# packet, package, parcel



## Yichen

Hello all,

The following are pictures I get from google pictures respectively,
and the "subtitles" of the first two are labelled by myself.















It seems to me that "a packet" is a more well-formed "package",
something like the type of a cigarette packet. It is usually not so large.

It's difficult to tell a package and a parcel apart.
I think "package" is a general term, so a parcel (or even a packet) is also a package.

Is my impression correct?


Thank you.


----------



## Uncle Jack

These are not exclusive terms, and for many items you could use any one of the three.

In very broad term, a "packet" is relatively small, something that you could pick up and hold in one hand. Shape is largely immaterial, and a packet of seeds, for example, is really an envelope, but it contains seeds rather than a letter.

"Package" can be used for almost anything enclosed in paper or card, of any size, that isn't obviously a letter. Most packets could also be called packages, but a package can be far larger, perhaps requiring two people to lift. However, "package" tends not to be used for things intended to be moved by fork lift truck or packed in material other than paper or card.

"Parcel" is not so much about the size of an object, but that it is delivered from one place to another. Your "packets" at the top could be turned into parcels by wrapping them in plain paper and posting them to someone. To count as a parcel, the package really needs to be able to be picked up and carried by one person.


----------



## Yichen

A wonderful explanation!   Thank you, Uncle Jack.

What are those things that move by fork lift truck  called? 
A bale or something?

And what is the right word for my "subtitle"  in post #1？


----------



## Uncle Jack

Yichen said:


> A wonderful explanation!   Thank you, Uncle Jack.
> 
> What are those things that move by fork lift truck  called?
> A bale or something?


Larger objects tend to have specific terms relating to their construction. Pallet, crate, container, stillage, bale are all possible, but there is often only one term that naturally applies to any one object. "Pallet" is used not just for the pallet itself, but everything that is loaded onto the pallet.



Yichen said:


> And what is the right word for my "subtitle"  in post #1？


I would use "label", which means you would need to choose a different verb (or not use a verb at all).


----------



## Yichen

Got it. Have a good day. Uncle Jack.
Here in China, it is already early in the morning or deep in the night.


----------



## kentix

Are you referring to what is on the left as a packet or what is on the right?


----------



## Yichen

Sorry I didn't make it clear, kentix. In each picture (the first two), I meant the two are of the same kind.


----------



## kentix

In American English, in the first picture, I would call those on the right "packets", and that on the left a small box.


----------



## zaffy

Uncle Jack said:


> "Package" can be used for almost anything enclosed in paper or card, of any size, (...)  a package can be far larger, perhaps requiring two people to lift.
> 
> "Parcel" is not so much about the size of an object, but that it is delivered from one place to another.  To count as a parcel, the package really needs to be able to be picked up and carried by one person.



Would "parcel" work in this sign in both AE and BE? If so, would it imply something different? This sign is stuck to the door of a public buidling in the US.


----------



## kentix

I would take it to mean anything bigger than a letter. In the U.S. the only entity that delivers regular letter mail is the US Postal Service. All other deliveries are by package delivery companies. I think the gist of the sign is they don't want any deliveries through the front door. We don't generally use the word parcel so you wouldn't likely see it on a sign like that.

The open question is whether the postal service needs to bring packages to the back. I would think they have an exception, at least for smaller packages.


----------



## JulianStuart

That sign means ~ "anything other than letters".  The building probably has an arrangement with the Post Office about parcels/packages coming by USPS that does not apply to packages from UPS/DHL/FedEx etc.

Cross-posted


----------



## zaffy

kentix said:


> We don't generally use the word parcel so you would likely see it on a sign like that.



Why, do you think, UPS uses _parcel_ not _package_ in their name then? It's an American company, right?


----------



## kentix

It was named in 1925. Times change.


----------



## zaffy

And when we move, can we call these boxes "packages"? I guess we can never call them "parcels", as they are always meant to be sent/mailed/delivered. But how about "package"? Are packages also meant only to be sent/mailed/delivered?


----------



## JulianStuart

zaffy said:


> And when we move, can we call these boxes "packages"? I guess we can never call them "parcels", as they are always meant to be sent/mailed/delivered. But how about "package"? Are packages also meant only to be sent/mailed/delivered?
> 
> View attachment 53198


Those are (moving) boxes, not packages.


