Would the German Meeresfrüchte include fish for you? Definitely not for me, it's just prawns, crabs, squid etc. I've always handled the two as meaning the same but I seem to have been wrong. Obviously, if you take the strict meaning of the words, it means "everything from the sea you can eat" and that would include seaweed etc.
I've certainly always taken seafood to mean mussels, oysters, squid, octopi etc - all the non-fish critters that live in the sea. But I couldn't tell you why.
What's all the more fscinating is that this all stemmed from a discussion about me feeding stupid people to lions! LOL
WOW! Look at all the comments! I'm with Moooodie -- it's fun that this all started with a discussion of feeding people to the lions.
As mentioned in that entry, I think of seafood as being food from the sea, which includes fish. OTOH, I wouldn't include vegetable matter in that, so kelp and seaweed wouldn't be seafood.
I think grog and rum should be classified as seafood, as one MUST have some when one is at sea.
To me fish would be classified as seafood; but in my experience this opinion seems to differ from most restaurants who classify it as everything in the ocean except fish.
I have always assumed that seafood includes fish. Being a vegetarian, it tends to concern me more as to whether seaweed counts as seafood, but I usually conclude that it does. Not that it would convince me to go to a seafood restaurant though! I wonder if any vegetarian seafood restaurants exist?
Hmmm. Some part of me wants fish to be seperate. Yet another part of me wants it to be part of seafood. This may be due to having 1 northern and 1 southern parent.
Interesting - I'd expect something calling itself a Seafood Restaurant would serve both fish and shellfish, and wouldn't be surprised to find fish in a "seafood paella", however I'd equally not be surprised if people used the term "fish and seafood".
I think the category of "seafood" probably does include fish most of the time, but not all.
seafood does not include fish probably mostly because a not insignificant proportion of the fish we eat isn't necessarily from the sea (salmon for instance) there are crustaceans which are fresh water but fair fewer of them
That being said if I was checking someone's dietary preferences and they said they didn't eat seafood I would probably check if they meant fish aswell
I'd probably judge on context more than anything. Luckily though I'm not a fan of fish, shrimps or anything that comes under the fish/seafood banner so I don't have to worry about it too much.
It would depend on context for my money, and could either include or exclude fish. I wonder if the distinction is anything to do with the kosher rules on aquatic comestibles, that insist on that water-dwellers have both fins and scales before they are considered edible.
Sort of both. I would call fish seafood, and I wouldn't be surprised to see pieces of fish in a collection of stuff that is labelled seafood, but if something says seafood on it, I expect that it will have things that came from the sea at least some of which are invertebrates.
ich hätte, ohne nachzudenken, den begriff "seafood" auch dem deutschen "meeresfrüchte" gleichgesetzt. demnach alles an krabben, muscheln, tintenfische, was da kreucht und fleucht. keine (normalen) fische und keine pflanzen. also offensichtlich alles aus dem wasser, das ich nicht mag ;-) (mit der einschränkung, dass ich noch nicht oft algen gegessen habe, darüber also noch keine wirklich meinung habe)
That question really confused me! Cathy 'fused thinking "of course it does, why would there be a question?" I take it fromt he responses that it sometimes isn't, which makes me even more confused.
Seafood includes fish. Anyone who says otherwise is a hobbit sucking Welshman.
The term 'fruits de mer' or whatever it is the French say, can I think correctly be applied to edible marine invertebrates.
But ultimately these definitions are stupid, and just contribute to greater confusion. People will go off mussels 'cos of one bad experience then insist that they don't eat shellfish, despite the fact that in biological and cullinary terms they're writing off a huge variety of foods. I blame the fact that these thigns all get lumped together under convenient (but incorrect) headings.
Absolutley, although I think because fish is more common to have on its own, when people go somewhere for seafood, I think they tend to have something more 'exotic' so the association is certainly there.
My understanding is as per this (which I stole from Wikipedia)
Seafood is any sea animal or seaweed that is served as food or is suitable for eating. This usually includes seawater animals, such as fish and shellfish (including molluscs and crustaceans). By extension, in North America although not generally in the United Kingdom, the term seafood is also applied to similar animals from fresh water and all edible aquatic animals are collectively referred to as seafood.
