What does the following sentence mean?

[DJ Kim]

"If you are going after Moby Dick, take along the tartar sauce."

What does the aboce sentence mean?

Thanks in advance.

[Gary N. Deckant]

Moby Dick was an enormous white whale in a novel by Herman Melville.
Tartar sauce is a popular condiment usually eaten with seafood.
I would paraphrase your sentence as follows:
If you are undertaking a large project, make appropriate preparations.

--
Gary N. Deckant
bs...@yfn.ysu.edu
Youngstown, Ohio

[Robert Bryan Lipton]

DJ Kim wrote in message ...

>"If you are going after Moby Dick, take along the tartar sauce."
>
>What does the aboce sentence mean?
>
>Thanks in advance.

It's a joke, son. 'Tartar sauce' -- I never cared for it, but it reminds
me of mayonnaise mixed with relish -- is typically used as a dipping sauce
on fried seafood. The joke here is that you're going to eat Moby Dick.
All of him. Haha.

Bob

[Eric The Read]

bs...@yfn.ysu.edu (Gary N. Deckant) writes:
> In a previous article, king...@bigfoot.com ("DJ Kim") says:
>

> >"If you are going after Moby Dick, take along the tartar sauce."
> >What does the aboce sentence mean?
>

> Moby Dick was an enormous white whale in a novel by Herman Melville.
> Tartar sauce is a popular condiment usually eaten with seafood.
> I would paraphrase your sentence as follows:
> If you are undertaking a large project, make appropriate preparations.

I view it more as an exhortation to assume (and prepare for) success.
That is, if you're going after Moby Dick, don't just assume you'll get
him-- assume you're going to be so amazingly successful, you're going to
have him for dinner.

In the Melville book, Ahab was out to kill the great white whale, not
harvest (or whatever the appropriate verb is) him. To me, this sentence
says, "Don't be satisfied with mere success-- plan to succeed beyond your
immediate goals."

Then again, my mother was the sort who bought Anthony Robbins tapes, so
perhaps I'm a bit biased to view such sillyisms as motivational. :^)

-=Eric

[tim fulmer]

DJ Kim wrote:

> "If you are going after Moby Dick, take along the tartar sauce."
>
> What does the aboce sentence mean?
>

> Thanks in advance.

Well "going after Moby Dick" would refer to an ambitious undertaking of
massive proportions. And tartar sauce, of course, is a condiment used
to flavor to food (usually seafood).

So we put the two ideas together and we get, "If you're going to devote
yourself to ambitious undertakings, be sure you bring along something to
sweeten up the trip."

[Mark Barton]

In article <CqRG1.109$xS.2...@news.bora.net>, "DJ Kim"
<king...@bigfoot.com> wrote:

>"If you are going after Moby Dick, take along the tartar sauce."
>
>What does the aboce sentence mean?

Note:

(i) "Moby Dick" is the title of a famous book by Herman Melville, and also
the name of a great whale that is hunted by one of the characters in the
book.

(ii) Tartar sauce is commonly served with fish or raw meat.

Therefore my best guess is "If you have great ambitions, be sure to take
care of the little things that will allow you to enjoy your success more
completely if and when you achieve it."

Cheers,

Mark B.

--
Please remove the spam block (both bits) from my address to reply.
If you receive this by email, note that it was posted as well. Please
make your preferences about CCing known. My default is to CC when
answering a serious query or if I severely criticise a post.

[N.Mitchum]

Mark Barton wrote to >>"DJ Kim" :
-------

> >"If you are going after Moby Dick, take along the tartar sauce."
> >
> >What does the aboce sentence mean?
>

> Therefore my best guess is "If you have great ambitions, be sure to take
> care of the little things that will allow you to enjoy your success more
> completely if and when you achieve it."

>.......

I'd say the intent was not to deliver a message but to make a joke
by incongruously pairing a little tub of sauce with a vast,
dangerous monster. Its significance is more in the humor than in
the interpretation.

--- NM (Mailers: drop HINTS)

[teribucha...@gmail.com]

On Tuesday, September 1, 1998 at 12:00:00 AM UTC-7, DJ Kim wrote:
> "If you are going after Moby Dick, take along the tartar sauce."
>
> What does the aboce sentence mean?
>

> Thanks in advance.


It means this: prepare to succeed.-- regardless of how great the task is. If you're going fishing and EXPECT to catch a big fish (like a whale), you would need a means to cook and serve the fish and the usual things that accompany fish, including a commonly used condiment like tartar sauce. Taking "the tartar sauce" just means you've prepared to achieve your goal in advance.

