Talk:Refried beans

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mexico Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mexico, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Mexico on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Refried beans is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to plants and botany. For more information, visit the project page.
Start This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.


[edit] Merge

Frijoles refritos has been merged with Refried beans per comments on that article's talk page. That article now redirects here. Kafziel 18:43, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] re- in 'frijoles refritos'

I don't think the origin of the re- prefix in frijoles refritos comes from sobre. re- has been used as an intensifier in Romance languages since Classical Latin, next to the reading of repetition or iteration. In English, we only have that second meaning, but in Spanish (especially Latin American varities) it's still intact. So re- intensifies the adjective frito. They are, in fact, "well-fried" beans.

Are there any native speakers who have some other feeling about this?

Damon Allen Davison allolex 16:50, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

  • No clue, but your way seems to make more sense than the "sobre" thing. However, I too would like for a native speaker to comment. -Platypus Man | Talk 05:06, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
1. m. Aceite frito con ajo, cebolla, pimentón y otros ingredientes que se añaden en caliente a algunos guisos.
2. m. Cosa rehecha o recompuesta, especialmente refundición de una obra dramática o de otro escrito"

and "refreír. (Del lat. refrigĕre).

1. tr. Volver a freír.
2. tr. Freír mucho o muy bien algo.
3. tr. Freír demasiado algo."
-- Beardo 04:50, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

He's a reference to the quote's source from http://www.foodtimeline.org/foodmexican.html:

"Several people have asked me why, when the beans are fried, they are called refried. Nobody I asked in Mexico seemed to know until quite suddenly it dawned on me. The Mexicans have a habit a qualifying a word to emphasize the meaning by adding the prefix re-. They will get the oil very hot (requemar), or something will be very good (retebien). Thus refrito beans are well fried, which they certainly are, since they are fried until they are almost dry."" ---Oxford Companion to Food, Alan Davidson [Oxford University Press:Oxford] 1999 (p. 657)

Esptoronto 14:50, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

I think its a fairly collquial term, in Modern Spanish the prefix "re-" certainly does not exclusively mean an emphasis on a verb as in the colloquialism described by the previous poster. It more often implies "volver a + verb" such as rellenar, however a few words just occurred to me: "rebuscar" - "to search carefully for" thus emphasises the verb "buscar" and a word with many colloquial meanings "rematar" - "to top" or "to finish off" as in kill, clearly you cant kill someone again. Angryafghan 15:13, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mashing before, during or after frying?

There seems to be some confusion in this article as to whether the beans should be mashed before being fried or after (or indeed, during). Most recipes I have come across indicate that the mashing occurs after the frying and the pan returned to the heat after additions such as stock in order to break the beans down further, develop and mix the flavours, and dry out the bean paste to the desired consistency. This method seems to make the most sense when making the healthier modern versions. This is the first time I've come across a 'mash then fry' approach. Is this possibly a difference between the very old lard-laden authentic recipes and the less fatty modern ones that usually require the addition of stock and therefore a different method? I think this needs clarifying somehow because at the moment the article is contradicting itself with no explanation. Ideas anyone?

cheers - Drywontonmee 06:56, 11 June 2007 (UTC)