# open container



## meijin

Hi, I've just looked up the noun "cup" in a few dictionaries, and two of the dictionaries I have say...

"a small *bowl-shaped container* for drinking from, typically having a handle"_ - Oxford Dictionary of English_
"A cup is a small *round container* that you drink from. Cups usually have handles and are made from china or plastic." -_ Collins COBUILD for Advanced Learner's English Dictionary_

and two of the dictionaries on WR say...

"a small, *open container* of china, metal, etc., usually with a handle, used as a drinking vessel for hot beverages" - Random House Learner's Dictionary of American English
"a small *open container,* usually having one handle, used for drinking from" _- Collins Concise English Dictionary _

I think *"bowl-shaped/round container"* and *"open container"* are two different things, and I believe that "open container", if I understand it correctly, is the correct definition because the containers in #1 below aren't "bowl-shaped" or "round" but are called *paper cups* in English.

#1







Now, if either of the following containers were on the table in your friend's house and if the cutlery were NOT in the container, would you ask "What's this *cup*?" 
I don't think so, because neither of them is an "open container", if it means the opening of the container is wider than its bottom.

(The ones in #2 are made of wood and the one in #3 is made from plastic.)

#2





#3


----------



## Keith Bradford

Dictionary definitions aren't reversible.  If "cat" is defined as a small mammal, it doesn't mean that all small mammals are cats.


----------



## Myridon

To paraphrase a famous saying I know it when I see it - Wikipedia
I don't know what a "cup" is, but I know it when I see it.  The non-paper equivalent of a paper cup is often a glass. Your Coca-cola in a glass or a paper cup would be in containers of the same shape.


----------



## sdgraham

If you will go down to one of your local _Starbucks_ stores, you will find that their cups don't have handles, but do have tops.


----------



## Uncle Jack

Everything you have pictured falls within the definition of an "open container". So do these:






One of them is a cup. One of them is bowl-shaped.


----------



## meijin

Thank you all very much for the comments. The only way for me to know if #2 and #3 are called "cups" or not is to receive straight answers to my question below.



meijin said:


> Now, if either of the following containers were on the table in your friend's house and if the cutlery were NOT in the container, would you ask "What's this cup?"




Let me add #4 and #5. 

#4





#5






Are the containers in all five photos "cups" in English? 
If not, which ones would you NOT call cups?


----------



## Uncle Jack

If you want to know whether something is or is not a cup, it is best just to post a picture and ask the question, not quote dictionary definitions. Dictionaries aren't really much good for physical objects, and an internet picture search is usually better.

#1 definitely cups
#2 and #3 definitely not cups
#4 might possibly be called cups, but clearly they are not drinking cups. I can imagine someone asking in a shop for "cups for candles",
#5 I have no idea what these are. If they are for flowers, then they are definitely not cups (because containers for flowers have their own name: vase)


----------



## meijin

Uncle Jack said:


> If you want to know whether something is or is not a cup, it is best just to post a picture and ask the question, not quote dictionary definitions.


Yes, but I thought posting some background information before asking the main question would be helpful.

The five answers you've just given are very helpful. Thanks!


----------



## meijin

Uncle Jack said:


> #2 and #3 definitely not cups


Actually, I have to ask about this. Would the container in #3 definitely not be a cup even when it didn't contain the cutlery? 
I mean, #1 and #3 look very similar. Why are the containers in #1 definitely cups and the container in #3 definitely NOT a cup?


----------



## Uncle Jack

meijin said:


> Yes, but I thought posting some background information before asking the main question would be helpful.


It often is, meijin, and we do find it exasperating that many other people provide no background information at all, so I don't want to discourage you from doing this. But we are easily side-tracked, particularly when given dictionary definitions we we do love to chew over.



meijin said:


> Actually, I have to ask about this. Would the container in #3 definitely not be a cup even when it didn't contain the cutlery?
> I mean, #1 and #3 look very similar. Why are the containers in #1 definitely cups and the container in #3 definitely NOT a cup?


Okay, #3 might be "mistaken" for a cup, but only if someone thought it could be drunk out of. What might be called an "ideal" cup is relatively shallow, which is why #4 might possibly be called cups even though they aren't for drinking. However with taller objects, they only come into the category of "cup" because they can be drunk out of and aren't made of glass.


