Varieties vs Varietals

Forgive me if this has been covered before, as I believe it may have been.

I am reading a wine guide. I am in the section labeled: "Grape Varietals". This section highlights many individual grape types used for wine (i.e.: Cabernet Sauvignon, Pinot Noir, Torrontes, etc.) and presents their major characteristics, primary growing locations and items of that nature.

I'm thinking, "They mean grape varieties, not varietals. Then I'm thinking "Maybe I'm wrong."

To me, a grape can be a particular variety. The Cabernet Sauvignon grape is a variety of grape. But a bottle of Cabernet Sauvignon is a varietal wine.

I need some help with this: Am I wrong or right and if I'm wrong, what's right?

Variety is a noun. Cabernet Sauvignon, Merlot, Syrah, Chardonnay, Pinot Grigio are all varieties of grapes. Varietal is an adjective. Grapefruit, grassiness, lemon, lime may all be varietal characteristics in a Sauvignon Blanc wine. However, SO MANY writers ignore the distinction that it seems to be a losing battle to use them properly.

(As an English major it used to bother me when the Army always talked about ""prioritizing"--to me it should be "setting priorities". I'm not certain that prioritize is a real word.)

I'm with Jane, but few writing about wine seem to know or care about the difference between the adjective and the noun.

[David M. Bueker]

Misuse of the word varietal drives me nuts, but I am sick of rolling that rock uphill day after day.

Misuse of the word varietal drives me nuts, but I am sick of rolling that rock uphill day after day.

Just delegate to your local thunder god if needed, David.

Mark Lipton

Misuse of words is now being ratified in hallowed places like the Oxford English Dictionary. My favourite at present concerns "literally", whose misuse to mean its exact opposite "figuratively" is apparently now allowed .

Misuse of words is now being ratified in hallowed places like the Oxford English Dictionary.

I'm probably in the minority here.

1. Dictionaries, even the esteemed OED, do not "ratify" words. Dictionaries are passive observers and chroniclers, not advocates. As new words and usages appear they are noted in future editions, while disused words are removed. Which is why there ARE future editions.

2. Unless you want to establish an English version of L'Académie française, you're going to have to accept that ours is a living language which is constantly changing both its vocabulary and grammar rules. You can rail and shake your fist all you want, but it's yelling at the tide to not come in. I'm not immune from indignation either - in my professional capacity I've chafed at the transformation of "impact' into something other than a literal strike, and "on the ground" to mean "in the area" - but working with language constantly has shown me how impotent my indignation is. It's going to evolve whether us pedants know, just know, that the latest example is not right. Popular usage determines what is the correct rule, not the other way around. Always has been, always will. Now I tend to marvel at the process, seeing it as part of a long established human trait, rather than decry it. Zen is much better for my blood pressure.

So I'm afraid we're all gonna have to get used to hearing - and maybe saying - "varietal" in a context which wasn't previously correct. And that's the news.

Viva la English!

I can't understand why people get so upset by using varietal as a noun or literally for figuratively. Language inevitably changes and at any one time there will be such usages that are changing and some will use the "wrong" form but that "wrong" form become so prevalent that it becomes a variant of the right form. There's not really anything we can do to stop this sort of change so why fight against windmills? I still prefer to use the for varietal as an adjective only, so for those of you who hate it as a noun, just use it like I do!

I can't understand why people get so upset by using varietal as a noun or literally for figuratively.

Yes, language is fluid, but changing adjectives into nouns is confusing, especially when the same word appears in a long text numerous times as an adjective here and a noun there, but refers to the same thing--a grape that grows on a vine; in other words, a thing, a noun.

Fluid does not have to mean confusing, and in my view, it shouldn't.

I can't understand why people get so upset by using varietal as a noun or literally for figuratively. Language inevitably changes and at any one time there will be such usages that are changing and some will use the "wrong" form but that "wrong" form become so prevalent that it becomes a variant of the right form. There's not really anything we can do to stop this sort of change so why fight against windmills? I still prefer to use the for varietal as an adjective only, so for those of you who hate it as a noun, just use it like I do!

Otto, in my view the purpose of language and its vocabulary and grammar is to convey meaning as precisely as possible. Using "literally" to mean "figuratively" is a negation of this principle, even though this misuse has gone on for a long time and can sometimes be guessed for what it is by the context. "Varietal" as a noun is unlikely to mislead in the same way, but it is sloppy use of grammar which, if tolerated as a practice, can lead to blurring of meaning.

Whilst not against evolution, I would like to see a sufficient rigour of teaching language in schools so as to preserve its function of conveying meaning as precisely as possible. Is this tilting at windmills?

Language should convey meaning, but it has never been perfect at doing this and neither will it ever be perfect. In almost all instances you can tell from the context whether varietal is used as a noun or an adjective. Same with all other potentially ambiguous usages.