[Madrigal Gurneyhalt]

20 years and still nobody can spell 'tartare' correctly!

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Tuesday, June 12, 2018 at 7:21:13 AM UTC-4, Madrigal Gurneyhalt wrote:
> On Tuesday, 12 June 2018 05:37:12 UTC+1, teribucha...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Tuesday, September 1, 1998 at 12:00:00 AM UTC-7, DJ Kim wrote:

> > > "If you are going after Moby Dick, take along the tartar sauce."
> > > What does the aboce sentence mean?

> > It means this: prepare to succeed.-- regardless of how great the task is. If you're going fishing and EXPECT to catch a big fish (like a whale), you would need a means to cook and serve the fish and the usual things that accompany fish, including a commonly used condiment like tartar sauce. Taking "the tartar sauce" just means you've prepared to achieve your goal in advance.
>
> 20 years and still nobody can spell 'tartare' correctly!

There is no tartar sauce in steak tartare.

Nor is there a buildup of tartare on teeth.

[Madrigal Gurneyhalt]

There is no tartar sauce. It is tartare sauce (or, strictly speaking,
sauce tartare).

[Peter T. Daniels]

Whatever you're talking about probably isn't tartar sauce.

"Tartar sauce (spelled tartare sauce in the UK, New Zealand, Australia, South Africa, and other parts of the Commonwealth) is a mayonnaise or aioli-based sauce of French origin, and is typically of a rough consistency due to the addition of diced gherkins or other varieties of pickles."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tartar_sauce

It isn't even "sauce tartare" in the Commonwealth.

The only hits for the French word order are in French. Thus it would seem
to be a term that HH's mother would approve of?

[Richard Tobin]

In article <42b361ed-cb82-466a...@googlegroups.com>,

Madrigal Gurneyhalt <purpl...@googlemail.com> wrote:

>There is no tartar sauce. It is tartare sauce

Nonsense. "Tartar" is a standard English spelling.

>(or, strictly speaking, sauce tartare).

Apparently "strictly" now means "pretentiously".

-- Richard

[Madrigal Gurneyhalt]

Food names are always pretentious. I don't make the rule,
I just follow it!

[Jimmy Wilkinson Knife]

Rules are meant to be broken in cooking or we'd never invent new recipes!

[charles]

In article <85ba6dd0-f5d5-49cd...@googlegroups.com>,

Madrigal Gurneyhalt <purpl...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, 12 June 2018 14:05:02 UTC+1, Richard Tobin wrote:
> > In article <42b361ed-cb82-466a...@googlegroups.com>,
> > Madrigal Gurneyhalt <purpl...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >There is no tartar sauce. It is tartare sauce
> >
> > Nonsense. "Tartar" is a standard English spelling.
> >
> > >(or, strictly speaking, sauce tartare).
> >
> > Apparently "strictly" now means "pretentiously".
> >

> Food names are always pretentious.

How about "porridge" - is that pretentious?

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

[Richard Tobin]

In article <5707076c...@candehope.me.uk>,

charles <cha...@candehope.me.uk> wrote:

>How about "porridge" - is that pretentious?

The OED's first quotation for "porridge" is

?1533 G. Du Wes Introductorie for to lerne Frenche
Ye haue alredy eaten your porage.

which I take to be an early version of "you'll have had your tea".

-- Richard

[charles]

In article <pfok2j$2of6$1...@macpro.inf.ed.ac.uk>,

I understand the current expression is "But, you'll be driving."

> -- Richard

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

When I first heard of it in England (1940s/50s perhaps) it was "sauce
tartare".

>The only hits for the French word order are in French. Thus it would seem
>to be a term that HH's mother would approve of?

I have a jar of it with "Tartare Sauce" on the label.

Prepare to be confused - Steak Tartare:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steak_tartare#History

The name is a shortening of the original "à la tartare" or "served
with tartar sauce", a dish popular in the 19th and early 20th
centuries.

The modern version of steak tartare with raw egg was first served in
French restaurants early in the 20th century. What is now generally
known as "steak tartare" was then called steack à l'Americaine.
Steak tartare was a variation on that dish; the 1921 edition of
Escoffier's Le Guide Culinaire defines it as steack à l'Americaine
made without egg yolk, served with tartar sauce on the side.

