# Kitchen Terminology & Slang



## cookingboi (Dec 27, 2012)

Hi everyone. My name's Chris and I'm brand new to this site so I just wanted to say hi to everyone.

I have checked out the site briefly but I couldn't exactly find what I was looking for. I am trying to move up into a line cook position and I'm looking for terms and slang used in the kitchen. I already know the "_in the weeds_" means "I'm backed up and need some help," and "_on the fly_" means "drop what you're doing and do this."

I'd like to know the rest of them so that if I do get a job as a line cook, I'll have a good grasp ahead of time. Thanks to all of you for your help.

~Chris


----------



## arugula (Sep 13, 2012)

" 86 the ____, Chef." - You do not have anymore ____ in the building." (Example carrots, ribs, oranges, ect.)

Mind your back. - moving behind someone on the line.

Fire table ____! - put table ___ in the window...


----------



## guts (Jun 22, 2011)

I wouldn't worry, this is stuff you'll pick up along the way - and there are much more important things you should probably be concentrating on.


----------



## just jim (Oct 18, 2007)

http://www.cheftalk.com/t/61268/kitchen-lingo


----------



## smork (Aug 27, 2012)

only term you need to know is "yes chef"   "right away chef"     .


----------



## veronporter (May 9, 2011)

arugula said:


> " 86 the ____, Chef." - You do not have anymore ____ in the building." (Example carrots, ribs, oranges, ect.)
> Mind your back. - moving behind someone on the line.
> Fire table ____! - put table ___ in the window...


Not trying to rip your post apart but I think in most kitchens you simply say "behind" or "atrás" when walking behind someone and "fire" means to start cooking the table where as "sell" means to put it in the window.


----------



## veronporter (May 9, 2011)

Most of these aren't universal but some stuff I've picked up over the years;

"range" or "piano" - oven-top burners.

"robocop" - robot-coup/food-processor. ex. "Hey, where the hell is robocop?"

"blitz it" - puree in vitamix.

"morons" - waiter. ex. "tell the morons to stab their goddamn tickets!"

"heard it" - I understand and will now act accordingly. ex. Chef; "sell table 6 then get me garniture ready for table 11" you; "Heard it!"

"joto" - pronounced ho-toe; a term of affection and/or endearment, especially for a hispanic coworker. ex; "you're such a filthy joto"

"flash" - briefly heating a plate of food in the salamander/oven to assure it's piping-hot for the guest. ex. "flash and sell baby"

"chef de partie" - french for "line-cook".

"sally" - salamander oven/broiler. ex. "pop that plate in the sally and GO!"


----------



## shootoo (Jul 15, 2012)

veronporter said:


> "joto" - pronounced ho-toe; a term of affection and/or endearment, especially for a hispanic coworker. ex; "you're such a filthy joto"


Don't mean to... Question your kitchen's slang... But if a new guy called one of my hispanic cooks a joto, they'd more likely than not get their ass beat


----------



## meezenplaz (Jan 31, 2012)

Touch-it-up == hit it with the Brulee torch.

Zap it == Same thing, also microwave briefly.

"Hang on I'm in the zone" == Don't bug me about that right now, I'm totally

     focused on everything I'm doing.

Dunk-it== quick blanch


----------



## veronporter (May 9, 2011)

Shootoo said:


> Don't mean to... Question your kitchen's slang... But if a new guy called one of my hispanic cooks a joto, they'd more likely than not get their ass beat


Yeah, that one flew right over your head... See, in my kitchen we call that a "joke".


----------



## chefbuba (Feb 17, 2010)

veronporter said:


> Most of these aren't universal but some stuff I've picked up over the years;
> 
> "range" or "piano" - oven-top burners.
> 
> ...


I don't know who told you the definition of this word, it is far from a term of affection. I'd like to see you walk up to any Hispanic person and call them a filthy Joto, you would probably end up on the floor. You better brush up on your Spanish.


----------



## just jim (Oct 18, 2007)

chefbuba said:


> I don't know who told you the definition of this word, it is far from a term of affection. I'd like to see you walk up to any Hispanic person and call them a filthy Joto, you would probably end up on the floor. You better brush up on your Spanish.


Depending on the environment, any derogetory term can be a term of affection.

I wouldn't walk up to a stranger and say that, but would have no porblem with a close coworker.

Similar to how my friends and I greet eat other with the bird, call each other foul names, etc.


