# The can/tin contains pineapple/orange/strawberries



## meijin

Hi, the cans/tins in the following image I found online say (from left to right) "Crushed Pineapple", "Pineapple Slices", "Pineapple Tidbits", and "Pineapple Cubes". But, if I just want to say what food is in the container regardless of the size/shape of the contents, I can say "The can/tin contains pineapple", can I? Is it also correct to say "The can/tin contains orange" when it contains orange chunks, bits, etc.? You can't say "The can/tin contains pineapple*s*/orange*s*", because these fruits are larger than the container (if it's a smaller container) so more than one pineapple/orange _cannot _be in it. On the other hand, I think the slices, bits, chunks, etc. in the container have actually come from two or more different pineapples/oranges due to mass production in the factory. So I'm probably wrong and "pineapple/orange" should be pluralized_. _But one of the products in the photo says "Crushed Pineapple" (singular), so maybe I'm right?  










When two or more of the same fruit can go into the container, it should always be plural, I think. For example, you'd always say "The can/tin contains strawberrie*s*" when describing what food is in the can/tin below.


----------



## Scrawny goat

What an interesting observation. I never even noticed this fact but we do indeed say 'a can of peache*s*, strawberr*ies*, etc' but 'a can of pineapple, sweetcorn, etc'

For oranges though, I've only seen segments, plural. 'A can of orange' sounds wrong to me.


----------



## Myridon

In theory, you are correct.  In practice, our use of language is informed by the world around us.  In a can of processed oranges in the US, you will find either orange juice or segments from mandarin oranges (a small tangerine) so there is generally more than one in the can. We buy a can of orange juice or a can of (mandarin) oranges.
(There are no canned strawberries that aren't strawberry jam, strawberry pie filling, etc.)


----------



## JulianStuart

Myridon said:


> (There are no canned strawberries that aren't strawberry jam, strawberry pie filling, etc.)


(A quick google search for “tinned strawberries” will reveal their existence, typically “in light syrup” (like in the OP). Whether they _should_ exist, given how poorly they represent the fresh items, is a separate discussion)


----------



## PaulQ

Your reasoning is sound:
if a several of the whole fruit are in the can, then use the plural; -> strawberries, cherries
if only one of the whole fruit is in the can, then use the singular; -> an apple (obviously this is rare.)
If the can does not contain a recognisable *whole *fruit, use the uncountable -> pineapple; mellon.
If the contents are mixed, then use the uncountable and plural -> pineapple and cherries.

The adjective does not change anything - Boiled cherr*ies*/crushed pineapple

The above comes for the idea of "the countability of foodstuff - in *broad *terms if it physically a whole something, then it is countable, if it is not physically a whole something then it is uncountable:

Chocolate (chocolate amorphously or in cubes in a bar)-> a chocolate - a single sweet/candy of or coated with chocolate.).
Cake (a slice of cake) -> a cake (e.g. a cupcake.)
Potato (mashed) -> a potato (whole potatoes; baked potato in its jacket)


----------



## Myridon

JulianStuart said:


> (A quick google search for “tinned strawberries” will reveal their existence, typically “in light syrup” (like in the OP). Whether they _should_ exist, given how poorly they represent the fresh items, is a separate discussion)


A search for "tinned anything" is not a search for American English.  If it's not clear, I meant "in the US" to apply to the entire post.


----------



## meijin

Thank you all very much for the replies. Glad to know my thinking was correct.



Scrawny goat said:


> but we do indeed say 'a can of peache*s*,


Are peaches in Ireland small? Japanese peaches are rather big. I don't know how many of them are in a can of peaches (I don't eat canned fruit), but I suppose it's just one and a half or two (which would indeed be "peach*es*").



Myridon said:


> In a can of processed oranges in the US, you will find either orange juice or segments from mandarin oranges (a small tangerine) so there is generally more than one in the can.


Ah yes. I was wondering if a can of oranges in the US uses the big oranges (California/Florida oranges?) or smaller ones (mandarin oranges, which we eat a lot here in Japan).


----------



## JulianStuart

Myridon said:


> A search for "tinned anything" is not a search for American English.  If it's not clear, I meant "in the US" to apply to the entire post.