Over time, the distinction between steack à l'Americaine and its
variant disappeared. The 1938 edition of Larousse Gastronomique
describes steak tartare as raw ground beef served with a raw egg
yolk, without any mention of tartar sauce.

Formerly, it was called "Tartar steak".

Although the word 'tartare' presumably refers to the Tatar people of
Central Asia, and there are many stories connecting steak tartare
with them, steak tartare is not related to Tatar cuisine.

"À la tartare" or simply "tartare" still means "served with tartar
sauce" for some dishes, mostly fried fish.

The name 'tartare' is now sometimes applied to other meats or fish,
such as tuna tartare, introduced in 1975 by the restaurant Le Duc in
Paris.

--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)

[Peter T. Daniels]

The couple of times I've had steak tartare, no egg (yolk) was involved.
(In preparing meat loaf, an egg is added to the ground-meat mixture,
supposedly to keep it from falling apart; my mother didn't put bread
crumbs in the meat loaf, which I have since gathered is _de rigeur_.)

There is a related Thai (appetizer) dish, in which the ground beef is
"cooked" (cured) with lemon juice, rather like ceviche. IIRC the beef
is wrapped/molded around an edible stalk.

[RH Draney]

On 6/12/2018 7:00 AM, charles wrote:
> In article <85ba6dd0-f5d5-49cd...@googlegroups.com>,
> Madrigal Gurneyhalt <purpl...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>> Food names are always pretentious.
>
> How about "porridge" - is that pretentious?

Certainly was when we were growing up...we called it "oatmeal"....r

[Ken Blake]

On Tue, 12 Jun 2018 09:44:25 -0700, RH Draney <dado...@cox.net>
wrote:

As I understand it, "porridge" refers to any kind of cooked breakfast
cereal. "Oatmeal" is only one type of "porridge."


I eat oatmeal for breakfast almost every morning, but don't cook it. I
just add berries and milk to the raw oat flakes, and eat it as a cold
cereal like Wheaties, Corn Flakes, etc.

[Peter T. Daniels]

"Porridge" was something bears ate, because Goldilocks found it at their house.

[Katy Jennison]

In BrE 'oatmeal' usually means oats which have been milled or steel-cut,
whereas oat flakes, = rolled oats, are porridge oats in BrE. BrE
oatmeal makes a different type of porridge, canonically cooked overnight
in a hay-box, whereas standard porridge oats (rolled, like Quaker oats)
cook in five or ten minutes in a saucepan, and can also be eaten
uncooked as you describe, which BrE oatmeal can't.

I remember someone going out specifically to buy BrE oatmeal for an
American guest who'd requested oatmeal for breakfast, much to the
subsequent embarrassment of both of them.

--
Katy Jennison

[Jerry Friedman]

On 6/12/18 9:15 AM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
...

> There is a related Thai (appetizer) dish, in which the ground beef is
> "cooked" (cured) with lemon juice, rather like ceviche.

Larb or larp. The recipe I've more or less tried to follow used lime
juice, as ceviche often does.

> IIRC the beef is wrapped/molded around an edible stalk.

Either YDNRC or there are different kinds of larb or that's not the
right word.

--
Jerry Friedman

[Ken Blake]

On Tue, 12 Jun 2018 19:46:04 +0100, Katy Jennison
<ka...@spamtrap.kjennison.com> wrote:

>On 12/06/2018 19:05, Ken Blake wrote:
>> On Tue, 12 Jun 2018 09:44:25 -0700, RH Draney <dado...@cox.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 6/12/2018 7:00 AM, charles wrote:
>>>> In article <85ba6dd0-f5d5-49cd...@googlegroups.com>,
>>>> Madrigal Gurneyhalt <purpl...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Food names are always pretentious.
>>>>
>>>> How about "porridge" - is that pretentious?
>>>
>>> Certainly was when we were growing up...we called it "oatmeal"....r
>>
>>
>>
>> As I understand it, "porridge" refers to any kind of cooked breakfast
>> cereal. "Oatmeal" is only one type of "porridge."
>>
>>
>> I eat oatmeal for breakfast almost every morning, but don't cook it. I
>> just add berries and milk to the raw oat flakes, and eat it as a cold
>> cereal like Wheaties, Corn Flakes, etc.
>>
>
>In BrE 'oatmeal' usually means oats which have been milled or steel-cut,
>whereas oat flakes, = rolled oats, are porridge oats in BrE. BrE
>oatmeal makes a different type of porridge, canonically cooked overnight
>in a hay-box, whereas standard porridge oats (rolled, like Quaker oats)
>cook in five or ten minutes in a saucepan, and can also be eaten
>uncooked as you describe, which BrE oatmeal can't.

