Today: baba, babka, barbacoa, cocoa, cacao, kabob, korma (!), but no arrack.
2 Likes
No dacron . Not a food, but vintage. 
I don’t know what that is. SB was low on food words, besides the usual suspects like cocoa, cacao, and naan.
A polyester wrinkle-free material very popular in ‘70s clothing.
There was another”on”-suffixed fiber (yarn), “orlon” , which mimicked cashmere.
1 Like
It’s a proper noun, I think.
No mâche, no miche.
Hamachi, tho.
Also, mahimahi. I guess the NYT decides when dashes are optional 
1 Like
I was going to mention “m” - the blur isn’t working for me.
Wait, the blur isn’t working? As in you see the word?
I can’t see the preview over on the right so I have a hard time aiming for the rectangle
1 Like
Cinnamon and tomato, but no manti or momo.
Oooh! One of the pangrams is manicotti!
1 Like
Heh!!im hungry!
1 Like
No manioc. Also no concomitant (which is not a food word, but is a word!).
4 Likes
No manti, no tian. Also, itty is a go, titty is not. Perhaps not surprisingly, neither is titman 
1 Like
This enraged me.
1 Like
OK, NYT. You’re fucking drunk. No placable, no placeable.
Apparently, we’re also being really selective which fish names are acceptable, and which aren’t — plaice being in the latter camp
WTAF?
3 Likes
Yeah, def not a food word. But a perfectly acceptable word in the English language. And yet, no cunt or cunty.
Fer shame.
Also, why is Inuit not included?
I think because Inuit is a proper noun.
1 Like
But they allow fish names and other random stuff.
I tried all 3, to no avail
1 Like
