# I want to learn how to make sweets.



## Nonn

Hello teachers, 

I want to go to France to learn how to make cakes, puddings, doughnuts, tarts, pies, chocolates, jam, everything sweet and delicious. 

Does "learn how to make sweets" work, or does it make you think I want to learn how to make candy/hard sweets. 

Thank you!


----------



## perpend

Welcome, Nonn (in case you haven't been yet welcomed on WR)!

"sweets" sounds okay to me, otherwise I'd use "desserts".

Some of your items aren't technically desserts, but I can't think of an all-encompassing term at this moment.


----------



## Parla

I have a nephew who is a *pastry chef* in a prestigious restaurant. He creates cakes, pies, tarts, and other fancy desserts, by hand. Is that, perhaps, what you mean?

The making of candy (chocolates sold in stores, lollipops, etc.) or jellies and jams is usually done in a manufacturing facility, with the items produced in large batches. That's something different.


----------



## Nonn

Thank you, perpend and Parla! 

Yes, handmade sweets/desserts/pastry! 

We like to use the word patesserie here but I heard it is a French word and not commonly used to English. 

Is it understandable to say "I want to learn how to make patesserie"? 

Thank you!


----------



## perpend

I was going to suggest that, but no, Nonn ... "pâttiserie" is not understood, at least not by most American English speakers. It might work in British English.

You might have to use two words: I want to go to France and learn how to make pastries and confections. 

Actually, confections is probably very dated.

I hope some sweet-tooth can find you a better solution!


----------



## natkretep

I'd understand 'I want to learn how to make pâtisserie', but I'd think you were using a French word. If you use _pastry_, I wouldn't think of cakes and jams.

'Make sweets' is OK in BrE, but I associate _sweets_ with more home-made desserts because 'sweets' is an informal word, whereas if you are going to France, I imagine beautiful and delicate confections. I think it might be a good idea to use the unusual word _confections _(and I agree with perpend that it sounds old fashioned).


----------



## Parla

A _patisserie_ (a perfectly good word in English) is defined as _a shop where French pastries and cakes are sold _(British dictionaries give a secondary definition: the pastries themselves)_. _There's one in my neighborhood; it also sells coffee and tea and has tables where people sit and consume these things in the shop.

If, as you say, you want to learn to create pastries, etc. professionally, then I think your goal would be said, at least in AE, to become a pastry chef.


----------



## perpend

Parla said:


> A _patisserie_ (a perfectly good word in English) ...



Have you heard that in American English, Parla? I noticed you qualified it as "English".

Going back to Nonn's question, I don't think I'd say: I want to go to France and work at a pâttiserie.

Then again, it depends on Nonn's target audience.

Maybe you can ask your nephew, if you have a sec, since he's in that industry.


----------



## velisarius

In BE "sweets" very often means "candy", and I wouldn't use it here.
You would need several words to cover all those things mentioned, I think._ Sweet things like pastries, cakes, chocolates, and jam._


----------



## Silver

I don't know why, but I have an urge to say that "dessert" is enough. And I say it now.


----------



## Andygc

No. It isn't. "I want to learn to make desserts" in BE would exclude "cakes, puddings, doughnuts, tarts, pies, chocolates, jam".


----------



## Silver

Here's my two cents worth, Andy.

Language should be concise as well as precise. No one cares what you are going to make or learn in a specific place. But what matters is that your target audience. Since you mentioned BE, I think in China if you say "I'm going to learn how to make desserts" is enough because your audience cares about the thing you are going to do rather than which dessert you are going to make. I also think that even you know what your target audience are, you don't necessarily need to be that specific. Let's say you are talking to a gourmet, "I'm going to learn how to make desserts" is far better than "cakes, puddings, and so on" because once you say it, it will be time-consuming.

I think the reason why the OP used "sweets" is because he/she has already had "sweet food" in mind, and dessert is a good word. I know that dessert means differently in different places, I just want to say that concise is better than redundant.


----------



## heypresto

'Desserts' may concise, but it's far from precise. Only 2 of the 7 things Nonn wants to learn to make could be called desserts.


----------



## Silver

Well, maybe I am influenced too much by my culture. 

I am going to France to learn how to make *sweet food*.


----------



## Nonn

Thank you everyone 

I want to say "I want to go to France to learn how to be a pastry chef" (I didn't know a pastry chef makes more than just pastries!) like Parla had suggested but I am not sure yet. So I will just choose my favorites and say "I want to go to France to learn how to make pastries, cakes and chocolate "


----------



## velisarius

Unless you are thinking of learning how to produce chocolate from the little beans, I think you need to say "... cakes and _chocolates" _(Plural)


----------



## RM1(SS)

Andygc said:


> No. It isn't. "I want to learn to make desserts" in BE would exclude "cakes, puddings, doughnuts, tarts, pies, chocolates, jam".