They have them in the US too (Made in the US, not tinned ones that have been imported!)
Monteagle  Canned Strawberries in Light Syrup
https://www.amazon.com/Oregon-Fruit-Strawberries-Syrup-15-Ounce/dp/B000I645TI
And some of the “canned” ones are actually in jars


----------



## Hermione Golightly

Google 'canned fruit cocktail', which means a mix of fruits, sometimes called  'fruit salad' when it's homemade.
Some things go into a homemade fruit salad and other things such as strawberries or melon, do not, not ever. Nor in my experience are they found in canned fruit mixes.

You'll see that in the _Del Monte_ brand, pineapple is in the singular and other usual items are plural regardless of size: cherries, apples, pears. I'd say that if melon _is_ in the salad (which is unlikely in the UK) it would be in the singular since they are large fruits like pineapple.
Another brand, (_Princes_?) uses the singular for everything except grapes and cherries. (It seems to be a UK brand because some profits go to _The Prince's Trust_, a charity of Prince Charles.)


> Fruit (in variable proportions: Peach, Pear, Pineapple, Grapes, Cherries (with Colour Erythrosine)), Water, Sugar, Acidity Regulator: Citric Acid, Antioxidant: Ascorbic Acid



Like other respondents, the only 'oranges' I know of in cans are called 'mandarins', or 'mandarin slices', when they are the only item in the can.


----------



## PaulQ

meijin said:


> Are peaches in Ireland small?


No, but when canned they are almost invariably "sliced peaches"


----------



## Truffula

"Pineapple" can definitely be a mass noun - when you say "a can of pineapple," "pineapple" is not singular but mass.

"Orange" can't be a mass noun.   There's not a single universal rule for fruits - some can be, some can't.  I suppose the easiest generalization is size.  If it's big enough of a fruit that a whole one is more than one serving, it's usually able to be a mass noun (cantaloupe, watermelon, pumpkin) and if a single one is too small to be a full serving, it's usually not (strawberries, grapes, cherries).    Single serving size fruits vary (papaya, guava can be mass nouns, apples, bananas can't) and have to be learned individually. 

Another, not size related rule is that usually ones ending in -fruit are fine to be mass nouns (starfruit, grapefruit, dragon fruit).

If there's a mass noun available for that fruit, you can say a can of (mass noun fruit).  If not, you say "a can of (plural noun fruits)" even if there's just most of one in the can.



Hermione Golightly said:


> Google 'canned fruit cocktail', which means a mix of fruits, sometimes called  'fruit salad' when it's homemade.
> Some things go into a homemade fruit salad and other things such as strawberries or melon, do not, not ever. Nor in my experience are they found in canned fruit mixes.



My mom puts strawberries and melon in homemade fruit salad and always has, so I grew up with it, and never knew some people thought it "not done" 

Del Monte also does at least cantaloupe:  Four Fruit Blend Del Monte (Grapes, Cantaloupe, Honeydew & Pineapple)

Also: Strawberry Melon Fruit Salad with Creamy Citrus Glaze


----------



## london calling

Hermione Golightly said:


> Some things go into a homemade fruit salad and other things such as strawberries or melon, do not, not ever.


Interesting. Here in Italy a fruit salad can have anything in it.

Regards oranges. Tesco sells orange segments in natural juice: those could be classed as 'tinned oranges'. Not common though, in my opinion. And when in London at home we always have tinned grapefruit from Sainsburys for breakfast when fresh ones are available: odd that we don't say 'tinned grapefruit*s*'....


----------



## meijin

PaulQ said:


> No, but when canned they are almost invariably "sliced peaches"





PaulQ said:


> ​


Well, but the same applies to canned pineapple.






But you don't say "a can of pineapple*s*". So, the reason it's called "a can of peach*es*" isn't because the contents are sliced.



Truffula said:


> "pineapple" is not singular but mass.


You're right.



Truffula said:


> Another, not size related rule is that usually ones ending in -fruit are fine to be mass nouns (starfruit, grapefruit, dragon fruit).


That's really good to know.


----------



## natkretep

london calling said:


> Interesting. Here in Italy a fruit salad can have anything in it.
> 
> Regards oranges. Tesco sells orange segments in natural juice: those could be classed as 'tinned oranges'. Not common though, in my opinion. And when in London at home we always have tinned grapefruit from Sainsburys for breakfast when fresh ones are available: odd that we don't say 'tinned grapefruit*s*'....


The issue is often avoided. I often encounter tinned mandarin segments, and that seems to be what goes on the tin: 'mandarin segments' rather than 'mandarins'. I also see 'grapefruit segments'.