I know this is thread drift, but please reread the first line of Otto's post just above. This best explains why I like scores along with descriptions when commenting on a wine. I sometimes can't tell whether or not the poster LIKED the wine, a score puts it in perspective for me.

[Robin Garr]

I can't understand why people get so upset by using varietal as a noun or literally for figuratively. Language inevitably changes and at any one time there will be such usages that are changing and some will use the "wrong" form but that "wrong" form become so prevalent that it becomes a variant of the right form. There's not really anything we can do to stop this sort of change so why fight against windmills? I still prefer to use the for varietal as an adjective only, so for those of you who hate it as a noun, just use it like I do!

Otto, I think what we have with this is sort of an "in-group" vs "out-group" thing. Back in the earlier days of wine, perhaps even before there was a Parker, becoming a wine geek gave you a kind of insider status. We knew stuff! We know how to tell Bordeaux from Burgundy! And there were all manner of secret codes, some as obscure and insignificant as, well, variety vs varietal. "Varietal" was a new word, using it showed that you were an expert - and then, oops! Most of use used it once the wrong way in front of someone who knew better, and who gleefully corrected us. Ever after, we in turn would gleefully correct others whose misuse of the term proved that we were smarter than them.

Well, maybe not forever after. I think most of us are pretty much over it by now, and as you point out, the language is fluid and it does evolve. But for a few wine geeks - many of them huddled among their like on Internet message boards for protection - there remain a few who still find wine-geek fulfillment in the opportunity to correct those who don't know as much as we do.

While I try to use varietal correctly, I don't usually get upset about incorrect usage. But using literally for figuratively? That defeats any purpose of conveying meaning.

OT, but I hate it when intelligent people use "ask" as a noun, as in "what is the ask here?" - they're just over-timid about using the word "request" in this context.

In almost all instances you can tell from the context whether varietal is used as a noun or an adjective.

I don't agree with that statement. WE aren't confused because WE are immersed in the subject. Someone just seeking a little information can be confused by one word meaning one thing in one paragraph and seemingly meaning something else in another paragraph because the word represents two separate parts of speech.

If you want a couple more words over which to argue how about "closure when what is meant in the context is closing" and "infamous when what is meant in the context is famous."

Again, fluid language: yes; confused language via misuse--no.

Varietal is such a useful word for a wine made from a single variety - unfortunately that meaning has been lost all too soon.

You certainly have a point, Peter.

Call me judgmental, I can't stand the mis-use of 'varietal' either. I think it came by abbreviating 'varietal bottling,' as in 'fighting varietals,' but you only have to wrongly use 'societal' instead of 'society' in a sentence to see how wrong it is. The fact that most of the drinking public mis-uses a word doesn't seem to me a good argument for mis-using it oneself. As my mother used to say, 'If they jump over a cliff does that mean you have to follow?'

A hundred years from now, assuming Garagiste is still in business, will Jon Rimmerman have persuaded the world that infamous means famous? I hope not. And if I were a homicidal maniac I'd get my jollies shooting people who say unique when they mean unusual. We English majors have to hold the line somewhere. But the variety-varietal noun-adjective militants may soon have to lay down their arms. It seems to me many or most wine makers and merchants and professional wine tasters these days simply call everything in the bottle "varietal" and everything in the vineyard "variety," and as someody on this thread implied, those are the sorts of people who change dictionaries. And bottle-vineyard rule will be easy to remember even if you don't know the difference between a noun and an adjective.

[Robin Garr]

OT, but I hate it when intelligent people use "ask" as a noun, as in "what is the ask here?" - they're just over-timid about using the word "request" in this context.

Yes, and if they pronounce it "ax" in that context, you know you're going someplace really interesting.

Unless you want to establish an English version of L'Académie française, you're going to have to accept that ours is a living language which is constantly changing

And like a sewer, it usually flows downhill.
Sorry, I couldn't resist that.
But I agree, I think we have lost this battle to the "little finger out" crowd. And you would think they would be the most attuned to the proper usage.

And if I were a homicidal maniac I'd get my jollies shooting people who say unique when they mean unusual. We English majors have to hold the line somewhere..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6smi2wrGD40

I think we have lost this battle to the "little finger out" crowd. And you would think they would be the most attuned to the proper usage.

Wait, what do pinkie affectations have to do with misusing varietal?

what do pinkie affectations have to do with misusing varietal?

I would think that the "insiders" in the wine world would be the most interested in "getting it right", but they seem oblivious, they just don't care.
"Varietal" just sounds more sophisticated than variety, and they are going to leave it at that. We have been out voted. And so another otherwise useful word gets trashed in the name of "affluence". There is no "right" or "wrong".