----------



## zaffy

And here the delivery company  delivered five packages or five boxes? Can I say "_I'm expecting five packages. Will you be able to carry them with me?_"


----------



## Uncle Jack

"Package" is probably the most common term used by shipping companies for things being shipped that can be carried by hand. Outside of the context of things being shipped, the word is hardly used.

If those boxes were sitting on a warehouse shelf, whether full or empty, they would be boxes. If you want someone to help you carry one, you would call it a box. You might possibly use "package" for something that has no definable form and no other obvious name, but most things can be referred to as boxes, bags, sacks, tins, barrels or something like that.

If you are awaiting a delivery, you might well say that you are expecting five packages, but this gives no clue as to their size or shape. They might be large boxes like post #16, small padded envelopes, or a formless shape wrapped in thin plastic. As soon as they cease being items being shipped, they cease being packages; even "parcel" has a wider use; presents under a Christmas tree are parcels, but they would not be called "packages".


----------



## zaffy

Uncle Jack said:


> even "parcel" has a wider use; presents under a Christmas tree are parcels, but they would not be called "packages".



But "package" also might have a wider use, like "a package of chips/crisps", which has nothing to do with shipping, right?


----------



## heypresto

Chips and crisps come in packets, not packages:


----------



## zaffy

heypresto said:


> Chips and crisps come in packets, not packages:



And if were expecting a delivery guy, would you say you were expecting a 'package' or 'parcel' in BE?


----------



## Uncle Jack

Parcel is still more common, I think, but it might depend on what it was. Both words are used.


----------



## zaffy

And does either imply anything more or less than the other in this example? Perhaps the food portions were smaller in the case of the parcels?

_She regularly sends food packages/parcels to her family in Ethiopia. _


----------



## JulianStuart

zaffy said:


> And does either imply anything more or less than the other in this example? Perhaps the food portions were smaller in the case of the parcels?
> 
> _She regularly sends food packages/parcels to her family in Ethiopia. _


No and no.


----------



## kentix

This is one of those areas of fairly large difference between BE and AE.

presents under a Christmas tree are parcels, but they would not be called "packages" -​
This is not used in AE. They are presents.

Chips and crisps come in packets, not packages:​
This is not true in AE. They are bags. If pushed, they might be packages. I would never call them packets.

would you say you were expecting a 'package' or 'parcel' in BE?​
In AE you are always expecting/waiting for a package to be delivered.

_She regularly sends care packages to her family in Ethiopia._​
When you send something to a family member/close friend who has a hard time getting that item where they are, we call that a care package. It could be food and/or something else.

If it's an organized drive by a charity with people (often volunteers) putting the items in boxes to send, we still call those care packages, as long as each package is intended to be received and used by one individual.


----------



## zaffy

And when do I use the word "pack"? Here Wallmart calls this "A mix variety pack"










kentix said:


> Chips and crisps come in packets, not packages:
> This is not true in AE. They are bags. If pushed, they might be packages. I would never call them packets.


Can I say "a pack of chips" for a single bag?
And would "a pack of crisps" work in BE?


----------



## Uncle Jack

In BrE, almost anything that is ready-packaged to keep it together (and separate from anything else) is a pack. You might by a pack of butter, a pack of flour or a pack of cereal. Here is a pack of mushrooms.



Here are mushrooms that aren't in a pack:




Usually, it is possible to use another word in place of pack, such as a bag of flour, a box of cereal or a punnet of mushrooms, and sometimes it is almost impossible to know whether "pack" is in common use for something or not.

It is common for "pack" to have some adjective added, to describe the type of pack. Your example is a variety pack (several different things packaged together). You might have a four pack or a six pack, of tins of baked beans or beer, perhaps.


----------



## zaffy

So would "a pack of crisps", with no adjecitve added,  have any sense to your BE ears? Would you perhaps imagine a pack with different kinds of crisps like the one in that Wallmart offer?


----------



## heypresto

zaffy said:


> And would "a pack of crisps" work in BE?


