Masaryk University Faculty of Arts Department of English and American Studies

3.2 Translated Recipes

3.2.1 Processing Ingredients

The first one converts the participial adjective located in the list of ingredients to a verb which becomes a part of the clause incorporated in the section of direction. This means that an attribute is transformed to a predicate as far as the constituents of the sentence are concerned.

The second one translates the participial adjective into its Czech counterpart, that is the adjective derived from a verb, and it is either kept in the list of ingredients or moved to the directional part. In this case the constituent of the sentence stays the same. For Czech is a syntactic language, it differentiates between two types of attributes: přívlastek shodný (attributive adjective) and přívlastek neshodný¹² (appositional adjunct).¹³

It is necessary to specify that the one dealt here is the former one – a kind of attribute in which the form of adjective agrees with the noun in the case, gender and number (Havránek and Jedlička 163). According to Stručná mluvnice česká, this type can occur in two different positions; either in front of or behind its head noun depending on the weight of the adjectival phrase (163).

Moreover, the one standing in the latter position can be used either restrictively or non-restrictively¹⁴ in the Czech language. If it narrows the meaning of the head noun, and must not be omitted because this would change the meaning of the whole sentence or phrase, which is this case, it stands for the “restricting” attributive adjective¹⁵ (164). Pravidla českého pravopisu instructs that this subtype must not be separated by a comma (71). Nevertheless, translated recipes do not always follow this rule.

To be more specific, two out of eleven cookbooks translated in the early 1990s express what to do with ingredients in the directional section of recipes, mainly by the verbs, such as in “Čokoládu nakrájejte na větší kousky” (Uchytil 81) and occasionally also by the participial adjectives and adjective phrases including this adjective¹⁶, such as in “Do hmoty vmíchejte . . . mírně vyšlehanou smetanu”. The remaining nine books adhere to the English standard and state how to preprocess the ingredients in their list, such as in “150g nadrobno nakrájené čokolády” (Roháčová 39).

Yet, in these early translations, there is a tendency to put the adjective and the adjectival phrase in front of a head noun (ingredient) rather than behind it even if the adjectival phrase may be rather heavy, as it is illustrated in “1 kg oloupaných a na kostičky nakrájených brambor” (Řehořek 108). This can be seen as translators’ effort to follow the standard Czech grammar which says that the attributive expressed by an adjective usually stands in front of its head noun (Stručná mluvnice česká 153, 165).

In contrast with English recipes, early Czech translations usually do not put a comma between the head noun and the adjective (or adjective phrase) standing behind because this would not follow the rules of the Czech grammar. Only two out of nine books include commas.

As to the recent translations of English recipes, all the cookbooks of the corpus introduce the information about the preprocessing of the ingredients in their listings. In addition to that, the postpositive position of the adjective or adjective phrase is not neglected any longer. What is also crucial is the fact that the comma is written in front of the postpositive adjective or adjective phrase in all but two books, such as in “2 salátové okurky, nakrájené na kostičky” (Hanzlová 30). Moreover, in Kuchařka pro zdraví, even one-word attributes are moved to the postpositive position and separated by a comma, for example “¼ hrnku (30g) vlašských ořechů, nasekaných” (115), and that is typical of English recipes.

To conclude, these signs mark a rather significant shift towards the preference of the English traditional form in the recipe translation as far as the above-discussed phenomenon is concerned.

3.2.2 Measurement

3.2.2.1 Units of Volume vs. Units of Weight

Concerning cookbooks translated in the early 1990s and non-liquid foodstuffs, units of weight together with spoons are exclusively used in nine out of eleven sources. In one of them, Vaříme v mikrovlnné troubě, there are both units of volume and their converted versions, for example “25g (1oz) másla” (Kalábová 62). Another cookbook combines both units of volume and units of weight for solid, cut, and powdery ingredients. In the last book, Nová makrobiotická kuchařka mořských řas, Marie Böhmová does not convert the units at all and states the amount of everything in cups and spoons.

Regarding the recently translated cookbooks and non-liquid ingredients, seven out of eleven books still prefer the units of weight together with spoons. An unusual case is the book Jamie’s Kitchen written by Oliver who measures non-liquid foodstuffs in units of weight together with spoons and even handfuls which can be seen as units of volume. In the translated version of this book, Vladimír Fuksa also uses the same combination of measuring units. Another three books work with both types of units; two stating first volume and then weight in parentheses, and one using volume and weight in turns in both its original and translated version. In the remaining book, namely, Nová kuchařka s mořskými řasami, Fuxa measures all ingredients with the exception of meat in units of volume.