You don't consider cakes and pies to be desserts?


----------



## velisarius

In BE, cakes aren't normally served as a "dessert" (sweet course of a meal). A slice of apple pie with custard could be a dessert, sure.


----------



## natkretep

Just to expand on that - cake could be a component in a dessert, but not cake alone. You could have a sponge in a trifle for example. Or you could have a square of cake with a sauce and some ice-cream on the side. When I was at university, we frequently had cake drowned in custard as our pudding (= dessert).


----------



## Andygc

Silverobama said:


> I just want to say that concise is better than redundant


There is no point in trying to be concise if the sentence then does not convey the information that the speaker intends to convey. There is no redundancy in "cakes, puddings, doughnuts, tarts, pies, chocolates, jam". Indeed,  it's far from a complete list; there's no pancakes, jellies and curds.


Silverobama said:


> Well, maybe I am influenced too much by my culture.
> I am going to France to learn how to make *sweet food*.


But that means nothing in English. We don't have a classification of food called "sweet food".


Silverobama said:


> No one cares what you are going to make or learn in a specific place.


Whether or not you care what Nonn wants to learn about is wholly irrelevant. Nonn appears to want to say what Nonn wants to learn about, and that is "how to make cakes, puddings, doughnuts, tarts, pies, chocolates, jam, everything sweet and delicious."

There is an excellent way to convey that information. It is "I want to go to France to learn how to make cakes, puddings, doughnuts, tarts, pies, chocolates, jam, everything sweet and delicious." Which is where we started.


----------



## RM1(SS)

Andygc said:


> No. It isn't. "I want to learn to make desserts" in BE would exclude "cakes, puddings, doughnuts, tarts, pies, chocolates, jam".


Hmmm....  Another question comes to mind.  To me a tart is just a small fruit pie - how do you distinguish between them?


I feel a sudden craving for some of Mr Kipling's products....


----------



## Wordsmyth

RM1(SS) said:


> Hmmm.... Another question comes to mind. To me a tart is just a small fruit pie - how do you distinguish between them?


In BrE, a tart is usually open. A pie is usually covered. It has nothing to do with size. And in either case, the filling may or may not be fruit.

Ws


----------



## Wordsmyth

natkretep said:


> Just to expand on that - cake could be a component in a dessert, but not cake alone.


I guess, Nat, that you're using _'cake'_ as a mass noun, to refer to what you get by baking a basic flour/fat/eggs/sugar mixture.

On the other hand there are _'cakes'_ that could well be served as desserts: 







Ws


----------



## natkretep

Yes, that's a dolled up cake - or what the industry calls a gateau. Instead of cream or sauce on the side, it's on (and maybe in as well) the cake. I'm also thinking about how a Victoria sponge cake or a jam Swiss roll is not normally considered a dessert.


----------



## Parla

> Parla said: "A _patisserie_ (a perfectly good word in English) ..."  Have you heard that in American English, Parla? I noticed you qualified it as "English".


Yes, Perpend: by "English" I meant the language generally, not a particular variety thereof. I went on to say that there is a business by that name in my neighborhood. You can find the word in the _American Heritage Dictionary_, the _Random House Dictionary, Merriam-Webster_, and other US dictionaries.


----------



## RM1(SS)

natkretep said:


> Yes, that's a dolled up cake - or what the industry calls a gateau.


_Gateau_ is one of those fancy French words that isn't used by honest Americans.   Note that the WRF dictionary only gives it as an entry in Collins -  not either version of Random House.  I agree that Wordsmyth's example is a pretty fancy cake, but I'd still call it a cake (and serve it as a dessert).


----------



## Andygc

Is this now a thread about differential cookery? Britain built an empire and once that empire had stolen tea plants from China the Empire's upper-class wives developed afternoon tea which, as the price of tea fell, trickled down to the more "genteel" middle class, but not to the broader working population whose "tea" was quite a different thing.

A proper afternoon tea not only includes sandwiches, but also includes a selection of cakes. These may be small, round and eaten individually, or large and eaten in slices. The large ones may be round or rectangular. They may be rich and fruity, covered in icing or not, light and fruity, Victoria sponge, somewhat dry and boring Battenberg (thank you, Auntie Daisy  ) - all manner of things. None of them is a dessert. The tea could well also include sweet biscuits (never a dessert), jam tarts, individual fruit pies and mince pies. If jam tarts, individual fruit pies or mince pies are eaten in an afternoon tea, they aren't desserts. If they are eaten after a main meal covered in custard, they are desserts. A slice of gateau might be eaten with a cup of coffee at a coffee shop when it isn't a dessert. It may also be eaten as part of a main meal and be a dessert.