----------



## DonnyB

meijin said:


> Actually, I have to ask about this. Would the container in #3 definitely not be a cup even when it didn't contain the cutlery?
> I mean, #1 and #3 look very similar. Why are the containers in #1 definitely cups and the container in #3 definitely NOT a cup?


Because a "cup" is (normally) something you drink from.  I suppose if you took the utensils out of #3, you could drink from it, but the point is that that _isn't_ the purpose it was designed for.  So consequently we don't call it a "cup".  

_[cross-posted]_


----------



## meijin

Thank you both very much for the very helpful explanations. 



DonnyB said:


> but the point is that that _isn't_ the purpose it was designed for.


But my point is, how would you know that it isn't designed for drinking something? If I saw that empty plastic container on the table in my friend's house, I'd probably think he had just finished drinking orange juice from it.


----------



## DonnyB

meijin said:


> But my point is, how would you know that it isn't designed for drinking something? If I saw that empty plastic container on the table in my friend's house, I'd probably think he had just finished drinking orange juice from it.


I suppose that's possible.  But I still wouldn't call it a cup, though.  It looks more like what I'd call a plastic beaker.


----------



## User With No Name

Myridon said:


> The non-paper equivalent of a paper cup is often a glass. Your Coca-cola in a glass or a paper cup would be in containers of the same shape.


I wonder if the phrase "paper cup" came about because "glass" also means the material that glasses are made of, and so people found the phrase "paper glass," well, um, jarring.


----------



## meijin

DonnyB said:


> But I still wouldn't call it a cup, though. It looks more like what I'd call a plastic beaker.


That's actually what I wanted someone to spontaneously mention in their response to photos #2 and #3. 
I suppose _beaker _doesn't apply to a wooden container (like the one in #2), but I too felt like calling #3 a beaker because it's a little too tall to call a cup.

(I wasn't really paying attention to the contents of the containers, but yes, they are utensils, not cutlery...)


----------



## elroy

Uncle Jack said:


> #4 might possibly be called cups, but clearly they are not drinking cups. I can imagine someone asking in a shop for "cups for candles",


 I would never call these “cups.”  “Cups for candles” sounds bizarre to me.  Another US-UK difference, perhaps?


----------



## meijin

elroy said:


> I would never call these “cups.” “Cups for candles” sounds bizarre to me. Another US-UK difference, perhaps?


That's good to know. So what do you call the small containers for the candles in the photo if for some reason you wanted to buy them? Would it be like _"Excuse me, I'm looking for small open round containers for small candles"_?


----------



## NewAmerica

meijin said:


> Thank you both very much for the very helpful explanations.



   I am just curious.  What do you mean by showing the sign ? A gratitude or an agreement?

   I guess that you use it to express your gratitude. Am I on the right track?


----------



## DonnyB

meijin said:


> That's good to know. So what do you call the small containers for the candles in the photo if for some reason you wanted to buy them? Would it be like _"Excuse me, I'm looking for small open round containers for small candles"_?


I'd ask in BE for "votive candle holders"


----------



## elroy

meijin said:


> That's good to know. So what do you call the small containers for the candles in the photo if for some reason you wanted to buy them? Would it be like _"Excuse me, I'm looking for small open round containers for small candles"_?


 The term seems to be “votive candle holders.”  In practice, I would probably say “candle holders” and describe them more specifically, to distinguish them from these.

_(cross-posted) _


----------



## meijin

NewAmerica said:


> I am just curious. What do you mean by showing the sign ? A gratitude or an agreement?
> 
> I guess that you use it to express your gratitude. Am I on the right track?


Well, according to the Collins dictionary I use, a thumbs-up or a thumbs-up sign is "a sign that you make by raising your thumb to show that you agree with someone, that you are happy with an idea or situation, or that everything is all right". It also says that "If you give a plan, idea, or suggestion the thumbs-up, you indicate you approve of it and are willing to accept it".
I use the sign when I agree with the poster, when I'm happy with the situation, or when I approve of the suggestion, or when two or all of these apply. 



DonnyB said:


> I'd ask in BE for "votive candle holders"





elroy said:


> The term seems to be “votive candle holders.”


Oh, I didn't know you call them holders!