Besides, an interesting phenomenon appears in twenty-one out of twenty-two translated cookbooks. As a measuring unit, tea- and tablespoons accompany both units of volume and units of weight. They are not only used for the description of a small amount but also for a rather big one. This is caused by the fact that English recipes use tablespoons to measure various ingredients presented in preprocessed states whose amount can also be considerable big, and the same happens in translated recipes as in the majority of cases spoons are not converted to the units of the metric system because they traditionally belong to Czech recipes. (See 3.3.2.1 for more information about this topic.)

To sum up, in the translations of English recipes, the amount of non-liquid ingredients is still preferably described in units of weight (with the exception of both table- and teaspoons); nevertheless, there is also a strengthening tendency towards using the volume units for all types of ingredients.

Nevertheless, this outcome together with the one of the previous subchapter reveals an interesting situation in the translated recipes. It has been already mentioned that what mainly enables to measure the amount of ingredients in units of volume in the English recipes is the fact that the ingredients are presented as preprocessed in their listing. The translated recipes also introduce the preprocessed ingredients in their list but they still state their amount in units of weight and spoons. Thus, the reader experiences a mixture of both English and Czech traditional forms in the features which are closely related to each other.

3.2.2.2 Measurement Systems

In the cookbooks published in the early 1990s, translators convert all the units of temperature and length to the metric system. Eva Kalábová is the only one who also presents all four above-mentioned categories in units of the Anglo-Saxon measurement system (such as pounds, ounces, and pints) in parentheses. As for the weight, ten out of eleven books use the metric system. Since stating everything in volume units, namely cups and spoons, the remaining book does not include the units of weight at all.

As to the volume, two books use cups and nine use the metric system. In addition, the issue of spoons is also related to this category; however, it is largely described in the previous chapter. Yet, there is still one fact worth mentioning: in his book Dívej se a vař: Čokoládové dezerty, Vladimír Uchytil converts even spoons, which are not necessary to be changed (see the following chapter for more information on this topic), to milliliters in order to state the volume solely in the metric system. His efforts result in vague segments, such as “5 ml mletý hřebíček” (Uchytil 80). Two more books out of those discussed above present small amounts both in milliliters and spoons, with the former or latter written in parentheses. A table is enclosed below the following paragraph to make the situation more lucid.

With respect to the recently translated cookbooks, the temperature, length and weight are measured by units of the metric system. Regarding the volume, four books adhere solely to the metric system including spoons and other four books use only the system of cups and spoons. The last two books state the units of one system first and then the unit of the other one in parenthesis.

Usage of Measurement Systems for Units of Volume in the Translated Cookbooks ^d

Regarding the one-to-one analysis, Oliver works with units of both the metric and the Anglo-Saxon system, such as in “2kg/ 4½ lb duck or goose fat” (213). In Fuksa’s translation, only the units of the metric system are preserved, such as in “2 kg kachního nebo husího sádla” (213). In The Desperate Housewives Cookbook, Styler and Scott use Anglo-Saxon system with cups and spoons for volume. In the translation of this book, Petra Kudrnáčová retains the volume units and converts the rest to the metric system.¹⁷

As for the word cup, it is translated in several ways. Its most frequent translations are hrnek and hrneček together with šálek. However, the last expression is perceived as a rather small cup among Czech people. Therefore, its size do not correspond with the size of either the American cup, which has the volume of 236.59 ml, or the Imperial cup, which has the volume of 284.13 ml (Imperial Measures of Volume). This is one of the important problems related to the issue of retaining cups unconverted in translations.

Furthermore, books using cups for expressing both the weight and the volume cannot be seen as something unusual in the Czech Republic, as Czechs also use “cup cookbooks” which measure the amount of all ingredients solely with cups. Nevertheless, if the cups are combined with the metric units of weight, Czech readers perceive it as unnatural.

To conclude, the metric system is used in all categories except for the volume. As to this category, there is a visible influence of the Anglo-Saxon form as some translators have shifted from milliliters and liters to cups. Thus, it is also obvious that the Anglo-Saxon system occasionally mixes with the metric one because in some books individual categories are stated in various systems.

