The Speech of Kings - the Great "Entree" Debate

I am not a linguist but I am North American and, therefore, in a recent post I used the term "entree" as a substitute for "main course" in one of my restaurant reviews; choosing the North American vernacular (actually U.S. I'm sorry to say) rather than the French where entree is the "entrance or beginning, prior to the main". Well the readership went wild; I was inundated with emails.... ok, I got one - but I know from personal experience that email complaints are like rats... where there's one, there's a whole colony. So, like many before me (or so I have found), I did some research into this etymological incomprehension. There are actually a couple of really good books on this subject which I'll talk about at a later time.

But without spending too much time on it I'm going to reference someone else's 1994 investigation on the topic. Unlike many other entries on the subject, which put too much gloss on the "Americans are dumb and don't know how to speak, let alone read - and the average Canadian is a close second" school-of-thought, I felt this argument was reasonably balanced, recognizing both the cultural differences that separate the Old World from the New and the evolution of the menu. In the words of Michael Whitbrock of Carnegie Mellon:

"I went and did some more research on the great entree question. Instead of an American error, it looks more like a case of simple reasonable linguistic divergence based on the changing nature of menus over the last century. The traditional French menu, (according to Larousse, and to an 1895 American cookbook) went something like this:

• Soup.
• hors d'oeuvres or/and fish
• entree (or entrees) - ie: the third course
• roti
• final course
• dessert.

What I reckon happened was that as the necessity of the main course waned (more slowly in NZ, Australia and Britain than in the US), the entree moved towards the beginning of the meal . Since a modern menu goes something more like:

• hors d'oeuvres
• soup or entree
• main
• dessert and cheese (or cheese and dessert if you are french)

The English useage bears more resemblance to the traditional one in terms of the formal/social/ritual aspects of hosting a dinner. Since modern main courses are rarely roasts, the American useage bears more resemblance to the food which was traditionally served for this course. "

So with this in mind my interpretation is that the adopton of the term entree is less an Old World/New World/Neanderthal American debate as it is a case of the changing way in which we approach meals in general. In Australia the term entree is used as the first course in the meal; in France, where it all began, it is the third course - the lead-in to the main course, after the fish course; and in the United States, and through osmosis Canada, it has become synonymous with the main course.

To quote a random blog entry in August 2004 "I think part of the change may be due to the changes in dining habits. Looking at the first-class dining menu of the Titanic we see they are serving a 10 course meal , each course with a separate wine, not including the fresh fruit, cheeses , coffee, cigar and brandy that followed the tenth course! The term "entree" is not used on the menu.'.

Despite a recent epicurean 4-city tour not once was I offered a fish course, entree and main before a cheese course and desert. I was offered an appetizer - by various names - more often "something to start" and an entree. We live in North America, and that is what the main course has become. If I was in Australia it would be the first course - the entree; if I was in France, it would be the third course, the entree, between the fish and the main course; but I am in Canada and it is the second course - the main course- the entree.

I can only conclude - again, someone else's observation, that it is not unlike that etymoligoical curiosity "the matinee" - the morning performance! Now, when was the last time that you went to a matinee that started before 2 PM.?