----------



## elroy

Regarding #2 and #3, I would not call these cups even if they were empty.  They just don't look like cups.  (But maybe I'm biased because I already know what they are!  meijin, you should've photoshopped the items out of the containers and _then_ asked us what we'd call them! )


----------



## Uncle Jack

I might add that I would not call #4 "cups" myself, but perhaps I should explain more clearly why I think someone might use the term:

There isn't an obvious name for them. If #5 are for flowers, then there is an obvious name in "vase", but all we have for #4 is "candle holder", and candle holders are often saucer-like with a tube to hold a tall candle rather than cup-like that a short candle fits inside, so someone might choose to use "cup" to better describe what they meant.
They are close in size/shape to an "ideal" cup (a teacup). #2 and #3 are not; to me they might be "beakers", but I would hesitate to call them "cups" unless I was pretty sure they had the function of a cup, in other words to be drunk out of.
#1 only has the name "cup" because they perform the function of a cup. I tend to agree with @User With No Name In post #14 that the obvious name would have been "paper glass", if this did not sound so confusing. It certainly does not follow that anything else having this shape can be called a cup.


----------



## meijin

elroy said:


> (But maybe I'm biased because I already know what they are! meijin, you should've photoshopped the items out of the containers and _then_ asked us what we'd call them! )


Well, I actually wanted to post photos of empty containers for #2 and #3, but while I was googling for images, I realized that you probably wouldn't be able to tell how big or small the container is without someone's hand or the whole table in the photo. I couldn't find these, and the only ones that I could find and thought would help the viewers tell the size of the container were those photos showing utensils.


----------



## elroy

@Uncle Jack, I understand where you're coming from, but even if I had to circumlocute, I would never say "cup."  I would say "candle holders" and describe which ones I meant, without the word "cup"; for example, "candle holders, but not the tall ones; the short, wide ones, kind of like the ones for tealights, but bigger" or "candle holders, but not the tall ones; the ones that look like glass containers."

I imagine many salespeople would be thrown off if I said "cups for candles"!


----------



## PaulQ

Meijin,
You are reinventing the wheel: Theory of forms - Wikipedia. Your problem was addressed 2,500 years ago by the philosopher, Plato.

The question is "What makes a cup, "a cup"?" Plato's answer was that there is some "essence" of "cupness" about it." And this applies all other "forms" or "objects."

It is not a strange idea - consider "chair"... As you read that word, a picture of a chair enters your mind. However, that picture is unique to you - the chair I am imagining is not like yours and both your and my "chair" can be distinguished from elroy's and Uncle Jack's.

You may also wish to consider that words are understood by their context - what might be a cup in one context, is a container or a bowl in another.


----------



## elroy

Indeed. 

This similar Arabic forum thread may be of interest.


----------



## meijin

PaulQ said:


> It is not a strange idea - consider "chair"... As you read that word, a picture of a chair enters your mind. However, that picture is unique to you - the chair I am imagining is not like yours and both your and my "chair" can be distinguished from elroy's and Uncle Jack's.


You've actually brought up a VERY good example, Paul. I mean, do you ever call a stool a chair? (I'm asking this because in Japanese we call chairs and stools by the same word). If I'm not mistaken, a cup doesn't have to have a handle. I suppose a chair doesn't have to have a back either.


----------



## PaulQ

The importance of context cannot be overstated:





meijin said:


> If I'm not mistaken, a cup doesn't have to have a handle.


That is true. A cup may not be suitable for drinking from or even capable containing anything:
OED
1. A small open vessel for liquids, usually of hemispherical or hemi-spheroidal shape, with or without a handle; a drinking-vessel. The common form of cup (e.g. a tea-cup or coffee-cup) has no stem; but the larger and more ornamental forms (e.g. a wine-cup or chalice) may have a stem and foot, as also a lid or cover; in such case cup is sometimes applied specifically to the concave part that receives the liquid.

 4. A natural organ or formation having the form of a drinking-cup; e.g. the rounded cavity or socket of certain bones, as the shoulder-blade and hip-bone; the cup-shaped hardened involucrum (cupule) of an acorn ( acorn-cup); the calyx of a flower, also the blossom itself when cup-shaped; a cup-shaped organ in certain Fungi, or on the suckers of certain Molluscs; a depression in the skin forming a rudimentary eye in certain lower animals (also eye-cup or cup-eye).