Edible seaweeds are rarely considered seafood, even though they come from seawater and are widely eaten around the world. See the category of sea vegetables.
no subject
Date: 27/3/07 03:19 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 27/3/07 03:50 pm (UTC)I've always handled the two as meaning the same but I seem to have been wrong. Obviously, if you take the strict meaning of the words, it means "everything from the sea you can eat" and that would include seaweed etc.
no subject
Date: 27/3/07 08:21 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 28/3/07 01:06 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 28/3/07 01:09 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 27/3/07 03:21 pm (UTC)It is my personal understanding that fish = fish, and seafood = everything else.
no subject
Date: 27/3/07 03:21 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 27/3/07 03:23 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 27/3/07 03:24 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 27/3/07 03:28 pm (UTC)I've certainly always taken seafood to mean mussels, oysters, squid, octopi etc - all the non-fish critters that live in the sea. But I couldn't tell you why.
What's all the more fscinating is that this all stemmed from a discussion about me feeding stupid people to lions! LOL
no subject
Date: 27/3/07 05:49 pm (UTC)As mentioned in that entry, I think of seafood as being food from the sea, which includes fish. OTOH, I wouldn't include vegetable matter in that, so kelp and seaweed wouldn't be seafood.
I think grog and rum should be classified as seafood, as one MUST have some when one is at sea.
no subject
Date: 27/3/07 03:33 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 27/3/07 03:34 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 27/3/07 03:35 pm (UTC)So, if a menu has a fish section and a seafood section then no. But something that just said "seafood soup", for example, I'd expect to have fish in.
no subject
Date: 27/3/07 03:56 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 27/3/07 03:36 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 27/3/07 03:36 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 27/3/07 11:20 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 27/3/07 03:38 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 27/3/07 03:42 pm (UTC)Though I can see the "fish isn't meat" level of argument for it being the other way around.
no subject
Date: 27/3/07 03:43 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 27/3/07 03:46 pm (UTC)Some part of me wants fish to be seperate. Yet another part of me wants it to be part of seafood.
This may be due to having 1 northern and 1 southern parent.
no subject
Date: 27/3/07 03:52 pm (UTC)I think the category of "seafood" probably does include fish most of the time, but not all.
no subject
Date: 27/3/07 04:34 pm (UTC)Mm, I agree with this. Maybe it's a term that's in the process of evolving from one meaning to the other.
no subject
Date: 27/3/07 03:53 pm (UTC)N.
no subject
Date: 27/3/07 03:59 pm (UTC)That being said if I was checking someone's dietary preferences and they said they didn't eat seafood I would probably check if they meant fish aswell
no subject
Date: 27/3/07 04:04 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 27/3/07 04:16 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 27/3/07 04:34 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 27/3/07 04:41 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 27/3/07 04:58 pm (UTC)I wonder if the distinction is anything to do with the kosher rules on aquatic comestibles, that insist on that water-dwellers have both fins and scales before they are considered edible.
no subject
Date: 27/3/07 05:03 pm (UTC)I tend not to think of seaweed as seafood as it's plant matter, and is usually just deep fried cabbage...
no subject
Date: 27/3/07 05:06 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 27/3/07 05:19 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 27/3/07 05:36 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 27/3/07 05:48 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 27/3/07 06:43 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 27/3/07 08:34 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 27/3/07 09:03 pm (UTC)(It doesn't include jumbo sausages, however. :o)
no subject
Date: 27/3/07 11:57 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 28/3/07 07:27 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 28/3/07 07:38 am (UTC)Seafood includes fish. Anyone who says otherwise is a hobbit sucking Welshman.
The term 'fruits de mer' or whatever it is the French say, can I think correctly be applied to edible marine invertebrates.
But ultimately these definitions are stupid, and just contribute to greater confusion. People will go off mussels 'cos of one bad experience then insist that they don't eat shellfish, despite the fact that in biological and cullinary terms they're writing off a huge variety of foods. I blame the fact that these thigns all get lumped together under convenient (but incorrect) headings.
no subject
Date: 28/3/07 10:13 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 28/3/07 01:14 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 28/3/07 10:14 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 28/3/07 02:31 pm (UTC)Seafood is any sea animal or seaweed that is served as food or is suitable for eating. This usually includes seawater animals, such as fish and shellfish (including molluscs and crustaceans). By extension, in North America although not generally in the United Kingdom, the term seafood is also applied to similar animals from fresh water and all edible aquatic animals are collectively referred to as seafood.
Edible seaweeds are rarely considered seafood, even though they come from seawater and are widely eaten around the world. See the category of sea vegetables.
no subject
Date: 21/9/10 02:36 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 21/9/10 02:52 pm (UTC)