----------



## rdm magic (Apr 16, 2012)

You never call your friends misc. insults that can't be said here, as a term of endearment?


----------



## veronporter (May 9, 2011)

Just Jim said:


> Depending on the environment, any derogetory term can be a term of affection.
> 
> I wouldn't walk up to a stranger and say that, but would have no porblem with a close coworker.
> 
> Similar to how my friends and I greet eat other with the bird, call each other foul names, etc.


Thanks for getting it...


----------



## shootoo (Jul 15, 2012)

Just Jim said:


> Depending on the environment, any derogetory term can be a term of affection.
> 
> I wouldn't walk up to a stranger and say that, but would have no porblem with a close coworker.
> 
> Similar to how my friends and I greet eat other with the bird, call each other foul names, etc.





veronporter said:


> Thanks for getting it...


I get it... I'm sure we all do it to some form or another. I think it was a little weird how you left it in the list that you had there though.


----------



## wyoming fsd (Jan 12, 2013)

There's the basics, a "10 top just came in", 10 people... "salads out on 5" salads taken to table 5, so food better be ready in 5-10 minutes depending on the turnover and normal ticket times.

"All day" as in I have 4 steaks hanging all day (right now)... "I'm dragging a ___" I'm behind or slow to cook an item, (don't be that guy). I'm sure you will catch on fast, best of luck!


----------



## ed buchanan (May 29, 2006)

I have noticed the language varies by state and or location.


----------



## sibs (Jan 11, 2013)

veronporter said:


> "chef de partie" - french for "line-cook".


Umm...a chef de partie is actually someone who's in charge of a section (as in Chef de Partie Garde Manger).

Sarah


----------



## squirrelrj (Feb 18, 2011)

sibs said:


> Umm...a chef de partie is actually someone who's in charge of a section (as in Chef de Partie Garde Manger).
> 
> Sarah


AKA line cook.


----------



## sibs (Jan 11, 2013)

Isn't a line cook just a cook who works on the line?


----------



## squirrelrj (Feb 18, 2011)

sibs said:


> Isn't a line cook just a cook who works on the line?


as opposed to "station cooks" working where, the basement?

If you're Chef de partie of "saute" you're working the saute station, if you're grill chef de partie, you're on the grill station, etc... these are all line positions.

*Chef de partie*

*A chef de partie, also known as a "station chef" or "line cook",[sup][2][/sup] is in charge of a particular area of production. In large kitchens, each station chef might have several cooks and/or assistants. In most kitchens, however, the station chef is the only worker in that department. Line cooks are often divided into a hierarchy of their own, starting with "first cook", then "second cook", and so on as needed.*


----------



## sibs (Jan 11, 2013)

Well, as opposed to a prep cook...who may well work in the basement.  In my opinion, that definition is a little confusing in that chef de partie is a specification that means 'in charge of', and it makes no sense to speficy that someone is in charge of a section if they are the only one working there.  Thus, if I'm the only GM, I'm not going to call myself chef de partie GM.  That would be ridiculous.  It only makes sense to use the term 'chef de partie' if there are one or more cooks working in a section, and one of them is actually in charge.


----------



## petemccracken (Sep 18, 2008)

sibs said:


> ... It only makes sense to use the term 'chef de partie' if there are one or more cooks working in a section, and one of them is actually in charge.


I respectfully beg to differ. _In charge_, IMHO, is not restricted to the management of personnel. For me _in charge_, in a commercial kitchen sense, means to be _in charge_ of the equipment, mise en place, and production of that unit/station/facility as required, which *may *include additional personnel, i.e. chef de partie

Now, I do NOT speak French but I have been told that the French term _partie_ means *part*, not party. For me, that means _chef de partie_ translates to *chief of the part *(of the kitchen), not chief of the party ( a group of employees)

BTA, WTHDIK


----------



## squirrelrj (Feb 18, 2011)

sibs said:


> Well, as opposed to a prep cook...who may well work in the basement. In my opinion, that definition is a little confusing in that chef de partie is a specification that means 'in charge of', and it makes no sense to speficy that someone is in charge of a section if they are the only one working there. Thus, if I'm the only GM, I'm not going to call myself chef de partie GM. That would be ridiculous. It only makes sense to use the term 'chef de partie' if there are one or more cooks working in a section, and one of them is actually in charge.