3.2.2.3 Determination of Size

Cookbooks translated in the early 1990s are divided into two equal groups. One half contains exactly expressed proportions; for instance, the diameter of pancakes such as in “Těsto vyválíme na 4 placky o průměru 18cm” (Hanišová 78), and the size of tins such as in “Směs dejte do . . . čtvercového pekáče o straně asi 30cm.” (Staněk 30). Sometimes the information about the proportions of sliced and cut ingredients is also presented: “1 proužek kombu dlouhý 15 cm a nastříhaný na 2 cm dlouhé kousky” (Böhmová 40). The other half states size approximately as their translators tried to adhere to the Czech standard of that time. (See 3.3.2.3 for details.) One book does not comment on the size at all.

Besides, this phenomenon has spread during the years and this is, indeed, reflected in the cookbooks translated between 2006 and 2009; only two out of ten analyzed books mentioning the size do not embrace any example of precisely described proportions. One of them is Nová kuchařka s mořskými řasami that ranks among the “cup cookbooks” and, thus, it tends to state everything rather roughly. One book does not mention the size of anything.

Nevertheless, a one-to-one analysis reveals that some exactly stated proportions are lost during the process of translating. This is observable, for example, in a recipe called “Chicken and Dumplings”. Celery stalks are described there as “peeled and cut on the bias into ½-inch slices” (Styler and Tobis 102); however, the parallel translated segment does not include any accurate description proportions: “2 celerové natě, nakrájené šikmo na širší plátky” (Kudrnáčocá 114). On the other hand, the following line dealing with onion strips states their exact proportions both in the original and in its translation.

All in all, the research shows that not all precise descriptions of size in English recipes are also translated into their Czech versions; this means that still some proportions are defined rather approximately. Notwithstanding, this above-discussed phenomenon has been clearly becoming more and more popular. As a result, the old traditional Czech form is in decline and the English one particularly prevails as far as this phenomenon in translated recipes is concerned.

3.2.3 Structure of Directions

Concerning the older translated cookbooks of the corpus, nine out of eleven present the description of meal preparation divided into several paragraphs. One of these, however, mixes both undivided and segmented directions. The remaining two describe what to do with ingredients in long indiscrete paragraphs. With regard to the newer cookbooks of the corpus, all of them structure the directional part in the recipes.

In spite of the fact that Švomová maintains in her thesis that miscellaneous marking such as numbering is not retained in the Czech translated versions (13), the table enclosed below demonstrates the opposite. Regarding the above-mentioned books, numbers accompany each paragraph in twelve cases and bullets are used once.

Table 6

Table 7

Indeed, Czech translation of English recipes wholly adheres to the English recipe stereotype as far as this phenomenon is concerned.

3.2.4 Forms of Address

In her thesis, Havlásková also declares that “the first person plural is in a minority” (Havlásková 40). Notwithstanding, this does not correspond to the results of the research. As for the analyzed cookbooks published in the early 1990s; five of eleven use the first person plural and five more books use the second person plural. The infinitive only appears in one material. Regarding those cookbooks of my corpus which have been translated during the last four years, they occur in a similar situation, except for the fact that the infinitive variant disappeared.

Nevertheless, the lack of change can be explained by the fact that four of the recent cookbooks – those which use the first person plural – were published by the same publishing company, namely Rebo Productions, which clearly has a standardized form for the translation of recipes concerning addressing the readerership. In spite of this fact, all these books were included in the corpus because they differ in the majority of the other features explored.

Taking this information into account, I assume that Havlásková’s claim is correct and that the second person plural predominates in the translated recipes.

3.2.5 Summary: Development of the Translation of English Recipes

3.3 Original Czech Recipes

In order to find out all this information, the materials published shortly after 1989 and also those published in the recent years have been investigated. To be more specific, these are: eighteen Czech cookbooks and eleven Czech periodicals concerning the former period, and fourteen cookbooks, twenty-four magazines and two Internet sites regarding the latter period.

As to the earlier published periodicals, not only traditional magazines such as Vlasta and Praktická žena but also the sešitové kuchařky (“booklet cookbooks”), for example Sešity domácího hospodaření, are included in the research. Although they do not rank among the typical periodicals, they are numbered, used to be published several times a year, and, in addition to that, plenty of people identify them as periodicals. They have more in common with periodicals than with books and, therefore, they are added to other magazines.

Concerning the Internet sites, both of them consist of ordinary people’s contributions. The most popular recipes written by eight various authors were explored on each site.

