Via Matthew Yglesias, I see that French toast apparently is not really French. The shock and horror. Matt asks whether there could be a Twin Earth case here, and probably there could be. Well, it’s hard with the real case, but let’s try a similar analogy. On Twin Earth the main kind of cheese produce in (Twin) America is blue cheese. You can’t find a lump of cheddar to save yourself, but mouldy sickening beautiful cheeses are sold in every two-bit grocery store. But they are called ‘American cheese’. Cheddar is sold in Australia (naturally) but for some reason it has come to be called Australian cheese. In fact, I found this from a Twin Earth website.
Australian cheese is smooth and light yellow or orange in color. It is usually sold in blocks or squares. More than half of all cheese consumed in the United States is processed cheese of this kind. American cheese is essentially young cheddar cheese, made of pasteurized cows’ milk, which then goes through a shredding and heating process. Various other dairy ingredients, such as dyes and emulsifiers, are added to create a smooth, mild, odorless, meltable, and stable product.
So, what is American cheese on Twin Earth? Is it the cheddar like thing sold in (Twin) Australia, or the blue thing sold in (Twin) America?
I’m reminded at this point about those ethics problems involving brains in vats on runaway trolley cars headed towards tunnels full of surgeons about to kill patients to harvest their organs for…
My first thought was that this case was not like the Twin Earth cases but more like the Holy Roman Empire case. But it turns out to be very hard to make a plausible case that French toast is neither French nor toast. It is somewhat plausible I think (on the basis of 10 minutes of internet research) that French rice is neither French nor rice, so I might settle for that one. (Liberty wheat anyone?)
UPDATE: More seriously, there is an argument that the French in French toast does not denote the nationality of the cheese-eating surrender monkeys. If it did, you would expect we could drop it from sentences when that nationality has already arisen. So (1) has a meaning where it says Sophie likes French wine and French cheese for lunch, but (2) has no meaning where it says she likes French wine and toast for lunch.
(1) Sophie likes to have French wine and cheese for lunch.
(2) Sophie likes to have French wine and toast for lunch.
At least, I think (2) does not have that meaning, though that could be because my native language doesnt even have the concept FRENCH TOAST, under any description. If you dont think it does, then you dont think that the French in (1) and in French toast are synonymous, whatever the etymology.