In article >,
Joe Doe > wrote:
>In article <LY1jb.563368$cF.240727@rwcrnsc53>, "Louis Cohen"
> wrote:
>
>> The American Heritage Dictionary (www.bartleby.com) does not distinguish
>> between stock and broth. But, this perhaps reflects common rather than
>> specialist usage.
>
>> The meat vs bones distinction seems useful and plausible at least among
>> professionals. But, is there a second authoritative source for it, other
>> then our Chef Hans?
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Louis Cohen
>
>Actually I have two sources that contradict this and say a broth is called
>stock when it is used as a liquid to cook something else in.
>
>The first source is James Petersonıs ³Splendid Soups² who states on page
>59: ³if a broth is being used as a backdrop for other flavors
>(technically, this is called stock) * as in vegetable soups * it isnıt
>necessary to use meat² Note the reference to meat is incidental (not
>central) and the distinction is that stock is broth that is being used to
>cook something else.
>
This is what I would've guessed.
Not to mention that I revere James
Peterson. :-)
Joe