# I’d like a chicken/two chickens



## Eladio the Chemist

Hi, everyone!
Please help me with this. Can I say?:
(At the butcher’s/fish shop) I’d like _a_ chicken/_a_ fish/_a_ pork. I’d like _two_ chicken_s_/_three_ fishe_s_/_two_ pork_s_.
I’m asking because I’m talking about cookery, _uncountable nouns_. If I cannot say that, how could I refer to _a_ whole animal, and to _two, three_ animals?
And thanks in advance.


----------



## agtebo07

You can say "I'd like a chicken/a fish." For pork you'd typically have to specify the type of pork if it's a cut of meat. If you are buying the whole animal, you would just call it a "pig." Thus, for plural: "I'd like two chickens/three _fish_/two_ pigs_."


----------



## Chris K

_Chicken_ can be used either countably or uncountably, but _pork_ can not (it's never countable). So you'd say "two *pieces of *pork."

_Fish_ is more complicated, but when talking about food the word is uncountable.


----------



## Eladio the Chemist

Thank you agtebo07 and Chris K.
I got that!
By the way, is a fryer a dead chicken, an alive chicken, or both things?


----------



## Chris K

Eladio the Chemist said:


> Thank you agtebo07 and Chris K.
> I got that!
> By the way, is a fryer a dead chicken, *a live* chicken, or both things?



By the time we call it a "fryer" it's usually dead.


----------



## Eladio the Chemist

Thanks again, so I assume that I could ask for a fryer, two fryers... Okay?


----------



## Chris K

Eladio the Chemist said:


> Thanks again, so I assume that I could ask for a fryer, two fryers... Okay?



Definitely.


----------



## Eladio the Chemist

Okay, that's all. Thanks ever so much!


----------



## duvija

'Fryers' are small chickens. In theory, it cannot be a hen or a rooster...


----------



## Chris K

duvija said:


> 'Fryers' are small chickens. In theory, it cannot be a hen or a rooster...



Small enough to cut up and fry, yes. The big 'uns are called roasters.


----------



## neal41

When I was a child, my grandmother and my aunt kept chickens.  A fryer was a male chicken which would not be kept for egg laying.  It was killed for frying once it was fully grown.  There was no point in continuing to feed it beyond that point.  No chicken is too big to cut up and fry, but hens that have been kept for egg laying will be too tough to fry when you finally decide to eat them.  I think that you bake them.  I assume that young females that won't be kept for egg laying are also called fryers and are also fried.


----------



## gengo

neal41 said:


> When I was a child, my grandmother and my aunt kept chickens.  A fryer was a male chicken which would not be kept for egg laying.  It was killed for frying once it was fully grown.  There was no point in continuing to feed it beyond that point.  No chicken is too big to cut up and fry, but hens that have been kept for egg laying will be too tough to fry when you finally decide to eat them.  I think that you bake them.  I assume that young females that won't be kept for egg laying are also called fryers and are also fried.



The dictionary defines fryer as "A small young chicken suitable for frying."



Chris K said:


> _Fish_ is more complicated, but when talking about food the word is uncountable.



It's not uncountable if you are talking about whole fish.  For example, "We cooked two fish that we had caught that afternoon" or "We were each served three small fish that had been steamed."  However, if the fish has been sliced, then you would have to say "two slices of fish," etc.


----------



## Chris K

gengo said:


> [...]
> It's not uncountable if you are talking about whole fish.  For example, "We cooked two fish that we had caught that afternoon" or "We were each served three small fish that had been steamed."  However, if the fish has been sliced, then you would have to say "two slices of fish," etc.



True.


----------



## Eladio the Chemist

It's me, again!
Then, following the reasoning, I could say, for instance (cookery):
A turkey, two turkey... (turkeys?)
A duck, two ducks...
A rabbit, three rabbits...
Is that okay?


----------



## Chris K

Eladio the Chemist said:


> It's me, again!
> Then, following the reasoning, I could say, for instance (cookery):
> A turkey, two turkey... (turkeys?)
> A duck, two ducks...
> A rabbit, three rabbits...
> Is that okay?



Turkey*s*, yes: "We're going to cook two turkeys for Thanksgiving."


----------



## Eladio the Chemist

Thank you Chris K!!


----------



## gengo

Eladio the Chemist said:


> Then, following the reasoning, I could say, for instance (cookery):
> A turkey, two turkey... (turkeys?)
> A duck, two ducks...
> A rabbit, three rabbits...
> Is that okay?



Yes, but with the usual exceptions of English.

One deer, two deer,...  (I can't imagine cooking two whole deer at once, but...)

And of course the same applies to certain vegetables:

One squash, two squash,...


----------



## Eladio the Chemist

Thanks, gengo!


----------



## Eladio the Chemist

gengo said:


> One deer, two deer,... (I can't imagine cooking two whole deer at once, but...)