Besides, an outcome of a questionnaire is added at the end of each subchapter. It was filled out by sixty respondents (thirty-four women and twenty-six men). Contributors from several generations participated; their age ranges between twenty and eighty. The results of the questionnaire are not only stated for the whole group but also for each sex. The sample questionnaire is enclosed in the appendix and also on a CD.

3.3.1 Processing Ingredients

The information about the way ingredients ought to be processed is included both in their listings and in the directional parts of the scrutinized Czech recipes, depending on the year of publishing.

Regarding the cookbooks of the early 1990s, seven of them define what to do with the foodstuffs solely in the directional part. These activities are predominantly expressed by verbs and occasionally by participial adjectives. These adjectives are used because of the principle of parsimony, which aims to make the recipes understandable and, simultaneously, as short as possible (Švomová 24). Other ten books use this type of adjectives in the list of ingredients only marginally. Nevertheless, this phenomenon appears rarely – on average, once or twice on several pages. Only in one book, namely in Řecká kuchyně, the preprocessing information is included in the description of almost all the ingredients in their list. However, this can be the result of the fact that the author – Martha Elefteriadu – was living abroad for several years and this cookbook was published by a foreign publishing company, as well.

According to the corpus, the periodical authors of this period even less often place the adjectives containing the preprocessing information in the list of ingredients. To be more specific, the above-discussed characterization included in the list of ingredients appears regularly in one and exceptionally in three out of eleven analyzed magazines.

This phenomenon mainly relates to some particular ingredients: namely, cheese, predominantly described as grated; herbs, usually chopped and measured by spoons; and walnuts, very often roughly cut.

Generally, the Czech recipes written in the early 1990s traditionally prefer to tell the reader what to do with the ingredients in the directions. This information is expressed by verbs and by adjectives or adjectival phrases.¹⁸ These latter ones only rarely occur in the list of ingredients, and if so, then they stand in front of their head noun. If they happen to stand behind the head noun because of their weight, they are never separated by a comma.

Yet, this situation has changed during the years. Although this characterization of ingredients incorporated in their lists only prevails in two out of fourteen explored recent cookbooks, this phenomenon mingles with the traditional Czech form of the 1990s in six more books. The remaining six pieces use these descriptions of preprocessing only seldom or they do not include it at all. Nevertheless, those implying this feature constitute the bigger part of the analyzed materials.

The state can be seen as the result of the impact of the translated cookbooks since this feature is typical of English recipes, and it has been frequently used in the translated cookbooks for the last twenty years.

Despite all the predictions, this trend is less common in the recent periodicals than in cookbooks. It was observed that there are equal numbers of magazines which frequently use this phenomenon and those that reject it completely or include it only rarely. To specify this, six magazines strictly follow the English standard, two jumble the recipes with either the English or the Czech characteristics, and other four periodicals fuse features of both traditional forms as far as this issue is concerned. On the contrary, seven completely exclude this phenomenon and the rest adapts it only marginally.

Notwithstanding, it is necessary to emphasize, that the number of those magazines using predominantly this new form is higher than the number of the cookbooks.

All in all, nowadays, the list of ingredients of Czech recipes presents the foodstuffs in their preprocessed state considerably often in the printed material and, thus, the typical features of Czech and English recipes are merging. Concerning the position of adjectives or adjective phrases, in all books but one they still usually stand in front of their head nouns, unless too heavy. Furthermore, in magazines, they also happen to be placed behind their head nouns (ingredients). In seven cases, they are even separated by commas, which is ungrammatical according to the rules of the Czech Grammar.

The situation is rather contradictory on the Internet. All researched contributors who display their recipes on Vareni.cz describe what to do with the ingredients in the directional part. A similar situation was observed on Recepty.cz. Except for one person following the English trend, everyone still uses the same form as the one published at the beginning of the 1990s in books and magazines. It is obvious that amateurs do not follow the new trend and prefer to write their own recipes according to the old standard.

As to the questionnaire, the graph enclosed below clearly shows that Czech people have accepted both the version of recipes in which the way foodstuffs should be processed is already incorporated in the list of ingredients, and the version that describes the activities associated with ingredients only in a directional part. To be more specific, the English format is slightly more popular with men, of whom 61.5% support this feature in Czech recipes, than with woman of whom only 44% support this new trend.

Fig. 1. People’s Preferences Concerning Processing Ingredients.