No. It's a _packet _or _bag _in BE.

So we don't bamboozle you (and ourselves) with lots of different, and often conflicting words and usages from two different Englishes, it might be a good idea to decide which English you wish to concentrate on?


----------



## heypresto

zaffy said:


> So would "a pack of crisps", with no adjective added, have any sense to your BE ears?


It would sound odd at first, until you explained what you meant, or it was obvious from the context. I think we are more likely to call it a multipack.


----------



## zaffy

heypresto said:


> So we don't bamboozle you (and ourselves) with lots of different, and often conflicting words and usages from two different Englishes, it might be a good idea to decide which English you wish to concentrate on?


You might've noticed I'm interested in both AE and BE, so please don't find me a pain in the arse  Thanks to these formus I now discover real English, after almost 30 years of dealing with it. EFL sucks a lot, to be honest. An articficial language that makes teachers and students think only one version works.


----------



## Wordy McWordface

_ And would "a pack of crisps" work in BE? _

In BrE, the term 'pack of crisps' might suggest some form of  'multipack' or 'family pack'.  This would be a large bag containing, say, twelve individual bags of crisps. The individual bags are *packets*, while the whole set of twelve is sold as a *pack*.


----------



## Wordy McWordface

Additional question for fellow English speakers in North America:

If chips and peanuts and suchlike don't come in packets but in bags, what does come in packets?  How do you use the word 'packet' in AmE, if at all?


----------



## Keith Bradford

zaffy said:


> ... EFL sucks a lot, to be honest. An articficial language that makes teachers and students think only one version works.


 Give that person a medal!


----------



## Myridon

Wordy McWordface said:


> Additional question for fellow English speakers in North America:
> 
> If chips and peanuts and suchlike don't come in packets but in bags, what does come in packets?  How do you use the word 'packet' in AmE, if at all?


Powdered gravy mixes and things like that. These are packets of chili powder. About 10 cm tall and almost flat.


----------



## Wordy McWordface

Myridon said:


> Powdered gravy mixes and things like that. These are packets of chili powder. About 10 cm tall and almost flat.
> View attachment 53367


Thanks, Myridon. So what is it about the concept of 'packet' that allows in the French's Chili-O packaging but doesn't allow in the 10 cm bag of peanuts? Is it because the chili powder packaging is almost flat? Like a sachet?


----------



## Myridon

Because it's a packet not a bag.  
In an American English, a sachet is a small item that smells nice that you your great-grandmother  might hide in a drawer to make the drawer smell nice. It doesn't have a defined shape. It might be a bag.


----------



## kentix

This is a packet of ketchup.


----------



## heypresto

In BE that's a sachet.   

English is great, isn't it?


----------



## kentix

By some piece of universal karma I happened to watch a movie the other day called _Cut Bank_. Cut Bank is the name of the small town in Montana the story takes place in. There is a bit of murder going on and exactly what is happening and who is doing what is mysterious at first. The murder involves a mailman delivering mail in his mail truck and the disappearance of that mail. Anyway, one very, very eccentric, loner character in the movie (is he a murderer?) is upset because a package he was expecting to receive disappeared during the crime. He spends most of the movie trying to find it. And part of what makes him strange, aside from his obviously unusual social mannerisms, is that he keeps asking people, "Do you know where my parcel is?" and variations on that. "I have to find my parcel." "He says you know where my parcel is." He says parcel so many times in a situation we wouldn't say it that it reinforces his creepiness. You can tell something is off with him. Who knew it was possible to make parcel a creepy word.


----------



## kentix

I would call this a packet of peanuts and that's how they advertise it. It's one ounce, which is approximately 28 grams. Because it's an isolated picture it's hard to gauge the size. It looked like it would feed a whole family when I first added it but it's quite small.





This is a multi-pack. On the box they call those packets "packs" but in the advertising text link describing them they refer to them as bags.




PLANTERS Salted Peanuts, 1 Oz. Bags (48 Pack) - Snack ... - Amazon.com

The whole thing is a mixed bag.