----------



## PaulQ

meijin said:


> Well, but the same applies to canned pineapple.


It seems that you are trying to find "reasons why not", but you should be looking for "reasons why". 


> But you don't say "a can of pineapple





> So, the reason it's called "a can of peach*es*" isn't because the contents are sliced.


In fact it is.They are peache*s* that have been sliced.

If I am asked to buy a "can of pineapple", then I would have to ask "pineapple rings; pineapple chunks, or crushed pineapple?" So the person who asked me should have made that clear.


----------



## Packard

The choice of pineapple is an anomaly.  It is perhaps the only single fruit that could not fit in a typical can.  It is not likely you could fit two pineapples in a single can.   

I can't immediately think of another canned fruit that is too large for multiples to fit in a single can.

So pineapple is always going to be crushed, sliced or sold in chunks regardless of the English language.


----------



## Scrawny goat

Packard said:


> The choice of pineapple is an anomaly.  It is perhaps the only single fruit that could not fit in a typical can.  It is not likely you could fit two pineapples in a single can.
> 
> I can't immediately think of another canned fruit that is too large for multiples to fit in a single can.
> 
> So pineapple is always going to be crushed, sliced or sold in chunks regardless of the English language.


What about my sweetcorn example?!
Then again, I've never heard that used in the plural at all.


----------



## PaulQ

Sweetcorn is uncountable.


----------



## Myridon

natkretep said:


> I often encounter tinned mandarin segments, and that seems to be what goes on the tin: 'mandarin segments' rather than 'mandarins'.


Ours say "mandarin oranges."


----------



## PaulQ

But show a picture of segments... (Ignore the ones that have peel - if you get peel in the can, you have a 'lemon'.)


----------



## Packard

Scrawny goat said:


> What about my sweetcorn example?!
> Then again, I've never heard that used in the plural at all.



Corn would appear to be too large to fit in a can, but only the kernels are canned.  I did learn that corn is a vegetable, grain and fruit--which offends my natural desire to pinpoint things. 

Please settle a dispute. Is sweet corn a vegetable or a grain? What is the difference? How about field corn? - eXtension

Corn seed is actually a vegetable, a grain, and a fruit. Corn seed is a vegetable because it is harvested for eating. (Usually sweet corn when grain is harvested at the milk stage.) Corn seed is a grain because it is a dry seed of a grass species. (Usually field corn when harvested after the grain is relatively dry.) Corn seed is a fruit because that is the botanical definition.


----------



## Scrawny goat

I found a picture of baby corn in a can, and they are labelled 'cobs' (with no mention of sweet corn at all)
Sadly I can't manage to paste it here. 

Am I the only one getting hungry reading this thread?


----------



## Myridon

PaulQ said:


> But show a picture of segments... (Ignore the ones that have peel - if you get peel in the can, you have a 'lemon'.)


I was searching yesterday and found the Tesco cans show randomly cut slices with the peel on as "mandarin segments."   Same for grapefruit.


----------



## Packard

Myridon said:


> I was searching yesterday and found the Tesco cans show randomly cut slices with the peel on as "mandarin segments."   Same for grapefruit.



I don't think there is a legal definition of "segments" so you are probably free to use it as you wish.

A canned centipede could also be sold in segments.


----------



## Myridon

Packard said:


> I don't think there is a legal definition of "segments" so you are probably free to use it as you wish.


I feel quite sure that the can contains segments (biological term "lith") because that's the part that stays together easily without releasing the pulp or juice.
Parts of a citrus fruit:
Citrus - Wikipedia


> The fruit is a hesperidium, a specialised berry, globose to elongated, 4–30 cm (1.6–11.8 in) long and 4–20 cm (1.6–7.9 in) diameter, with a leathery rind or "peel" called a pericarp. The outermost layer of the pericarp is an "exocarp" called the flavedo, commonly referred to as the zest. The middle layer of the pericarp is the mesocarp, which in citrus fruits consists of the white, spongy "albedo", or "pith". The innermost layer of the pericarp is the endocarp. The segments are also called "liths", and the space inside each lith is a locule filled with juice vesicles, or "pulp". From the endocarp, string-like "hairs" extend into the locules, which provide nourishment to the fruit as it develops.


----------



## Packard

Myridon said:


> I feel quite sure that the can contains segments (biological term "lith") because that's the part that stays together easily without releasing the pulp or juice.
> Parts of a citrus fruit:
> Citrus - Wikipedia



For some reason I only see Mandarin oranges when I Google [images] "canned oranges".  My guess is that it is the one type of orange that is especially easy to can.