Thanks for the clarification. Yes, it's rolled oats that I have for
breakfast.

Steel-cut oats are widely available in the US too.

[Sam Plusnet]

That's Terrible, Ivan.

--
Sam Plusnet

[Janet]

In article <466e7070-6b39-4d8d...@googlegroups.com>,
gram...@verizon.net says...

I eat porridge too.

Janet UK

[Peter Moylan]

Did DJ Kim really not get any answers twenty years ago?

--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia

[Peter T. Daniels]

There were six messages in the thread before today's revival, but since
the reviver is not a Google Groups user, the reviver had no way of knowing
that.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

I guess you didn't look at the full headers?

> the reviver had no way of knowing
> that.

--
athel

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

Probably he didn't stick around long enough to find out, as he had to
rush off to Pyongyang to help his cousin Jong-Il, and he had no access
to news groups there.


--
athel

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Wednesday, June 13, 2018 at 2:50:51 AM UTC-4, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> On 2018-06-13 02:54:44 +0000, Peter T. Daniels said:
> > On Tuesday, June 12, 2018 at 8:41:57 PM UTC-4, Peter Moylan wrote:
> >> On 12/06/18 14:37, teribucha...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>> On Tuesday, September 1, 1998 at 12:00:00 AM UTC-7, DJ Kim wrote:

> >>>> "If you are going after Moby Dick, take along the tartar sauce."
> >>>> What does the aboce sentence mean?
> >>>> Thanks in advance.

Wow. They were saying that 20 years ago.

> >>> It means this: prepare to succeed.-- regardless of how great the task
> >>> is. If you're going fishing and EXPECT to catch a big fish (like a
> >>> whale), you would need a means to cook and serve the fish and the
> >>> usual things that accompany fish, including a commonly used condiment
> >>> like tartar sauce. Taking "the tartar sauce" just means you've
> >>> prepared to achieve your goal in advance.
> >> Did DJ Kim really not get any answers twenty years ago?
> > There were six messages in the thread before today's revival, but since
> > the reviver is not a Google Groups user,
>
> I guess you didn't look at the full headers?

No, of course I didn't.

But, yet one more time, the fact that GG appears somewhere in the chain of
devices by which a drive-by posts a message in a newsgroup does not make
them a Google Groups user.

If you drive a car, do you necessarily grasp how the differential works?

If you use a dishwasher, do you necessarily know how it squirts the various
appropriate chemicals onto the dishes at the appropriate times?

The drive-by is shown some text, perhaps by a Google search (though very
rarely have I ever been shown a newsgroup posting in a Google search),
perhaps by something within gmail, and it must have a "Reply" button on it.
That's all. They have no idea that their message is going anywhere but to
the original poster of the message. It may be the case that the date --
1998 or whatever -- is shown somewhere on the screen. But evidently with
at least as little salience as the thread headings are shown to GG users
today. At any rate, the drive-by never returns to view responses to their
message and, if they recall it at all, maybe they think the original
poster was rude for not acknowledging their help.

But since GG is involved in the chain, at some point the GG formatting,
including the original date, gets included. But only sometimes, so there
must be differing initial conditions.

[Peter T. Daniels]

He was nowhere to stick around at and has no knowledge of news groups.
Or newsgroups.

[Jerry Friedman]

We didn't find that out till later.

--
Jerry Friedman

[charles]

In article <1846f638-bf02-414f...@googlegroups.com>, Peter

If you learn to drive a car you don't call it "car mechanics"; similarly,
if you arec being taught how to use "MSWord" that's "Office Practice" not
"Computing".

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

Yes. I find PTD's argument very strange. If I don't know how a
differential works (and I don't) then I can't say that I use my car to
go to work, even if I do it every day?


--
athel

[Peter T. Daniels]

? Does that have anything to do with anything I said?

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

+1 even when it is spelled[1] "porage".

[1] I didn't used the customary BrE "spelt" meaning "spelled" to avoid
any misinterpretation such as "spelt porage" is "wheat porridge".

[Peter T. Daniels]

Perhaps you could attempt rebutting what I wrote, rather than charles's
non sequitur?

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

That's what I was doing. I had formulated it before I read Charles's sequitur.