In conclusion, being taken all the above-mentioned information into account, it is obvious that the traditional form of Czech recipes has been changing under the influence of the translated recipes as far as the discussed issue is concerned. In recent officially published materials, this Czech typical feature is mixing with the parallel English one as the participial adjectives describing how to prepare the foodstuffs has become rather a regular part of the list of ingredients. Yet, the shift is not strong enough to convince the ordinary people to write their recipes in this English-like style. However, it has influenced them, especially men, to such extent that they started to accept this new trend and half of them even prefer it when working with and reading recipes.

3.3.2 Measurement

3.3.2.1 Units of Volume vs. Units of Weight

In fact, these two items frequently accompany the units of weight in the analyzed Czech recipes of the early 1990s. The situation is illustrated by the list of ingredients of a typical Czech recipe called “Telecí řízky se žampiónovými omeletami”: “4 telecí řízky, 100g žampiónů, 4 plátky šunky, 4 vejce, 4 lžíce smetany, 1 dl vývaru z kostí nebo vody, 40g másla, olej, sůl” (Lukešová 43). The spoons are preferably used to measure small amounts of liquids and chopped food such as parsley. More than three spoons per an ingredient are only exceptionally observable. Indeed, they are used for the description of the amount that is so small that it would be rather difficult to measure it in a cup, a measuring glass or by a kitchen scale. In spite of this fact, even a small amount is occasionally stated in grams, such as in “20g másla” (Janoušek 47).

The previous paragraph also relates to the state in periodicals published in the 1990s. As for them, nine out of twelve magazines use the weight units together with spoons and pieces. Concerning the remaining three, some cups and glasses for measuring non-liquid ingredients also appear there. However, it is a rather infrequent phenomenon.

Besides, in this early period there is a slight tendency to state even some liquid ingredients (for instance mayonnaise and oil) in units of weight, such as in “300g majonézy” and “100g oleje nebo másla” (Trejbal 20-21). Nevertheless, this is only such an occasional feature that it cannot be seen as typical of Czech recipes.

As to the contemporary recipes, the amount of non-liquid ingredients is still predominantly expressed in the units of weight. This is evident form the fact that twelve out of fourteen cookbooks and twenty-two out of twenty-four magazines use solely grams and kilograms. Only three cookbooks – Bábovky a moučníky written by Večeřová at al., Pod pokličkou 2 written by Porebská at al., and Pod pokličkou 3: Popelky v české kuchyni by Horsáková at al. – together with two magazines – namely, F.O.O.D. and Kreativ – use both categories for solid, cut, and powdery foodstuffs. To be more specific, the units of weight and the units of volume mix in the recipes themselves. This is illustrated in a recipe called “Olivové zmrzliny s bílou čokoládovou omáčkou” in which one can found “1 šálek (250 ml) zelených oliv, vypeckovaných a jemně nasekaných” and also “100g černých oliv, vypeckovaných a nahrubo nasekaných” (F.O.O.D. 64).

It is a question, whether this fusion is the result of the impact of translation or of “cup cookbooks” used in the Czech kitchens. Being taken into consideration the fact that Večeřová’s book deals with the cakes and other desserts, and that it presents the ingredients in their preprocessed state only exceptionally, it is rather probable that its author was influenced by the Czech “cup cookbooks”. On the contrary, the remaining four materials rather frequently use the phenomenon of preprocessing ingredients in their list and this phenomenon is closely related to the topic discussed here; therefore, it is feasible that their authors and editors were affected by the translation.

As to the Internet sites, units of volume are slightly more common there than in the printed sources. To specify this, on Recepty.cz, half of the analyzed authors openly prefer the units of weight according to the analyzed recipes. The other half favors the units of volume in recipes dealing with sweet meals and cakes, and in different type of recipes they present the liquids in volume units and the other ingredients in weight units. This is more an impact of a long usage of “cup cookbooks” than of the translation of English recipes. Vlasta Vejvodová is an anomalous case because she presents all the foodstuffs in milliliters and spoons. This can be seen as illogical in Czech recipes.

On Vareni.cz, the authors of recipes mix the units of weight and units of volume for non-liquid ingredients in recipes. It cannot be said that anyone inclines solely to one category as they use grams together with many handfuls and spoons. In addition, in a large number of recipes, ingredients are preferably stated by pieces rather than in some units. Nevertheless, cups are used rarely

All in all, the impact of the translation and also of the English traditional form on the use of cups is still negligible in printed materials as thirty-four out of thirty-eight printed sources still follow the example of the 1990s.