A Google search shows that perhaps it is, but the process is disturbing:

Mandarin orange - Wikipedia

*Canning[edit]*
Canned mandarin segments are peeled to remove the white pith prior to canning; otherwise, they turn bitter. Segments are peeled using a chemical process. First, the segments are scalded in hot water to loosen the skin; then they are bathed in a lye solution, which digests the albedo and membranes. Finally, the segments undergo several rinses in plain water. They are often used in salads, desserts, and baking.


----------



## Myridon

Packard said:


> For some reason I only see Mandarin oranges when I Google [images] "canned oranges".


That's the entire point of my post #3.


----------



## Scrawny goat

Oranges for marmalade making are also sold in cans!


----------



## Packard

Myridon said:


> That's the entire point of my post #3.



I suspect that the ability to chemically peel the segments may come into play, as is the fact that they are sweeter than regular oranges and the internal structure is less fibrous. 

I Googled "canned navel oranges" and only found one image that was actually about navel oranges (the rest were all Mandarin oranges).


----------



## Truffula

I'm just going to repeat here:  there _is no_ universal rule as to what fruits are able to be mass nouns and what fruits are not.

In the case of "canned fruit" the fruit is a mass noun if it can be one and a plural if it can't be a mass noun ("canned pineapple" , "canned peaches")

I gave a couple of rules I figured out by reflection on my native speaker's knowledge of the case by case status of various fruits.

If there's a specific fruit you want to inquire about, you can do so.  If you want general rules, I gave two I thought of:  if the fruit is very large it can be a mass noun, if it is very small it can't, if it is medium sized (I determine small, medium, large by typical serving size) it can go either way and probably is determined by how often it is (or very well "was" as the word usage standard probably has a longer lifespan than the consumption style standard) eaten as discrete fruits.

And the other specific rule I thought of was the one about fruits whose name ends in "fruit."

I think the type of oranges that come in cans may be outside the real topic too


----------



## Myridon

Truffula said:


> I think the type of oranges that come in cans may be outside the real topic too


That discussion started because the type of "oranges" that are commonly canned* in the US *are small enough that several of them could fit in a "standard-sized" can even if they were whole and unpeeled.  We rarely if ever put pieces of a large orange in a can. Therefore, "canned oranges" fit the pattern of "use the plural if several whole fruit fit in a can".  We aren't even thinking of big oranges when we say "buy a can of oranges."


----------



## Scrawny goat

No one cares about my marmalade oranges....

How DO you add a photo?!


----------



## Truffula

Scrawny goat:  you add an image with image tag.  

[code]

[img]https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51pWfwFXZyL.jpg[/img]

[/code]

looks like 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




As you see, "oranges" is plural on this can.  Because "orange" isn't used as a mass noun.


----------



## Myridon

A 6 pound can would hold whole oranges.  This is some sort of specialty ingredient for making marmalade so they would still have the peels on.    $10.28 plus shipping on Amazon.  I could buy several jars of pretty good marmalade for that.


----------



## Truffula

Myridon: It's a 3/4 pint can of oranges, but when you add water and sugar and boil and so on to make the marmalade, you end up with 6 lbs of marmalade.

Item details on the amazon page shows "Item Weight: 1.9 pounds" - the price is just over US$10.


----------



## Scrawny goat

Truffula said:


> Scrawny goat:  you add an image with image tag.
> 
> [code]
> 
> [img]https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51pWfwFXZyL.jpg[/img]
> 
> [/code]
> 
> looks like
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As you see, "oranges" is plural on this can.  Because "orange" isn't used as a mass noun.


Thank you!


----------



## Myridon

Truffula said:


> Item details on the amazon page shows "Item Weight: 1.9 pounds" - the price is just over US$10.


I estimate that there are 2.5 large oranges in a pound so there are easily three oranges there (and they probably don't use large oranges).


----------



## Truffula

The number in the can doesn't matter, though.






  This can is 8.5 ounces (including added syrup, so not 8.5 ounces of fruit) and "single serving" - based on the nutrient count it contains approximately one peach (more calories than one peach, because added syrup; less fiber than one peach, because skin was removed) - and its label reads "peaches."


----------



## RM1(SS)

Scrawny goat said:


> No one cares about my marmalade oranges....
> 
> How DO you add a photo?!