----------



## Keith Bradford

I think we're in danger of over-thinking this.  It may not be true in the USA but I for one would have no qualms in calling that       






 ...a *bag *of peanuts or a *sachet *of peanuts or a *packet *of peanuts. I don't even know which word would come most spontaneously to mind.


But I do know that the collective bundle of 48 of them (Forty-eight!  Are you an addict or what!?!?) would be called a *pack *until it was wrapped in cardboard when it could be called a *box*.


----------



## zaffy

Keith Bradford said:


> But I do know that the collective bundle of 48 of them (Forty-eight! Are you an addict or what!?!?) would be called a *pack *until it was wrapped in cardboard when it could be called a *box*.



Or package/parcel once it was meant to be shipped, right?


----------



## zaffy

Wordy McWordface said:


> Is it because the chili powder packaging is almost flat? Like a sachet?





Myridon said:


> a sachet is a small item that smells nice that you your great-grandmother  might hide in a drawer





kentix said:


> This is a packet of ketchup.



Wow, looks like I can fully trust Longman    Or can I? It says the smelly thing is BE too.


----------



## Wordy McWordface

Kentix said:
_I would call this a packet of peanuts and that's how they advertise it. It's one ounce, which is approximately 28 grams. Because it's an isolated picture it's hard to gauge the size. It looked like it would feed a whole family when I first added it but it's quite small._

View attachment 53372



So this is a 28g packet of peanuts? And would I be correct in thinking that it's the size that makes something a packet rather than a bag?
Now, let's say that Planters sell an identical product containing 500g of peanuts - enough for the whole family. Would that then be a bag of peanuts?


----------



## Wordy McWordface

zaffy said:


> Wow, looks like I can fully trust Longman  Or can I? It says the smelly thing is BE too.
> 
> View attachment 53384



I don't think so. If someone said "Great Aunt Joan makes sachets and gives them to her friends as birthday presents", I wouldn't know what they meant. Sachets of what? 

Admittedly, if  I went into a smelly-things shop in the UK and saw 'lavender sachets' and 'rose petal sachets' for sale, it would be obvious what they were and it wouldn't strike me as an odd use of the word. 

But without context, the word 'sachet' is simply a form of packaging in BrE. For us, a sachet is the sachet of ketchup in #37 or a sachet of shampoo in a hotel bathroom.  It's a flat plastic thing you tear the end off with your teeth before squeezing out the contents and throwing it away.


----------



## kentix

Wordy McWordface said:


> Would that then be a bag of peanuts?


I would think so. But at that size they normally come in jars or cans.

Maybe if you can stick your hand in it, it's a bag. 

But I would call this a bag of rice (or package).


----------



## JulianStuart

kentix said:


> By some piece of universal karma I happened to watch a movie the other day called _Cut Bank_. Cut Bank is the name of the small town in Montana the story takes place in. There is a bit of murder going on and exactly what is happening and who is doing what is mysterious at first. The murder involves a mailman delivering mail in his mail truck and the disappearance of that mail. Anyway, one very, very eccentric, loner character in the movie (is he a murderer?) is upset because a package he was expecting to receive disappeared during the crime. He spends most of the movie trying to find it. And part of what makes him strange, aside from his obviously unusual social mannerisms, is that he keeps asking people, "Do you know where my parcel is?" and variations on that. "I have to find my parcel." "He says you know where my parcel is." He says parcel so many times in a situation we wouldn't say it that it reinforces his creepiness. You can tell something is off with him. Who knew it was possible to make parcel a creepy word.


Did he have any trace of a British accent (or heritage), by any chance? 
I grew up in the UK with parcel - something bigger than a fat enveope, often tied with string in the days before tape) and sent through the post (US = mail) via parcel post.The word package was not something I remember.  Then I moved to N. America and I learnt (or learned, if you prefer) the word for those objects was package. I used to eat crisps from a "packet of crisps" but now I sometimes eat chips from a "bag of chips" - they have tiny ones and huge ones (sharing size and party size, they're still "bags").


----------



## Wordy McWordface

kentix said:


> I would think so. But at that size they normally come in jars or cans.
> 
> Maybe if you can stick your hand in it, it's a bag.
> 
> But I would call this a bag of rice (or package).
> View attachment 53387





_Maybe if you can stick your hand in it, it's a bag. _
That makes sense. (Depending how big your hands are).