There are desserts which never get near the afternoon tea table. Spotted Dick, jam roly-poly, suet puddings, Christmas pudding. I suspect few BE speakers would refer to them as "desserts", but I associate the word "dessert" with a fairly limited subset of the BE-speaking population (I think it's influenced by both social class and region). These puddings don't really fit the OP's sentence. Nobody in his right mind would go to France to learn how to make a Spotted Dick.

So, in BE, saying "I want to learn to make desserts" would leave the listener almost as ill-informed as he was before he heard the sentence.


----------



## AutumnOwl

Would "fine bakery wares and confectionery" be understood in English to mean what Nonn wants to learn to do?


----------



## Wordsmyth

natkretep said:


> Yes, that's a dolled up cake - or what the industry calls a gateau.


 Where I live, of course, a _gateau_ is just any cake!



AutumnOwl said:


> Would "fine bakery wares and confectionery" be understood in English to mean what Nonn wants to learn to do?


I'm not sure I'd know what "fine bakery wares" covers, AO. It's not a term I've ever heard used. A little googling comes up with a number of continental European sites that mention it (German, Dutch, Belgian, ...)

... OK, I've just found it. Apparently it's a term used in the EU's Eurocode 2 Food Coding System, and it includes both sweet and savoury products. It's Eurocode category definition 6.50, and it means: bakery products with either a sugar content or a fat content (or both) exceeding 5% on a dry weight basis. I don't think that would be the inspiration behind Nonn's culinary ambitions!

There's also a risk, in general conversation, of "bakery wares" being confused with the more familiar term "bakeware", which isn't stuff you bake: it's what you bake it in.

Ws


----------



## srk

velisarius said:


> Unless you are thinking of learning how to produce chocolate from the little beans, I think you need to say "... cakes and _chocolates" _(Plural)


I'm guessing that learning how to make chocolate from (something close to) scratch is in the curriculum.


----------



## Nonn

velisarius said:


> Unless you are thinking of learning how to produce chocolate from the little beans, I think you need to say "... cakes and _chocolates" _(Plural)



I'd love to learn how to make chocolate and chocolates! Thank you for teaching me the difference 

It's been so interesting reading all this talk about dessert!


----------



## london calling

In my opinion, Parla was right to suggest Pastry chef, if it is for some kind of 'official' purpose. Otherwise, as you say Nonn, you can simply list the things you would like to learn how to make.

From Wikipedia:

Pastry chef
A pastry chef or pâtissier; the French female version of the word is pâtissière, is a station chef in a professional kitchen, skilled in the making of pastries, desserts, breads and other baked goods.

Dessert
The term dessert can apply to many foods, such as cakes, tarts, cookies, biscuits, gelatins, pastries, ice creams, pies, puddings, custards, and sweet soups.


----------



## Nonn

Thank you, London calling!


----------



## Silver

I seldom disagree with Parla. But I must say the French word "patissiere" is of a high register. I am not sure it is used in daily conversations. 

And I think "dessert" is a good word, I still stubbornly think that the word is the best choice here. Anyway, good luck to you, a future pastry chef.


----------



## Nonn

Thank you, silverobama!


----------



## Andygc

Silverobama said:


> I still stubbornly think that the word is the best choice here


Why, when people who speak the language have told you that in BE it is most certainly not? I leave it to AE-speakers to decide if you are right for their form of English.


----------



## suzi br

Silverobama said:


> I seldom disagree with Parla. But I must say the French word "patissiere" is of a high register. I am not sure it is used in daily conversations.
> 
> And I think "dessert" is a good word, I still stubbornly think that the word is the best choice here. Anyway, good luck to you, a future pastry chef.



Sweetie, you are wrong! Using dessert here would not convey the full thing.
I would probably change the verb to train and say I want to go to France to train as a pastry chef.  Pastry itself is not an inclusive term but the addition of chef carries the patisserie angle (which I don't think is "high register" in the UK because so much of our restuarant industry evolved from French influences).


----------



## Silver

Hi, Nonn.

I'm not trying to disagree with native speakers, nor am I trying to mislead you. 

Please take a look at London Calling's post in #32. See the definition of dessert in Wikipedia.

I am not saying that Wikipedia is always reliable, but in cities like mine, one can't talk to less than 5 native speakers, I must say Wikipedia is a great help.

I am not a gourmet, I just don't want to complicate matters here. If "dessert" simply covers two items, I'd just say those two items.


----------



## suzi br

Silver, someone wanting to go to France to train in "desserts" would simply NOT use that term.  In fact, in the UK they are highly likely to use the French term because that is where they are aiming to study.


----------



## Silver

Thanks a lot, Sweetie.


----------



## suzi br

Silverobama said:


> Thanks a lot, Sweetie.



Trust me .. and Andy for that matter !

In answer to the OP .. sweets is definitely wrong in the context of training to make patisserie etc.  But it might be OK to say as a pet name to someone you talk to a lot in forums.  But would definitely be wrong to use with someone you never talked to before!


----------