I right-click on the photo, select "copy image," and then paste it (control-V) into my post.


----------



## Dale Texas

Scrawny goat said:


> No one cares about my marmalade oranges....
> 
> How DO you add a photo?!



Well, *I *care about them. I've _always_ cared about them.


----------



## Scrawny goat

Dale Texas said:


> Well, *I *care about them. I've _always_ cared about them.


The oranges and I are pleased to hear it!


----------



## natkretep

Scrawny goat said:


> I found a picture of baby corn in a can, and they are labelled 'cobs' (with no mention of sweet corn at all)
> Sadly I can't manage to paste it here.
> 
> Am I the only one getting hungry reading this thread?


Tins of 'young corn' or 'baby corn' are common here. Always corn in the singular because, as Paul said, _corn_ is uncountable.




(Scrawny goat: I use 'copy and paste' to add a picture. You can't do that with all pictures because I assume the copying feature has been disabled for particular web pages.)


----------



## Scrawny goat

natkretep said:


> Tins of 'young corn' or 'baby corn' are common here. Always corn in the singular because, as Paul said, _corn_ is uncountable.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Scrawny goat: I use 'copy and paste' to add a picture. You can't do that with all pictures because I assume the copying feature has been disabled for particular web pages.)


Thanks- I think you are right.


----------



## london calling

Scrawny goat said:


> Oranges for marmalade making are also sold in cans!


Yep. You can buy tinned Seville oranges in the UK.


----------



## Hermione Golightly

I think the oranges for marmelade are sold as a prepared pulp with the thin, medium or thick sliced peel already in and softened. The whole lengthy first stage of marmelade making has already been done for you.


----------



## london calling

Hermione Golightly said:


> I think the oranges for marmelade are sold as a prepared pulp with the thin, medium or thick sliced peel already in and softened. The whole lengthy first stage of marmelade making has already been done for you.


Yes, see this (Tesco.com) , all you have to do is add sugar and boil:





They are still however tinned (thin cut) oranges.


----------



## Hermione Golightly

I don't think the number of Seville oranges is relevant. Since they are inedible there's no point canning them whole.
Apart from the mandarin orange segments already mentioned, I've never seen oranges in tins. I wonder why not - they seem to have much the same qualities as grapefruit in all respects.


----------



## london calling

Hermione Golightly said:


> I don't think the number of Seville oranges is relevant. Since they are inedible there's no point canning them whole.
> Apart from the mandarin orange segments already mentioned, I've never seen oranges in tins. I wonder why not - they seem to have much the same qualities as grapefruit in all respects.


Try Tesco, as I said above:


----------



## meijin

PaulQ said:


> So, the reason it's called "a can of peach*es*" isn't because the contents are sliced.
> 
> 
> 
> In fact it is.They are peache*s* that have been sliced.
Click to expand...

I still don't have time to read many of the new posts in this thread, but let me just say that you are right and I'm right too. They are peaches that have been sliced, but the reason it's called "a can of peaches" isn't that the fruit is sliced (which is what I said). 


Edit: Even if the content of the can was uncountable like this, it would still be called "a can of peach*es*".


----------



## PaulQ

meijin said:


> but the reason it's called "a can of peaches"


It isn't - it is called a "can/tin of sliced peaches".

You should understand that English makes a broad assumption that most people know the context when talking about something. As a consequence, occasionally some words are omitted. This does not alter the meaning of what has been said.

For example, if I go into a shop and ask for a can of peaches, and the assistant gives me a can of sliced peaches, I cannot complain that I wanted "whole peaches" because "whole peaches" is not the default context of "a can/tin of peaches".

To me, your objections seem to be based on a belief that English should be, at all times, unambiguously clear to the student of English. This is not going to happen any time soon.


----------



## meijin

I edited my last post and I hope it's now clear that you misunderstood my earlier post. I agree that "a can of peach*es*" means "a can of sliced (or chopped, crushed, etc.) peach*es*". I never objected that. What I was trying to say is that "a can of peach*es*" doesn't mean "a can of peach slic*es*". This is why I said the reason 'peach' is plural in "a can of peaches" isn't that the peaches are sliced (or chopped, etc). It's just because the content (or contents) comes from more than one peaches.


----------



## london calling

As Paul says I may well ask for a tin of peaches but I know full well that what I will get is sliced peaches/halved peaches. The same thing goes for a tin of pineapple: I will in fact get chunks of pineapple/crushed pineapple/pineapple rings.