_But I would call this a bag of rice (or package)._
I would call it a bag, too.  (or a packet )


----------



## zaffy

So here Brits see two packets of sunflower seeds and Americans see two packages/bags of sunflower seeds, right?


----------



## Uncle Jack

zaffy said:


> Wow, looks like I can fully trust Longman    Or can I? It says the smelly thing is BE too.
> 
> View attachment 53384


(1) is spot on, although it neglects one important point, that a sachet is more or less flat. If it is made from paper, it is usually folded right over in the middle and sealed around the other three edges (or two pieces of paper might be sealed around all four edges). If it is made from plastic it is usually a tube squashed flat and sealed at both ends. The sachet of shampoo contains enough for a single use.

Powdered soups and cold remedies come in sachets, as do single portions of salt, sugar and sauces. Seeds (for planting) come in sachets

I would not call anything that contained peanuts a sachet - it would be too bulky, and neither of the pictures in post #49 are sachets; the one on the right is the wrong shape, and the one on the left looks too big/thick.


Wordy McWordface said:


> Admittedly, if I went into a smelly-things shop in the UK and saw 'lavender sachets' and 'rose petal sachets' for sale, it would be obvious what they were and it wouldn't strike me as an odd use of the word.


 (But it don't tend to go into these sorts of shop so this is not a meaning I generally think of when I hear the word "sachet").


----------



## JulianStuart

Uncle Jack said:


> (1) is spot on, although it neglects one important point, that a sachet is more or less flat. If it is made from paper, it is usually folded right over in the middle and sealed around the other three edges (or two pieces of paper might be sealed around all four edges). If it is made from plastic it is usually a tube squashed flat and sealed at both ends. The sachet of shampoo contains enough for a single use.
> 
> Powdered soups and cold remedies come in sachets, as do single portions of salt, sugar and sauces. Seeds (for planting) come in sachets
> 
> I would not call anything that contained peanuts a sachet - it would be too bulky, and neither of the pictures in post #49 are sachets; the one on the right is the wrong shape, and the one on the left looks too big/thick.
> 
> (But it don't tend to go into these sorts of shop so this is not a meaning I generally think of when I hear the word "sachet").


I see we are finally approaching the most important questions here.  Is a tea-bag a sachet, for example?


----------



## Uncle Jack

JulianStuart said:


> I see we are finally approaching the most important questions here.  Is a tea-bag a sachet, for example?


No. Its the right shape (well, the flat, square ones are, not the tetrahedral kind, and sachets aren't usually round), but you do not empty out the contents. Another part missing from Longman's definition.


----------



## Wordy McWordface

zaffy said:


> So here Brits see two packets of sunflower seeds and Americans see two packages/bags of sunflower seeds, right?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 53390


'Packet' or a 'bag' would be my first choices, but 'package' wouldn't necessarily strike me as wrong.

I'm not sure if you've realised this yet, zaffy, but comparing AmE and BrE is not as straightforward as comparing apples and oranges. It's not as simple as  'Brits say x and not y; Americans say y and not x'.   The picture is actually very lopsided.

Just take a look at my answer above or Keith's  #41. As a general rule,  BrE speakers are far more comfortable with the supposed American terms than vice versa. BrE speakers may not call the tiny thing of ketchup a 'packet', but it doesn't necessarily sound wrong to us. Given that we're all exposed to American media day in day out, this is hardly surprising. British kids spend the first years of their lives watching Rugrats or the Simpsons or whatever kids watch these days, so they all grow up absorbing American phrases.  In terms of our passive listening skills, we grow up bilingual. We may use English-English, Scots English, Irish English or Australian English in our daily lives, but we all understand American English because we've been surrounded by it for so long. American terms tend to be there in the background for us; these words may not even be in our active vocabulary, but they are generally familiar to us.  The reverse is not true: while 'packet of ketchup' and '5lb package of rice' sound unremarkable to British ears, 'sachet of ketchup' or '5 lb packet of rice' sound very wrong indeed to American ones. As I said, it's lopsided.


