Is that like an official definition for vegetables from some government? Because I don’t feel like there is a particularly good definition of vegetables. People mostly wouldn’t refer to apples as vegetables, for example.
Vegetables are edible parts of plants that are consumed by humans or other animals as food. This original meaning is still commonly used, and is applied to plants collectively to refer to all edible plant matter, including flowers, fruits, stems, leaves, roots, and seeds. An alternative definition is applied somewhat arbitrarily, often by culinary and cultural tradition; it may include savoury fruits such as tomatoes and courgettes, flowers such as broccoli, and seeds such as pulses, but exclude foods derived from some plants that are fruits, flowers, nuts, and cereal grains.
The analogy doesn’t work. The apple is the narrow group, while vegetables are the wide group.
To make your analogy fit to the original statement it would be: “People mostly wouldn’t refer to a Honda Accord as a car”. Which is the opposite of what you are saying and it’s also not true, so it really doesn’t make any sense.
The actual issue at hand is that there are two definitions of the word vegetable. One is the wider meaning, where all edible parts of plants are vegetables (and then apples clearly are vegetables), while there’s the culinary definition of vegetables, where vegetables are savoury edible parts of plants, and under that definition apples are not vegetables.
You use the broader definition, while @Ephera@lemmy.ml is using the culinary definition.
That’s because Vegetable is not a Botanical Term. It is a culinary term. So, Tomatoes are both fruit and vegetable.
This.
All fruits are vegetables. Not all vegetables are fruit.
The definition of a vegetable is just any edible part of a plant. While a fruit is specifically the seed-bearing ovary of a flowering plant.
Is that like an official definition for vegetables from some government? Because I don’t feel like there is a particularly good definition of vegetables. People mostly wouldn’t refer to apples as vegetables, for example.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vegetable
I wouldn’t call all cars a Honda Accord, either, but all Honda Accords are still cars.
The analogy doesn’t work. The apple is the narrow group, while vegetables are the wide group.
To make your analogy fit to the original statement it would be: “People mostly wouldn’t refer to a Honda Accord as a car”. Which is the opposite of what you are saying and it’s also not true, so it really doesn’t make any sense.
The actual issue at hand is that there are two definitions of the word vegetable. One is the wider meaning, where all edible parts of plants are vegetables (and then apples clearly are vegetables), while there’s the culinary definition of vegetables, where vegetables are savoury edible parts of plants, and under that definition apples are not vegetables.
You use the broader definition, while @Ephera@lemmy.ml is using the culinary definition.
I don’t think you can just use two classification systems in the same sentence. It should probably be illegal or something