On the other hand, a change has occurred in the use of tablespoons. Nowadays, they do not express merely small amounts of limited types of ingredients; their scope has been enlarged. The maximum number of table spoons expressing the amount of one ingredient is not three any longer, such as in “7 vrchovatých polévkových lžic polohrubé mouky” (Podlaha and Kalendová 63) and “12 lžic cukru” (Jirků 50). Another example is a baking powder. Its amount used to be expressed by packets and now it is frequently measured by spoons. This can be mainly seen in periodicals and also in some cookbooks.

Finally, it ought to be mentioned that the phenomenon concerning the mixing of Czech and English forms in the features which are closely related to each is even stronger in original Czech recipes of cookbooks and magazines.

As to the questionnaire, the graph enclosed below reveals that more than 40% of Czechs, surprisingly, prefer the volume units to express the amount of non-liquid ingredients. This fact, however, does not correspond to the result of the analysis of cookbooks, periodicals and Internet sites. To specify the numbers, although 69.3% of men support the weight units which still stand for a traditional feature of Czech recipes according to the result of the analysis, 50% of woman support the units of volume and that is a lot in comparison with the small number of Czech “cup cookbooks” available on the market.

Fig. 2. Popularity of the Units of Volume vs. Units of Weight.

In conclusion, although the English recipes translated into the Czech language have not influenced the form of the original Czech recipes, their impact has been strong enough to make them particularly popular with almost a half of Czech people. A change of the traditional form of this feature in Czech recipes would be welcomed by the respondents.

3.3.2.2 Measurement Systems

In the materials published in the early 1990s, the situation is clear as far as temperature, length and weight are concerned. All of them are measured by the metric system. Concerning volume, following two paragraphs elaborate on this topic, as not only the units of the previously mentioned system but also others appear in Czech recipes.

As for cookbooks, two out of eighteen items use the cup system to measure the volume and fourteen employ milliliters and liters (the metric system). The remaining two books express the amounts solely in the units of weight. Besides, almost all of them also work with spoons. The only exception is Řeznická kuchařka, in which everything is measured in milliliters since it is a cookbook for experts rather than non-experts and, thus, it is necessary to state the accurate amount of ingredients. Handfuls are incorporated only occasionally.

A similar situation is observable in periodicals. Five of them use solely the metric systems and four exceptionally also employ cups. Two magazines use cups. Again, spoons can be found in all the above-mentioned. Handfuls appear rarely.

Therefore, the metric system is the traditional measurement system of the early post-revolutionary era, mainly accompanied by spoons regarding the volume. The “cup cookbooks” are the only main exception to this form in this period.

Concerning the recent period; the temperature, length, and weight are still stated in units of the metric system in all the recipes. The volume is again problematic.

With regard to the cookbooks, none of those included in my corpus only use the cup system. (It is necessary to mention that although not being a part of my corpus, the “cup cookbooks” are still being published in the Czech Republic.) Three books measure both with cups and by the units of the metric system. The remaining eleven solely employ the European system.

As to the periodicals, only three out of twenty-four use both cups and units of the metric system in turns. The metric system is dominant in the remaining twenty-one magazines. Both of these printed types of materials always include spoons and rarely handfuls.

For the Internet results, see previous subchapter.

As to the questionnaire, it reveals that 35% of the questioned people support the system of cups and spoons. (See the graph below.) Concerning the gender distinctions, cups and spoons are supported by 50% of women and only 15.3% of men. It is evident that translations have more influenced recipe users than their authors.

Fig. 3. People’s Preferences Concerning Measurement Systems.

All in all, concerning the measurement, system the standard form has not profoundly changed. The metric system accompanied by the spoons dominates in Czech recipes. Only the scope of the usage of spoons has enlarged. Surprisingly, the usage of cups has been stagnating in cookbooks and only slowly increasing in periodicals, in spite of the fact that cups as a measuring unit has been spreading in the translations of English recipes, that they have been supported by the long existence of “cup cookbooks” in the Czech republic and that more than one third of Czechs prefer the cup system.

3.3.2.3 Determination of Size

As to cookbooks published in the early 1990s, thirteen state proportions vaguely and five exceptionally include some exact numbers. In periodicals this phenomenon was even less frequent as only two out of eleven magazines occasionally incorporated it in their recipes.