Here we have a little amount of deer in mountains, so it is not allowed to hunt them, but every December 24th we have the habit of cooking a whole pig (we roast it), we gather together all family at home and we eat it. Next day we eat the rest of the pig, if there was something left... Some people here cook the whole pig too, but on December 31st. So you see...


----------



## gengo

Eladio the Chemist said:


> Here we have few deer in mountains, so it is not allowed to hunt them, but every December 24th we have the habit of cooking a whole pig (we roast it), we gather together all family at home and we eat it. Next day we eat the rest of the pig, if there was something left... Some people here cook the whole pig too, but on December 31st. So you see...



Pues sí, pero ¿dos ciervos enteros?  Tendrías que tener una familia grandísima.


----------



## RicardoElAbogado

Just like we don't eat cow in English (we eat beef), we don't eat deer. Instead we eat venison, which is what the meat of a deer is called. 

On the other hand a fish in the water and a fish on your plate is still a fish in English.


----------



## Eladio the Chemist

RicardoElAbogado,
Perdone, pero sus aclaraciones en nada contradicen lo expresado en este hilo, ni aportan nada nuevo.


----------



## gengo

RicardoElAbogado said:


> Just like we don't eat cow in English (we eat beef), we don't eat deer. Instead we eat venison, which is what the meat of a deer is called.
> 
> On the other hand a fish in the water and a fish on your plate is still a fish in English.



That is missing the point.  We do not say "I cooked two venison/venisons."  As unlikely as it is that one would cook two deer at once, if that situation did arise, we would use the word deer, and not venison.  Similarly, if we had a _really_ big party and cooked two whole cows, we would not use the word beef.  (Yes, I know that in some contexts we say beefs, but not in this one, I believe).

We cooked two sheep.  (not mutton)
We cooked two calves.  (not veal)
And so on.


----------



## Chris K

gengo said:


> [...]  (Yes, I know that in some contexts we say beefs, but not in this one, I believe).
> 
> [...]



Or beeves.


----------



## inib

Chris K said:


> Or* beeves*.


I thought that was a joke but it's in the Oxford Concise Dictionary   (I think I've only ever used it as an uncountable noun).


----------



## RicardoElAbogado

gengo said:


> That is missing the point.  We do not say "I cooked two venison/venisons."  As unlikely as it is that one would cook two deer at once, if that situation did arise, we would use the word deer, and not venison.  Similarly, if we had a _really_ big party and cooked two whole cows, we would not use the word beef.  (Yes, I know that in some contexts we say beefs, but not in this one, I believe).
> 
> We cooked two sheep.  (not mutton)
> We cooked two calves.  (not veal)
> And so on.



I guess my problem is that while I have heard of pigs being cooked whole (and fowl such as chickens or turekys and as well fish being cooked whole), I have never heard of deer or sheep or calves being cooked whole. Those animals are usually butchered before cooking, and then the reference is to the meat, not the animal.


----------



## gengo

RicardoElAbogado said:


> I guess my problem is that while I have heard of pigs being cooked whole (and fowl such as chickens or turekys and as well fish being cooked whole), I have never heard of deer or sheep or calves being cooked whole. Those animals are usually butchered before cooking, and then the reference is to the meat, not the animal.



If you follow the thread, you'll see that this started with my pointing out that fish are cooked whole, and then later I mentioned deer, but also said that that would be very rare.  We were focusing on the grammar of all this, not the likelihood of actually cooking large animals whole.  That said, have you ever been to Argentina?  I've seen some huge slabs of meat on the BBQ there...


----------



## Eladio the Chemist

My wife's a pediatrician. Last year, she was called to work two months in Burkina Faso at a hospital (if that place can be called a hospital), in Africa. It's an extremely poor country, but there she learned that solvent people, usually French families, roast whole deer at home. Our Earth is a very complex thing! My point is: how could I tell this story (and others) in English if I hadn't learned what I've learned here?


----------



## duvija

gengo said:


> If you follow the thread, you'll see that this started with my pointing out that fish are cooked whole, and then later I mentioned deer, but also said that that would be very rare. We were focusing on the grammar of all this, not the likelihood of actually cooking large animals whole. That said, have you ever been to Argentina? I've seen some huge slabs of meat on the BBQ there...



The famous 'asado con cuero', which is just a huge cow, butterflied (don't you have a better verb? butchered seems not enough), and hangs from a stick, shoved over coal.


----------



## RicardoElAbogado

gengo said:


> If you follow the thread, you'll see that this started with my pointing out that fish are cooked whole, and then later I mentioned deer, but also said that that would be very rare.



I have been following the thread, just not in the same way you were. 

Please bear with me.  Keep in mind that I'm not trying to buffalo you into looking at things only from my perspective. 

From the original post:

_Hi, everyone!
Please help me with this. Can I say?:
*(At the butcher’s/fish shop) *I’d like a chicken_

I was trying to goose the thread along by pointing out that, in the context of buying meat at a store, deer meat would be venison (a term a non-native speaker of English might have to ferret out through a dictionary). But I'm done horsing around, and I am going to duck out of this thread.


----------