6.a. techn. Applied to various cup-shaped contrivances; see quots.
1850   J. Greenwood Sailor's Sea-bk. 113   Cup, A solid piece of cast iron let into the step of the capstan, and in which the iron spindle at the heel of the capstan works.


----------



## meijin

Are the plastic open containers in the following two photos called *plastic glasses*? (A quick search tells me some Indian manufacturers or sellers call them so.)
Or are they called *plastic cups *because, just like paper cups, the phrase 'plastic glass' is jarring?

#6





#7


----------



## elroy

#6 “cups” if they’re made out of plastic; “glasses” or “cups” if they’re made out of glass
#7 “plastic cups”


----------



## Myridon

#6 plastic glasses
#7 plastic cups


----------



## elroy

Myridon said:


> #6 plastic glasses


 Is this a regional variant?  I’ve never heard it before.


----------



## Myridon

elroy said:


> Is this a regional variant?  I’ve never heard it before.


How would I know?  Maybe you're in the only region that they're not called plastic glasses. 
I've never heard anyone call anything like #6 made of glass a "cup" but you think it's possible.


----------



## elroy

“Cup” is routinely used as a generic term for drinking vessels, even if they’re made out of glass.  This is very widespread and not regional to my knowledge.  I’ve heard it used by Americans from all different parts of the country.

I’ve never heard the phrase “plastic glasses,” though.


----------



## london calling

elroy said:


> I would never call these “cups.”  “Cups for candles” sounds bizarre to me.  Another US-UK difference, perhaps?


No, because I don't say 'cups for candles' either. They're candle-holders as far as I'm concerned. A personal difference, I think.


----------



## DonnyB

In BE, I would call #6 "acrylic glasses" and #7 "plastic cups".


----------



## london calling

Nisbets.co.uk does a roaring trade in plastic glasses. I quote:

Our plastic glasses are available in a variety of shapes and sizes, from plastic wine glasses and plastic pint glasses to plastic Martini glasses and plastic shot glasses. Our great range of plastic catering glassware offers a stylish and safe alternative to glass for busy bars, parties, festivals, barbeques and outdoor catering events. Options vary from more hardwearing polycarbonate glasses which to single use disposable glasses, which are the perfect one use glasses for festivals and outdoor events.


----------



## meijin

Thank you all very much. Your posts are very interesting and really helpful, but I'm sure I'll have to read them at least a couple of times to decide what I should call some of the containers I posted. 

What I've learned so far and know  for surer is that a small open container made of paper is call a "paper cup", and a small and plain open container made from plastic is called a "plastic cup". I wonder if a large/tall version of those two are also called a paper cup and a plastic cup, respectively.

#8 





#9


----------



## elroy

They are.


----------



## meijin

Having reread the thread, it seems to me that a 'cup' is:

any container, with or without a lid, for drinking from that is not made of glass and does not look like a bottle, jar, mug, beaker (BE), or glass, except that some people in the US call glasses and glass-looking containers for drinking from also 'cups'.

Would you say this definition is not bad?


----------



## DonnyB

meijin said:


> Having reread the thread, it seems to me that a 'cup' is:
> 
> any container, with or without a lid, for drinking from that is not made of glass and does not look like a bottle, jar, mug, beaker (BE), or glass, except that some people in the US call glasses and glass-looking containers for drinking from also 'cups'.
> 
> Would you say this definition is not bad?


Except that you can actually get glass cups and saucers (i.e. cups and saucers made of _glass_).


----------



## meijin

DonnyB said:


> Except that you can actually get glass cups and saucers (i.e. cups and saucers made of _glass_).


Ah... I suppose the "cups" in "glass cups" simply means "small open containers for drinking from, usually with a handle".

I also forgot to include _tumbler _in my last post, but since its definition seems to differ between AE and BE, I'd say "or glass, or any other container for drinking from that has a specific name".


----------



## PaulQ

meijin said:


> I also forgot to include _tumbler _


Tumbler (in the sense of a drinks container) is a strange word - I think everyone knows it, but I never hear people use it.


----------



## london calling

PaulQ said:


> Tumbler (in the sense of a drinks container) is a strange word - I think everyone knows it, but I never hear people use it.


I only ever use it to say 'whisky tumbler', although apparently it can refer to different kinds of heavy-bottomed glasses.


----------

