I have used, and heard used, the word "plonk" to mean "cheap wine", as
in "two buck chuck" (although I understand that 2BC is a specific cheap
wine).

However, in perusing a Spanish/English dictionary, I came across an
entry saying that "plonk" is English for wine, with no notation of
quality. Well, hmmmm..

So I went to my dictionary of slang and found the same thing... it comes
from Austrailia/NewZealand in the early part of the 20th century. It
started out meaning "cheap port", and by extension, =any= wine. By 1975
the beatniks used it for any cheap and readily available alcoholic
drink. But nowhere does it mention "cheap wine" as its own sense of
meaning.

So... how do you folks use the term?

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Jose wrote:
> I have used, and heard used, the word "plonk" to mean "cheap wine", as
> in "two buck chuck" (although I understand that 2BC is a specific cheap
> wine).
[...]

> So... how do you folks use the term?

I've usually heard it used as "cheap plonk," which may not be as much of
a redundancy as I thought.

Mark Lipton

I'd read - but no way of knowing if this is accurate or not - that the
word is an onomatopoeia, like a cork 'plonking' out of a bottle. I
suppose it could also be the sound of the wine blooping out of a bottle
as you pour it down a drain.

> > I have used, and heard used, the word "plonk" to mean "cheap wine", as
> > in "two buck chuck" (although I understand that 2BC is a specific cheap
> > wine).

I have to admit, 3BC (it's $3 here in Oregon) isn't bad for the money
you're spending. If for nothing but day-to-day table wine -- or for use
in cooking... I once read a pretty interesting review in which a blind
tasting was done, and Chuck Merlot ranked above some quite expensive
competitors as voted on by the majority of tasters.

So ultimately, I suppose "cheap" is a relative term -- either referring
to a wine 'not worth the price', or, 'an inexpensive wine', with
"plonk" referring to the former of those definitions. What do y'all
think?

Thanks,

David

In article >, teacherjh@aol.
nojunk.com says...

[SNIP]

Interesting. Thank you for the info.

I use the term for wine that is really not up to "snuff." Without going into
the derivation of "snuff," let's just say, wine that is not worth the effort
to consume. I have possibly/probably use the term incorrectly, but when I
mention that wine is "plonk," it means that it is not fit for consumption by a
person, who knows better.

Thanks,
Hunt

> I'd read - but no way of knowing if this is accurate or not - that the
> word is an onomatopoeia, like a cork 'plonking' out of a bottle. I
> suppose it could also be the sound of the wine blooping out of a bottle
> as you pour it down a drain.

There's a term, "plink plonk", which is a facetious military term for
white wine, and "plink" is a shortened form of that.

> I have to admit, 3BC (it's $3 here in Oregon) isn't bad for the money
> you're spending

If it's any good at all. When we got married (my wife and I, not you
and I <g>) we were fond of French Columbard. We have expanded our
palate and appreciation of wines; I wonder what that wine would taste
like to me now. Where is it that "3BC" is bought? (It's a store with
Charlie in the name, or something like that)

I did recently have a chance to taste some wine that was touted by a
pilot friend of mine; it was (imho) undrinkable, but he thought it was
excellent for the price - he got it for $2.99 at Costco. I don't
remember the wine, and I'm thankful for that.

> So ultimately, I suppose "cheap" is a relative term -- either referring
> to a wine 'not worth the price', or, 'an inexpensive wine', with
> "plonk" referring to the former of those definitions.

I think of "cheap" as dergatory ("inexpensive for a reason"), and
"inexpensive" as a neutral term.

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

> There's a term, "plink plonk", which is a facetious military term for
> white wine, and "plink" is a shortened form of that.

I love it. 'plink' even sounds "lighter" than plonk.


> If it's any good at all. When we got married (my wife and I, not you
> and I <g>) we were fond of French Columbard. We have expanded our
> palate and appreciation of wines; I wonder what that wine would taste
> like to me now. Where is it that "3BC" is bought? (It's a store with
> Charlie in the name, or something like that)

Trader Joe's -- they bought the winery a few years back. *blush* (for
admitting I've actually bought some). I have to say... as a
fourth-round bottle (entertaining friends, poker match, late-night BBQ,
whatever) -- at the point where no one cares *what* is pouring, 3BC
has, on one or two occasions, been used -- sometimes as a prank --
though reactions were generally positive.


> I think of "cheap" as dergatory ("inexpensive for a reason"), and
> "inexpensive" as a neutral term.

Right. I'm just playing with words this evening -- my linguist wife was
doing some translation earlier today and sometimes and I get a little
inspired. Or maybe it's this fantastic Freja Pinot. I should be
careful.

Cheers,

David

"Dave" wrote -
>
> I'd read - but no way of knowing if this is accurate or not -
> that the word is an onomatopoeia, like a cork 'plonking'
> out of a bottle. I suppose it could also be the sound of the
> wine blooping out of a bottle as you pour it down a drain.
>

Quite accurate: As an old antipodean joke goes "To make (cheap) wine, you
just throw grapes into the air, and they come down "plonk!"