----------



## JulianStuart

Wordy McWordface said:


> I'm not sure if you've realised this yet, zaffy, but comparing AmE and BrE is not as straightforward as comparing apples and oranges. It's not as simple as  'Brits say x and not y; Americans say y and not x'.   The picture is actually very lopsided.


  
It has been pointed out before, but the essence of that message seems to have not got(ten) through  (thru).  The questions are typically of the form that _assumes_ "Brits {all of them, always} say x and not y; Americans {all of them, always} say y and not x".  And even after an answer is given, there is inevitably a picture showing someone doing something unusual, as if in refutation of the answer that had been given.   I have speculated that in Polish*, there is only ever one "correct" way to say something and _everyone_ who speaks Polish _always_ uses _only_ that way.  English is NOT like that, given how broadly distributed it is geographically (pronunciation, names of items, some grammar differences, retention or loss of words from  long ago etc) and how many words it has picked up from different languages, all with similar but often not identical meanings.  Hence my rather facetious question on tea-bags versus sachets 

*I know no Polish, I infer this from many of Zaffy's posts


----------



## Wordy McWordface

JulianStuart said:


> I see we are finally approaching the most important questions here.  Is a tea-bag a sachet, for example?


No, for the reason that Uncle Jack gives.  But sometimes teabags come inside sachets.


----------



## zaffy

JulianStuart said:


> I have speculated that in Polish*, there is only ever one "correct" way to say something and _everyone_ who speaks Polish _always_ uses _only_ that way.



No, we have various forms too, but much less. I'm just always curious how things can be called by various natives in English. I do realise you speak English in many ways, thus I ask.  English is my passion  

For some Poles, this is a package of tea and for others it is a bag of tea.


----------



## kentix

JulianStuart said:


> Did he have any trace of a British accent (or heritage), by any chance?


No, he was rural Montana. I knew typing the words really didn't do it justice because he says it in his particular rural style. Kind of like "mah parcel" or "muh parcel". "I'm tryin' to find muh parcel."


----------



## Wordy McWordface

zaffy said:


> No, we have various forms too, but much less. I'm just always curious how things can be called by various natives in English. I do realise you speak English in many ways, thus I ask.  English is my passion
> 
> For some Poles, this is a package of tea and for others it is a bag of tea.
> 
> View attachment 53392


That's tea? Not something for filling a smelly American-style 'sachet'?


----------



## kentix

Uncle Jack said:


> (But it don't tend to go into these sorts of shop so this is not a meaning I generally think of when I hear the word "sachet").


I don't go into those shops either but that's about the only way I think of the word sachet.


----------



## zaffy

Wordy McWordface said:


> That's tea? Not something for filling a smelly American-style 'sachet'?


Yeah, this is what we brew and drink. Dry petals of some flowers. We call it "fruit tea".


----------



## Keith Bradford

Uncle Jack said:


> ...I would not call anything that contained peanuts a sachet - it would be too bulky...


Have you never been on an aeroplane?  They give you _tiny_ sachets of peanuts there.


----------



## zaffy

kentix said:


> We don't generally use the word parcel so you wouldn't likely see it on a sign like that.



I just found 'parcel' on a sign in Arizona


----------



## kentix

And I found this sign.


----------



## heypresto

Does the USPS deliver holidays in parcels?


----------



## kentix

It sounds like an advertising slogan. They might have been quoting one.


----------



## JulianStuart

kentix said:


> And I found this sign.
> 
> View attachment 53436


A refutation of a refutation?


----------



## JulianStuart

zaffy said:


> I just found 'parcel' on a sign in Arizona
> 
> View attachment 53434


Perhaps written by a BE speaker? I once had a paper published in an American science journal where I used the word “tyre”🕺🕺🕺


----------



## Roxxxannne

I thought of this thread today when I was chatting with a friend about a parcel of land in 18th century Massachusetts.  Does BrE still use that word for a "distinct, continuous piece of land" (as defined in the WR dictionaries)?

 (I'm guessing that a small flat piece of land in the UK is not a sachet of land).