If I'm arrested for stealing a bicycle, I can't get away with arguing
that I'm not a bicycle user because I've never ridden a bicycle before,
don't know how to ride one and was only using it to transport some
groceries. I'm sure that prosecutor would say that at the moment of
wheeling it along the road I was a bicycle user.

--
athel

[Katy Jennison]

<like>

--
Katy Jennison

[Peter T. Daniels]

I sure wouldn't. You'd be a bicycle thief, and if you were lucky you might
get a classic Italian film made about you, but a user? never riding it?
only wheeling it? Certainly not. Nor would you be being prosecuted for
being a bicycle user, so your protest would be ruled irrelevant and the
jury told to disregard it.

[Tony Cooper]

On Wed, 13 Jun 2018 11:56:18 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"

And yet you can be arrested for drunk driving in most states when
sitting behind the wheel of parked car when under the influence.

--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

[Percival P. Cassidy]

Many years ago I heard of a case in the UK where a man who had had too
much to drink was asleep in the back of the car, being driven home by
his chauffeur. He was found guilty of being "drunk in charge of a motor
vehicle" (which was the name of the offence at the time; maybe it has
changed by now) because the chauffeur was his employee, and therefore
he, the drunk owner, was "in charge of" the vehicle.

Perce

[RH Draney]

They used to have this argument in the days before the automobile, when
some cowboy would get himself well and truly plastered and his friends
would bind him into his saddle, trusting that his horse was still sober
and knew the way home...I wonder if we can hope for this approach when
self-driving cars stop requiring a human at the wheel....r

[Peter T. Daniels]

It takes more than just sitting. The key in the ignition, I think. Also,
an open container of an alcoholic beverage, no matter what you're doing.

Neither of those is "using" the car, except as a place to crash in.
Hmm, bad choice of idiom.

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

The offence is "Drunk in Charge of a vehicle", in brief the initialism
"DIC".

There are separate laws for Northern Ireland and Great Britain.

This is from a law firm in Northern Ireland:
https://www.mcconnellkelly.com/2015/12/09/six-myths-about-drink-driving-in-ni/

Six myths about drink driving in NI
....
Myth 6: I was only sitting in the car

There is a specific offence of “being in charge” of a motor vehicle.
For this offence you do not have to be driving the vehicle. It can
be extremely risky for example for someone to sit in their vehicle
with the keys in their possession waiting on a lift or for a taxi to
arrive.

If a Court were to find an “intention to drive” this could lead to a
conviction and possible disqualification from driving.

To me, that means that if a chauffeur[1] is driving the car the owner is
not "in possession of the key" and cannot be seen to have an "intention
to drive" so is not legally "in charge" of the car.

In this description from a firm of lawyers in England I have marked **
those parts which suggest strongly that if the car is being driven by a
chauffeur it is the chauffeur who is legally "in charge" of the car, not
the intoxicated owner in the back seat:
https://www.ibblaw.co.uk/service/road-traffic-offences/drunk-charge-motor-vehicle

Drunk in Charge of a Motor Vehicle
Is it ever a good idea to sleep in your car having had too much to
drink?

Most people are fully aware that it is a criminal offence to drive a
vehicle after having consumed so much alcohol that they exceed the
prescribed limit, but it is also an offence to be in charge of a
vehicle whilst drunk or unfit through drugs.

Motorists who are sleeping, or sitting in their vehicle have found
themselves facing serious charges despite the fact that they have
not actually driven or attempted to drive a vehicle. Although a
Drunk in Charge allegation is not as serious as Drink Driving, if
found guilty you will not only be in receipt of a criminal record
but it will also cause serious implications on your ability to drive
as the court could impose:
....

How is “in charge” defined?

There is no definition of “in charge” and the courts have been keen
to avoid an all-embracing test.

In determining if a person is in charge the court will consider:

Whether he was in the vehicle, if so where, or how far he was
from it;
What he was doing at the time;
** Whether he was in possession of the key for the ignition;
** Whether there was any evidence of an intention to take some form
** of control of the vehicle;
Whether any person was in or near the vehicle and if so the
particulars of that person.

You could also be prosecuted if you are found in the passenger seat
or the back seats. You do not have to be sitting in the driver’s
seat to be considered “in charge”.

However those that own or lawfully are in possession of the vehicle
or have recently driven it are deemed to remain in charge unless it
can be shown:

** that they had put the vehicle into someone else’s charge
** or can establish that they had ceased to be in control AND there
** was no realistic prospect of resuming control whilst unfit.