Lately, this accurate determination of a size has become more wide spread in magazine; ten out of twenty-fourteen often use it. Nevertheless, its frequency of usage has not raised in cookbooks as only four out of fourteen embrace it.

As for the Internet, this phenomenon is rare on the analyzed sites. In fact, only one example was noticed on Recepty.cz. Furthermore, the observed examples cover the same topics as the ones of early 1990s. Since the descriptions of the size of dishes are contained only in 3 analyzed materials, it is evident that this phenomenon has not reached this area yet.

As for the questionnaire, the graph enclosed below shows that slightly more than 40% of Czechs favor precisely defined proportions. Indeed, this exactly corresponds to its usage in the Czech recipe materials.

Fig. 4. Peoples’ Preferences Concerning the Determination of Size.

To conclude, it is evident, that the discussed trend, which is typical of English recipes, has been spreading. This statement is supported by the analysis of both the printed materials and the questionnaires. Unquestionably, this development has been conditioned by the translation of English recipes as this phenomenon is quite frequent in these. Nevertheless, its influence has not been strong enough to enforce the precise description of the proportions of dishes which stands for the cornerstone of this issue.

The phenomenon of accurate size determination has not profoundly changed a traditional Czech form, which is more likely to describe the proportions of the dishes, ingredients and their processed versions approximately. This is mainly evidenced by the result of the Internet analysis.

3.3.3 Structure of Directions

In the analyzed recipes of the early 1990s, the directions are written in one compact paragraph. All cookbooks but one and all the periodicals of this time period do not structure them. That exception is Libuše Vlachová’s Vaříme na víkendu and there is no special marking of paragraphs in this material.

Nevertheless, the situation has radically altered as the number of structured materials has increased from one out of twenty-nine to twenty-four out of thirty-eight during the last twenty years. To be more specific, seven cookbooks do not separate their descriptions of meal preparation in any way. The same number of books does the segmentation. In two of them, however, this relates only to some of the recipes; Blanka Heřmánková sections the directional part of those recipes which are long in Rychlé domácí recepty, and Monika Golková with Dagmar Janatová choose the recipes to be divided in Jím a mládnu aneb anti-aging na talíři at random. One of the analyzed books even marks the distinct parts of the directions to stress the structure. For details see the table below.

Table 8

Only seven recent periodicals do not divide the directional part of recipes into a separate segment. The remaining seventeen, by contrast, structure it. In three of them, this is applied only on some sections of the magazines. As for the marking of distinct directions, miscellaneous ways are used. Numbering is most common. For details see the table enclosed below.

Division of Directions in Czech Periodical Recipes Published between 2006 and 2009

Concerning the Internet sites, Recepty.cz includes recipes with both the structured and unstructured directions. The latter ones slightly prevail. Furthermore, Vareni.cz presents directional parts only in a structured format. Although it is not written anywhere, I assume that the recipes of this web site are edited as far as this phenomenon is concerned.

Regarding the questionnaire, 78.3% of the questioned people prioritize the structured format of directions. As for the gender distinction, this result is supported both by 80.8% men and 76.5% women. A graph is enclosed below.

Fig. 5. People’s Preferences Concerning the Structure of Directions.

In summary, the traditional format of the recipe directions has changed and it is apparent that it was caused by the impact of the English recipe translation, as the typical form of English recipes now corresponds to the new dominant form of Czech recipes as far the above-discussed phenomenon is concerned. Moreover, its popularity confirms the fact that it has already been widely accepted.

3.3.4 Forms of Address

My analysis, in addition, includes the questionnaire which also shows some interesting facts. Three out of four possible answers to the question on the preferences concerning the form of address were chosen by the addressed people. According to its results, only slightly more than a half of the questioned Czechs favor the traditional form. Remaining preferences are equally divided between the forms of address which appeared in Czech materials due to the influence of the translated recipes. One of them is the second person plural; the same form as the English recipes use. The other one – the infinitive – is not, in fact, a form of address but another way of describing the activity a person ought to do in order to prepare a meal. However, it also resulted from the English form, as in some cookbooks the imperative was mistranslated as the infinitive. This, consequently, affected the readership. A graph is enclosed below to provide the exact numbers.

Fig. 6. Popularity of Miscellaneous Forms of Address.

3.3.5 Summary: Development of the Czech Traditional Form