What else does a tin of peaches mean if not sliced/halved peaches? You can't buy tins of whole peaches as far as I know.


----------



## PaulQ

meijin said:


> What I was trying to say is that "a can of peach*es*" doesn't mean "a can of peach slic*es*".


To me it would. I would not expect half peaches or whole peaches or peach pulp - I would expect sliced peaches, because that is how they usually come. It is a default understanding. If I wanted any of the former I would specify.

You are of course correct to say


meijin said:


> This is why I said the reason 'peach' is plural in "a can of peaches" isn't that the peaches are sliced (or chopped, etc). It's just because the content (or contents) comes from more than one peach.


but that is somewhat of a statement of the obvious as "a can of..." must be followed by a description of its contents. 

The plural is chosen as "peach" is not usually an uncountable noun. The can's contents are "from [a supply of] peaches."


----------



## meijin

london calling said:


> What else does a tin of peaches mean if not sliced/halved peaches? You can't buy tins of whole peaches as far as I know.


So, do you disagree with the following statement of mine? The stuff in the glass (crushed peaches?) is uncountable, but I think you'd call a canned product containing this uncountable stuff "a can of peach*es*" if it was launched in your country. What I've been trying to say is that I don't think the term "a can of peaches" means "a can of (countable) peach _segments_ (e.g. slices, blocks)". "A can of peaches", I believe, means "a can of pulp (and some juice associated) that comes from (countable) _whole _peaches".



meijin said:


> Edit: Even if the content of the can was uncountable like this, it would still be called "a can of peach*es*".






PaulQ said:


> To me it would. I would not expect half peaches or whole peaches or peach pulp - I would expect sliced peaches, because that is how they usually come. It is a default understanding.


If that's the reason, then I think "a can of pineapple" is wrong and it should be "a can of pineappl*es*".


----------



## london calling

You are working on the assumption that English is a consistent language. It isn't.:


----------



## meijin

My question is quite simple. What does "peaches" in "a can of peaches" mean?

1. Slices of peach fruit
2. Whole peaches (but only some segments of those peaches are contained in the can) 
3. Some think 1 is correct, some think 2 is correct, some think 1 and 2 are both correct.

If it's #3, we are all happy. 




london calling said:


> You are working on the assumption that English is a consistent language. It isn't.:


My impression for many years has been that English is actually much more consistent (or logical) than Japanese.


----------



## PaulQ

meijin said:


> If that's the reason, then I think "a can of pineapple" is wrong and it should be "a can of pineappl*es*".


"a can of pineapple"= "a can of pineapple chunks/rings, etc." = "A can of things that are describable as pineapple". Pineapple is used uncountably.

See #5.

As food:
"Would you like some pineapple?"
"Yes, but don't give me much." 
"Yes, but don't give me many."

As whole, unprocessed fruit:
"Would you like some pineapples?"
"Yes, but don't give me much." 
"Yes, but don't give me many."


----------



## meijin

I forgot to say this, but I agree with what Truffula said (twice). I'll reread other posts when I have time.


----------



## london calling

meijin said:


> My impression for many years has been that English is actually much more consistent (or logical) than Japanese.


It isn't, believe me. It is a hybrid language which has different origins in different languages and has more exceptions than rules, unlike some other languages.


----------



## JulianStuart

PaulQ said:


> To me it would. I would not expect half peaches or whole peaches or peach pulp - I would expect sliced peaches, because that is how they usually come. It is a default understanding. If I wanted any of the former I would specify.


I hadn’t realized this thread would become such a can of worm(s)
I agree that if someone asked me to get a tin/can of peaches, I would assume they meant the normal/default kind, which has slices.  If they had needed halves (for decorative purposes perhaps) they would have specified “peach halves”.


----------



## meijin

PaulQ said:


> As food:
> "Would you like some pineapple?"
> "Yes, but don't give me much."
> "Yes, but don't give me many."
> 
> As whole, unprocessed fruit:
> "Would you like some pineapples?"
> "Yes, but don't give me much."
> "Yes, but don't give me many."


Paul, if you think that's the issue, then I'm still completely misunderstood and I'll try to improve my explanation skills as soon as possible. 




london calling said:


> It isn't, believe me. It is a hybrid language which has different origins in different languages and has more exceptions than rules, unlike some other languages.