----------



## Uncle Jack

Roxxxannne said:


> I thought of this thread today when I was chatting with a friend about a parcel of land in 18th century Massachusetts.  Does BrE still use that word for a "distinct, continuous piece of land" (as defined in the WR dictionaries)?
> 
> (I'm guessing that a small flat piece of land in the UK is not a sachet of land).


Yes, "parcel" is still used with that meaning, but it is not particularly common and is hardly an everyday term. Occasionally it is used in advertisements of land for sale (I am not sure if the text below the photograph will be visible. It says "An interesting parcel of land suiting a variety of purposes including agricultural, equestrian, small holder and amenity interests"):




No, we don't have sachets of land, nor packs, packets, packages, letters or envelopes either, for that matter. I suppose a parcel of land could be boxed round by box  :


----------



## Roxxxannne

I suspect that 'parcel' for land is not that common in AmE either.  Typically, I think, land would be referred to only in terms of acreage.

"Boxed round by box"


----------



## kentix

I think it's not uncommon in a certain context that's mostly business oriented. Businesses buy parcels of land for factories and other buildings they intend to build. 

In the case of residential land here, a parcel of land specifically created with the intended use of building a house there is specifically called a lot. A developer might but a parcel of land and divide it into lots.


----------



## JulianStuart

Roxxxannne said:


> I suspect that 'parcel' for land is not that common in AmE either.  Typically, I think, land would be referred to only in terms of acreage.
> 
> "Boxed round by box"


Could be regional (space and time?) .  Sonoma county collects property taxes for each "Assessor's parcel (number)" - our _lot_ is made up of two _parcels _and I'm expecting a _package_ from UPS today. I will probably have to sashay to the gate to sign for my package - it will contain at least one  box and some packets of spare parts.


> *United Parcel Service*, Inc. (“*UPS*”) was founded in 1907 as a private messenger and *delivery service* in Seattle, Washington. Today, we are the world's largest *package delivery company*


----------



## zaffy

Came across another example of 'parcel' in Utah.  So I need to pull down that metal cover to make more room for a parcel to fit  into that slot, right?


----------



## heypresto

Yes. I imagine it hinges out to reveal a chute into which you put anything that's too big to go through the thin slit at the top. But the mechanics of this is going off topic.


----------



## zaffy

These two were referred to as "bags" of peanuts by an American.  Does BE like it?


----------



## Wordy McWordface

I don't see anything wrong with calling those 'bags of peanuts' in BrE.  They could also be 'packs' or 'packets' in BrE.


----------



## Uncle Jack

It's hard to tell but they look like bags to me. "Bag" is a very general term that covers a wide range of things.


----------



## Wordy McWordface

zaffy said:


> These two were referred to as "bags" of peanuts by an American.  Does BE like it?
> 
> View attachment 56020


It's not surprising that the AmE speaker called these 'bags'. This seems to be consistent with what's been discussed earlier in this thread e.g.  'packet of crisps' v  'bag of chips'.


----------



## Peter_London_Stratford

JulianStuart said:


> It has been pointed out before, but the essence of that message seems to have not got(ten) through  (thru).  The questions are typically of the form that _assumes_ "Brits {all of them, always} say x and not y; Americans {all of them, always} say y and not x".  And even after an answer is given, there is inevitably a picture showing someone doing something unusual, as if in refutation of the answer that had been given.   I have speculated that in Polish*, there is only ever one "correct" way to say something and _everyone_ who speaks Polish _always_ uses _only_ that way.  English is NOT like that, given how broadly distributed it is geographically (pronunciation, names of items, some grammar differences, retention or loss of words from  long ago etc) and how many words it has picked up from different languages, all with similar but often not identical meanings.  Hence my rather facetious question on tea-bags versus sachets
> 
> *I know no Polish, I infer this from many of Zaffy's posts


You're right about Polish. And in Polish is only one way of correct pronunciation. And generally how word is spelt is in such way pronounced.


----------



## kentix

So you are saying there are no accents and no dialects in Polish. If I speak to a college professor in Warsaw and to a farmer on his farm and I have a blindfold on I can't tell any difference? If I speak to someone from the east side of the country they will speak exactly like someone from the west side? And no one ever writes less than perfect Polish* no matter what their education level?

* there is no perfect English to begin with


----------