A prep cook isn't a line cook, a chef de partie is.. why is this so hard to comprehend?

and surely it makes sense to specify that someone is in charge of a section, regardless of how many people work in that station.

Why call them "chef de cuisine" since they are in fact, the only one in charge of the food, no?

Either way you want to slice it, a chef de partie is still a line cook, they are on a line station, whether saute/grill/cold/dessert, those are line stations, where line cooks work.


----------



## shootoo (Jul 15, 2012)

sibs said:


> Well, as opposed to a prep cook...who may well work in the basement. In my opinion, that definition is a little confusing in that chef de partie is a specification that means 'in charge of', and it makes no sense to speficy that someone is in charge of a section if they are the only one working there. Thus, if I'm the only GM, I'm not going to call myself chef de partie GM. That would be ridiculous. It only makes sense to use the term 'chef de partie' if there are one or more cooks working in a section, and one of them is actually in charge.


If it's one or many, they're still in charge of that section. In charge of the section, not the people at the section. That's when executive and assistant and even commis come in to play depending on the size of the kitchen


----------



## ed buchanan (May 29, 2006)

Same applies for chef d partie Gard' manger  . He is not the chef Garde Manger he works in that department  or simply is a helper.


----------



## sibs (Jan 11, 2013)

PeteMcCracken said:


> I respectfully beg to differ. _In charge_, IMHO, is not restricted to the management of personnel. For me _in charge_, in a commercial kitchen sense, means to be _in charge_ of the equipment, mise en place, and production of that unit/station/facility as required, which *may *include additional personnel, i.e. chef de partie
> 
> Now, I do NOT speak French but I have been told that the French term _partie_ means *part*, not party. For me, that means _chef de partie_ translates to *chief of the part *(of the kitchen), not chief of the party ( a group of employees)
> 
> BTA, WTHDIK


Okay Pete, I see your point. I do speak French, and your translation of 'partie' is correct. However, in every professional kitchen I have ever worked in here in Montreal, where we use mostly french terminology, and often work with people who are French from France, the term 'Chef de Partie' has been used exculsively in a hierachical sense. Additionally, anyone calling themselves chef de partie when there was not, in actuality, anyone working directly under them was likely to be ridiculed for their pretentions. It's certainly possible that the term has evolved over time, and/or in certain places, but I just wanted to share my experience with it.

BTW, what is BTA, WTHDIK?


----------



## petemccracken (Sep 18, 2008)

sibs said:


> ...BTW, what is BTA, WTHDIK?


But Then Again, What The Heck Do I Know /img/vbsmilies/smilies/crazy.gif


----------



## squirrelrj (Feb 18, 2011)

A Chef de partie can be used in a heirarchy sense if you want, especially if you are training or working with a commis under you, but any way you slice it, if the grill chef de partie is on the grill station, he or she is still a line cook.

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-a-chef-de-partie.htm


----------



## cheflayne (Aug 21, 2004)

Just curious about different people's views on kitchen hierarchy, how would you rank the following: saucier, tournant, partie

We all know the chef is in charge, then the sous, who is on third... besides abbott & costello?


----------



## petemccracken (Sep 18, 2008)

cheflayne said:


> Just curious about different people's views on kitchen heirachy, how would you rank the following: saucier, tournant, partie
> 
> We all know the chef is in charge, then the sous, who is on third... besides abbott & costello?


All of the above?? /img/vbsmilies/smilies/wink.gif They all report to the Chef/Sous, therefore, they are third in line.


----------



## squirrelrj (Feb 18, 2011)

cheflayne said:


> Just curious about different people's views on kitchen heirachy, how would you rank the following: saucier, tournant, partie
> 
> We all know the chef is in charge, then the sous, who is on third... besides abbott & costello?


Junior sous, if applicable..

If not, i'd want my saucier next in line, followed very closely by the roundsman.


----------



## cheflayne (Aug 21, 2004)

Another question would be how goes the hierarchy for cook I, II, and III.

In California, III would be above II, and II would be above I. I have noticed that the reverse is true in Hawaii.


----------



## petemccracken (Sep 18, 2008)

I'm by no means positive, however, I seem to remember that there is an entirely different classification in the UK and Australia.


cheflayne said:


> Another question would be how goes the hierarchy for cook I, II, and III.
> 
> In California, III would be above II, and II would be above I. I have noticed that the reverse is true in Hawaii.


----------