Are there defences available?

The law states that someone cannot be convicted of an “in charge”
** offence if they can prove there was no intention and / or likelihood
** of the vehicle being driven whilst the driver was over the
** prescribed limit.

Unlike many other offences, with the offence of being drunk in
charge, the accused must prove that they did not have any intention
to drive the vehicle. The prosecution is not required to prove that
the accused was likely to drive whilst unfit or over the limit.

** A defence is available if it can be shown that there was no
** likelihood of driving whilst over the prescribed limit and doing
this should be established by expert scientific evidence or
** compelling circumstantial evidence. These defences are known as
“statutory defences”.

[1] I'm using "chauffeur" to include anyone driving the car with the
owner's authorisation, not necessarily an employee.

[Tony Cooper]

On Wed, 13 Jun 2018 20:22:30 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"

In some cars, the key can now be in the pocket and the car can be
started and operated.

[Peter T. Daniels]

The law quoted by PWD indicates that having the key in your pocket is good
enough, Over There.

> In some cars, the key can now be in the pocket and the car can be
> started and operated.

Ain't engineering and motoreering wonderful.

I always wonder how you get out of a car with electric locks if the battery
fails.

[Mack A. Damia]

On Tue, 12 Jun 2018 11:05:01 -0700, Ken Blake <K...@invalid.news.com>

wrote:

>On Tue, 12 Jun 2018 09:44:25 -0700, RH Draney <dado...@cox.net>

>wrote:
>
>>On 6/12/2018 7:00 AM, charles wrote:
>>> In article <85ba6dd0-f5d5-49cd...@googlegroups.com>,
>>> Madrigal Gurneyhalt <purpl...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Food names are always pretentious.
>>>
>>> How about "porridge" - is that pretentious?
>>
>>Certainly was when we were growing up...we called it "oatmeal"....r
>
>
>

>As I understand it, "porridge" refers to any kind of cooked breakfast
>cereal. "Oatmeal" is only one type of "porridge."
>
>
>I eat oatmeal for breakfast almost every morning, but don't cook it. I
>just add berries and milk to the raw oat flakes, and eat it as a cold
>cereal like Wheaties, Corn Flakes, etc.

(In Russia) "Porridge does not necessarily mean oatmeal. It could be
oatmeal, but it could also be cream o’wheat (semolina) or rice or
buckwheat, usually cooked with milk. Cream o’wheat is the most
controversial – kids usually hate it, because there could be clumps
inside. My sister prepared the best cream o’wheat for me when I was
little – she made it really thick, as a pudding and made it jelly in a
form of a pudding. Then she poured home-made raspberry jam over. That
was tasty (and the only way one could feed semolina to me). Most kids
do not like porridge and prefer pancakes."

https://understandrussia.com/what-russians-eat-for-breakfast/

[Bob Martin]

in 2496677 20180614 145151 "Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:

>> In some cars, the key can now be in the pocket and the car can be
>> started and operated.
>
>Ain't engineering and motoreering wonderful.
>
>I always wonder how you get out of a car with electric locks if the battery
>fails.

The central locking on a rear door of my Megane failed while the child lock
was applied, so the door could not be opened from inside or outside.
I phoned the garage who said that nothing could be done : "you'll have to
live with it."
I decided I couldn't so drilled a hole from the outside of the door and managed
to dis-engage the child lock, so at least the door can be opened from inside.
A week later the car went in for its MOT - I was told that it would have failed if
the door could not be opened.

[Joy Beeson]

On Tue, 12 Jun 2018 04:53:26 -0700 (PDT), Madrigal Gurneyhalt
<purpl...@googlemail.com> wrote:

> There is no tartar sauce. It is tartare sauce (or, strictly speaking,
> sauce tartare).

Tartar sauce is said to derive from sauce tartare, but bears very
little resemblance to it.

If I remember my cookbooks correctly, sauce tartare is finely-minced
raw vegetables. Tartar sauce is mayonnaise mixed with a small dab of
pickle relish, and sometimes other seasonings.

--
Joy Beeson
joy beeson at comcast dot net

[bill van]

For my tartar sauce, I chop sweet pickle, olive, capers, shallots or
onion, a herb or two and parsley into the mayo, then mix it with a
tablespoon of tarragon wine vinegar. Very tasty on mild fish fillets.

bill

[RH Draney]

Meh...if there's no horseradish in it, you can keep it....r