However, the expression is from Australian rhyming slang (a carry over from
convicts Cockney rhyming slang) "plonk" short for earlier "plink-plonk", a
corruption of French "vin blanc" which became "ving blong: (adopted by
Australian & New Zealand troops who fought in France in the 1914-18 Great
War).

It was in common usage in both countries from the 1930s - "Waltzing
Matilda" A fortified red wine of the kind that inebriates with speed and
economy is 'pinky' or 'plonk'.

In NZ 1949 "Rows of gaudily-labelled bottles of local 'plonk' stacked on
shelves behind the bar."

And for those who may have read Neville Shute's book "A town called Alice"
(1950) - "He asked me if I would drink tea or beer or plonk. 'Plonk?' I
asked. 'Red wine,' he said."

Actually, this link tells it all
http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-plo1.htm

--

st.helier

I'd say plonk any wine that is not worth referring to by name. So it
IS synonymous with wine in many circumstances. But it would not be
used for anythg the speaker considers to be special. (I'm British BTW)

--
Steve Slatcher
http://pobox.com/~steve.slatcher

On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 07:40:34 +0100, Steve Slatcher
> wrote:

>I'd say plonk any wine that is not worth referring to by name. So it
>IS synonymous with wine in many circumstances. But it would not be
>used for anythg the speaker considers to be special. (I'm British BTW)

I'd add that I think the term is going out of use now, though
journalists seem to have latched onto it - seems they think it is a
lot more fun to talk about plonk than wine.

--
Steve Slatcher
http://pobox.com/~steve.slatcher

"Jose" > wrote in message
...
>I have used, and heard used, the word "plonk" to mean "cheap wine", as in
>"two buck chuck" (although I understand that 2BC is a specific cheap wine).
>
> However, in perusing a Spanish/English dictionary, I came across an entry
> saying that "plonk" is English for wine, with no notation of quality.
> Well, hmmmm..
>
> So I went to my dictionary of slang and found the same thing... it comes
> from Austrailia/NewZealand in the early part of the 20th century. It
> started out meaning "cheap port", and by extension, =any= wine. By 1975
> the beatniks used it for any cheap and readily available alcoholic drink.
> But nowhere does it mention "cheap wine" as its own sense of meaning.
>
> So... how do you folks use the term?
>
> Jose
> --
> The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
> for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Here in the Boston, USA area, The Boston Globe newspaper runs a monthly
column called "Plonk" that discuss inexpensive wines available in the area,
which are bargains according to the author.

Neil

In article > ,
Mark Lipton > wrote:

> Jose wrote:
> > I have used, and heard used, the word "plonk" to mean "cheap wine", as
> > in "two buck chuck" (although I understand that 2BC is a specific cheap
> > wine).
> [...]
>
> > So... how do you folks use the term?
>
> I've usually heard it used as "cheap plonk," which may not be as much of
> a redundancy as I thought.
>
> Mark Lipton

We refer to it as weasel **** here.

In article .com>,
"Dave" > wrote:

> > There's a term, "plink plonk", which is a facetious military term for
> > white wine, and "plink" is a shortened form of that.
>
> I love it. 'plink' even sounds "lighter" than plonk.
>
>
> > If it's any good at all. When we got married (my wife and I, not you
> > and I <g>) we were fond of French Columbard. We have expanded our
> > palate and appreciation of wines; I wonder what that wine would taste
> > like to me now. Where is it that "3BC" is bought? (It's a store with
> > Charlie in the name, or something like that)
>
> Trader Joe's -- they bought the winery a few years back. *blush* (for
> admitting I've actually bought some). I have to say... as a
> fourth-round bottle (entertaining friends, poker match, late-night BBQ,
> whatever) -- at the point where no one cares *what* is pouring, 3BC
> has, on one or two occasions, been used -- sometimes as a prank --
> though reactions were generally positive.
>
>
> > I think of "cheap" as dergatory ("inexpensive for a reason"), and
> > "inexpensive" as a neutral term.
>
> Right. I'm just playing with words this evening -- my linguist wife was
> doing some translation earlier today and sometimes and I get a little
> inspired. Or maybe it's this fantastic Freja Pinot. I should be
> careful.
>
> Cheers,
>
> David

2 or 3 buck Chuck can be OK but there is so much lot to lot variation to
make it a crapshoot. By the way, Trader Joes does not own Bronco winery
that makes Charles Shaw wines but they are the exclusive dealer.

> Charles Shaw wines

Aha! That's the "chuck" in 3BC

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Dave wrote:

> Trader Joe's -- they bought the winery a few years back. *blush* (for
> admitting I've actually bought some). I have to say... as a
> fourth-round bottle (entertaining friends, poker match, late-night BBQ,
> whatever) -- at the point where no one cares *what* is pouring, 3BC
> has, on one or two occasions, been used -- sometimes as a prank --
> though reactions were generally positive.

