Subject: Re: Comments/questions on 4/11
From: riacmt@ubvmsa.cc.buffalo.edu (Carol Miller-Tutzauer)
Date: 1991-04-15, 07:57
Newsgroups: alt.tv.twin-peaks
Reply-to: riacmt@ubvmsa.cc.buffalo.edu

In article <1991Apr12.153310.2949@ns.uoregon.edu>, rhaller@oregon.uoregon.edu writes...
> >This kind of language is standard when 'serious' wine tasters discuss wines.
> >However, someone who throws words like that around just in order to impress
> >people is known as a 'wine snob'. It can be taken to extremes, but if you try
> >some of the wines that are made with an emphasis on quality and uniqueness than
> >for uniformity and quantity, you will find that words like that are probably
> >the best approximation for the sensations you will experience in addition to
> >the basic wine grape flavor. Oregon and Washington are known for producing
> >wines of this quality.

Actually, there is a wonderful book called (I think) "Communicating
about Wine" or "The Language of Wine" or something like that.  The
book is a study of the use of descriptors in wine-tasting and
discrimination and consensus in meaning among those doing the
tasting.  It is actually a study in language cognition, but
quite fascinating and certainly more interesting than your
typical academic drivel (I can say that because these are my
colleagues).  I read the book while in the Communication Studies
doctoral program at Northwestern University.  While I'm on the
subject of interesting approaches to academic topics, there is
a similarly excellent approach in a book about the anthropology
and sociology of the "meal" in human culture.  The book goes
through the history & culture of a simple meal -- discussing lots
on corn, Native Americans, etc.  I feel that more people would
approach topics in a more innovative fashion if such "innovations"
were not dismissed as "frivolous scholarship."

Carol