But how do you know when you don't speak Japanese? I've been studying English for many years and been speaking Japanese for many years too. 
In a way, Japanese is also a hybrid language. Actually it's probably the only language in the world that combines three different characters (and now it's four, because we use roman alphabets too). Spoken Japanese is also a mess.


----------



## PaulQ

meijin said:


> I forgot to say this, but I agree with what Truffula said (twice). I'll reread other posts when I have time.





Truffula said:


> "Pineapple" can definitely be a mass noun - when you say "a can of pineapple," "pineapple" is not singular but mass.


NB mass noun  = uncountable noun.


PaulQ said:


> "a can of pineapple"= "a can of pineapple chunks/rings, etc." = "A can of things that are describable as pineapple". Pineapple is used uncountably.





> "Orange" can't be a mass noun.


Neither can peach.


----------



## london calling

meijin said:


> But how do you know when you don't speak Japanese? I've been studying English for many years and been speaking Japanese for many years too.
> In a way, Japanese is also a hybrid language. Actually it's probably the only language in the world that combines three different characters (and now it's four, because we use roman alphabets too). Spoken Japanese is also a mess.


Did I compare English to Japanese? No. I was thinking of other European languages, such as Italian. English,  compared to Italian,  is inconsistent. You have to accept that a 'rule' in English will have many exceptions and often the answer to "Why...??" is simply "because that's the way we say it". If you don't accept that you'll go mad.


----------



## meijin

PaulQ said:


> NB mass noun = uncountable noun.
> Neither can peach.


But pineapple slices are countable. I said that it should be "a can of pineappl*es*" JUST because of your reply below. Of course I know "a can of pineapples" is wrong. My original post explains it and my assumption was considered correct by some posters (including you, I think. So I'm not sure why we are still discussing it ). 


PaulQ said:


> What I was trying to say is that "a can of peach*es*" doesn't mean "a can of peach slic*es*".
> 
> 
> 
> To me it would. I would not expect half peaches or whole peaches or peach pulp - I would expect sliced peaches, because that is how they usually come.
Click to expand...






london calling said:


> Did I compare English to Japanese? No.


Oh, OK. I thought you were comparing English to Japanese because you said "It isn't" to my statement comparing English to Japanese.


----------



## PaulQ

The problem with the whole "can of X" is that whereas each instance can be explained individually, and there can be broad guidance, there are (as my signature says) no universal "rules" as to whether it is "x" or "xs".


----------



## JulianStuart

meijin said:


> IEdit: Even if the content of the can was uncountable like this, it would still be called "a can of peach*es*".


This is an unusual item (compared to the default can/tin of peaches meaning sliced peaches) so it would be specified as a tin/can of peach puree.


----------



## heypresto

This thread go on any longer, can it? I really think it should be canned. Someone should put the tin lid on it.


----------



## london calling

Ah, but what would it become? A tinned/canned thread? And would the posts be classed as chunks or segments of the said thread?


----------



## Truffula

london calling said:


> meijin said:
> 
> 
> 
> My impression for many years has been that English is actually much more consistent (or logical) than Japanese.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It isn't, believe me. It is a hybrid language which has different origins in different languages and has more exceptions than rules, unlike some other languages.
Click to expand...




london calling said:


> Did I compare English to Japanese? No.



Yes, you really did, london calling.

Thanks for posting you agreed with me, meijin!


----------



## meijin

heypresto said:


> I really think it should be canned. Someone should put the tin lid on it.


Because no can can can it himself? 



PaulQ said:


> there are (as my signature says) no universal "rules"


I've just realized there's an option called "Show people's signatures with their messages" in Browsing Preferences, and enabled it for the first time. 
Why is it disabled by default? Or did I disable it a long time ago?? 



JulianStuart said:


> This is an unusual item (compared to the default can/tin of peaches meaning sliced peaches) so it would be specified as a tin/can of peach puree.


And if you rephrased it, would it be "a can of pureed peach" or "a can of pureed peach*es*"? 

As soon as I saw the word "puree", I had to check this. And, as expected, the can says "tomato*es*". I also see "Crushed Tomato*es*", "Diced Tomato*es*", etc. on other cans of tomatoes. It's probably because tomatoes are relatively small and more than one can go into the can.


----------



## RM1(SS)

london calling said:


> You have to accept that a 'rule' in English will have many exceptions and often the answer to "Why...??" is simply "because that's the way we say it". If you don't accept that you'll go mad.


----------