No quite, Dave. As Larry said, 2BC is made by Bronco (owned by Fred
Franzia, whose family sold the rights to their own name, now the bête
noir of the CA wine business) and sold exclusively through Trader Joe's.
My experience with it is that it's highly variable. Because Bronco
buys up surplus wine and bottles it under the Charles Shaw name, it
changes rapidly even within the same vintage. Most recently, I had a 2BC
Syrah that was one of the weirdest and most flawed wines I've had in
some time.

Mark Lipton

Hi Mark,

> No quite, Dave. As Larry said, 2BC is made by Bronco (owned by Fred
> Franzia, whose family sold the rights to their own name, now the bête
> noir of the CA wine business) and sold exclusively through Trader Joe's.
> My experience with it is that it's highly variable. Because Bronco
> buys up surplus wine and bottles it under the Charles Shaw name, it
> changes rapidly even within the same vintage. Most recently, I had a 2BC
> Syrah that was one of the weirdest and most flawed wines I've had in
> some time.

Ah, thanks for the correction Bronco.

Of course it's variable. It's nothing I would collect or cellar, but in
a pinch, it can get the job done. Trader Joe's own reviews speak of it
as an "easy drinking table wine", hence the very low price -- and
subsequently, the expectations those drinking it should have.
http://www.traderjoes.com/new/chuckshaw.asp

My point this thread is that I wouldn't typify it as "plonk" --
that's all...

David

two buck chuck is really good. I would not call it plonk. Trader Joe's
sells it. It's really drinkable. As far as the word plonk - I can't
comment, but I have drank a few "two buck chuck's" and think it is
really good. Not bad wine in my mind or mouth.
--
DAve

Jose wrote:
> I have used, and heard used, the word "plonk" to mean "cheap wine", as
> in "two buck chuck" (although I understand that 2BC is a specific cheap
> wine).
>
> However, in perusing a Spanish/English dictionary, I came across an
> entry saying that "plonk" is English for wine, with no notation of
> quality. Well, hmmmm..
>
> So I went to my dictionary of slang and found the same thing... it comes
> from Austrailia/NewZealand in the early part of the 20th century. It
> started out meaning "cheap port", and by extension, =any= wine. By 1975
> the beatniks used it for any cheap and readily available alcoholic
> drink. But nowhere does it mention "cheap wine" as its own sense of
> meaning.
>
> So... how do you folks use the term?
>
> Jose

In article >,
Mark Lipton > wrote:

> Dave wrote:
>
> > Trader Joe's -- they bought the winery a few years back. *blush* (for
> > admitting I've actually bought some). I have to say... as a
> > fourth-round bottle (entertaining friends, poker match, late-night BBQ,
> > whatever) -- at the point where no one cares *what* is pouring, 3BC
> > has, on one or two occasions, been used -- sometimes as a prank --
> > though reactions were generally positive.
>
> No quite, Dave. As Larry said, 2BC is made by Bronco (owned by Fred
> Franzia, whose family sold the rights to their own name, now the bête
> noir of the CA wine business) and sold exclusively through Trader Joe's.
> My experience with it is that it's highly variable. Because Bronco
> buys up surplus wine and bottles it under the Charles Shaw name, it
> changes rapidly even within the same vintage. Most recently, I had a 2BC
> Syrah that was one of the weirdest and most flawed wines I've had in
> some time.
>
> Mark Lipton

I have even tasted wine from 3 different lots of the Cabernet tasted all
at the same time. All 3 were totally different wines and 2 of the
bottles were undrinkable weasel **** in my opinion. The other bottle was
OK but not much in the way of cabernet flavor. Since it's 3 buck Chuck
in Virginia $9 to get an only so-so glass of wine is not a good value.
People seem to be caught up in the mystique of buying and under $40 case
of wine.

Some people never understand....you get what you pay for!!!


"Lawrence Leichtman" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> Mark Lipton > wrote:
>
>> Dave wrote:
>>
>> > Trader Joe's -- they bought the winery a few years back. *blush* (for
>> > admitting I've actually bought some). I have to say... as a
>> > fourth-round bottle (entertaining friends, poker match, late-night BBQ,
>> > whatever) -- at the point where no one cares *what* is pouring, 3BC
>> > has, on one or two occasions, been used -- sometimes as a prank --
>> > though reactions were generally positive.
>>
>> No quite, Dave. As Larry said, 2BC is made by Bronco (owned by Fred
>> Franzia, whose family sold the rights to their own name, now the bête
>> noir of the CA wine business) and sold exclusively through Trader Joe's.
>> My experience with it is that it's highly variable. Because Bronco
>> buys up surplus wine and bottles it under the Charles Shaw name, it
>> changes rapidly even within the same vintage. Most recently, I had a 2BC
>> Syrah that was one of the weirdest and most flawed wines I've had in
>> some time.
>>
>> Mark Lipton
>
> I have even tasted wine from 3 different lots of the Cabernet tasted all
> at the same time. All 3 were totally different wines and 2 of the
> bottles were undrinkable weasel **** in my opinion. The other bottle was
> OK but not much in the way of cabernet flavor. Since it's 3 buck Chuck
> in Virginia $9 to get an only so-so glass of wine is not a good value.
> People seem to be caught up in the mystique of buying and under $40 case
> of wine.