The wine terminology that triggers you the most violently, for me it is QPR

Along the same lines, I get a little annoyed when people refer Piedmont as “Piedmonte” (many offenders on Berserkers). It’s either Piemonte (in Italian) or Piedmont (English). It’s not Piedmonte.

4 Likes

I really wish you hadn’t said that. I now think of a recently described tasting event as a Monty Chardy Pardy. Thanks a lot!

1 Like

Ha! You may have just given that term a reason to live on.

I don’t get annoyed, but I do notice that interesting mash up of the two spellings from time to time.

It would be like calling the capital of Russia Moskvow.

1 Like

WB is rife with misspelling

3 Likes

Actually the hole interweb. :scream:

Guilty as charged…

1 Like

Late to this party, but just read a note this morning that had all of my “triggers” for the same wine:

-Precise, which ironically is so vague as to be meaningless.
-Autolytic, is a verb not a noun, “autolysis, more commonly known as self-digestion, refers to the destruction of a cell through the action of its own enzymes.”. I think you mean “yeasty”?
-Reductive, when you mean fresh, bright, zippy. Reduction has a specific chemical meaning and in narrow instances can cause real problems in how a wine tastes. Most of the time, that’s not how it is used.

Now I can imagind my triggers will provide a trigger for others!

1 Like

Like my favorite cocktail, the Moskvow Muele.

2 Likes

To autolyse (or autolyze) is a verb. Autolysis is a noun and autolytic is an adjective.

Autolytic aromas can be yeasty, but they can also be bready, creamy, custardy, doughy, brioche-y, toasty, nutty, etc.

So “yeasty” doesn’t really describe a wine that has lots of autolysis-derivative aromas or flavors, which might or might not include yeasty aromas or flavors.

5 Likes

I try to regularly remind myself to refer to what I taste, rather than refer to what I suspect may be the reason for elements of flavour/aroma, and to avoid vague or ambiguous terms, especially those that may not be known by all. This latter part because I’ve always hated exclusionary ‘insider’ talk that can easily be perceived as snobbery / bullshit to appear knowledgeable (whether it is or not).

If I were to use autolytic or reductive, I’d want to essentially present the evidence in terms of flavour, aroma (or in other instances texture) before being clear that it’s a belief or guess on linking that to the technical term. For those who are very much deeper into the technical side of our hobby, as committed enthusiast or winemaker, I see no such problem with them using such terms. For me as a genuine amateur it’s too much of a stretch to use such words and claim I know what I’m talking about.

2 Likes

Oh, I forgot. Pedantry is another one of my triggers.

Thanks for the reminder.

1 Like

The pleasure was entirely on my side!

4 Likes

I’m hardly triggered but I do inwardly cringe a bit every time someone says they committed infanticide by opening a bottle too early.
I know exactly what they mean, and the usage doesn’t make them an ogre; it’s just that 99% of my wine associations are fun/enjoyable/happy/relaxing and that term is bracingly discordant.

6 Likes

though conversely I do like the punny variant - vinfanticide.

3 Likes

Yes, brilliant! Much better way to use it!

2 Likes

Totally agree.

1 Like

I’ll be borrowing that, thank you very much.

2 Likes

Love it!
I am totally stealing this…

2 Likes

“Crunchy” is seriously cringe-worthy. WTF does that even mean?!?

Seeing it so often now that I’m thinking people writing tasting notes (and most critics in general) are just catch-phrase chasing lemmings.