This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential to the operation of the site, while others help to improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used. For more information, please see the ProZ.com privacy policy.
Cookie settings
häusliche Strukturen
Verbundstellenvereinbarung
This question was closed without grading. Reason: Other
Mar 31, 2017 09:47
7 yrs ago
2 viewers *
German term

Rohkostqualität

German to English Marketing Food & Drink Raw food
What is one to do with this term? Time and again, one sees it translated as 'raw food quality'. However, to my ears, this makes it sound like a specific classification. It sounds like a quality threshold that raw ingredients are required to meet (e.g. 'Erdmandeln in Rohkostqualität'). However no such classification exists, either in Germany or the US or UK. Ingredients are simply either raw or they aren't.

My inclination is to simply translate this term as 'raw'? Does anyone agree? And if not, how would you translate this term in a way that avoids the problem I've described above.

Thanks.
Proposed translations (English)
4 +1 raw
4 +1 of finest unrefined quality
4 unprocessed
3 natural/wholly natural/purely natural
References
Whole foods are foods that are unprocess...
Change log

Mar 31, 2017 10:11: Steffen Walter changed "Field" from "Other" to "Marketing"

Discussion

Marc Rothman (asker) Apr 4, 2017:
Terrible, isn't it? There was no mechanism for indicating that no satisfactory answer had been arrived at and at the same time to leave further comments and thanks. The options were either to grade the answers (which was not appropriate in this case) or to close the discussion without grading and without being to leave any further comments. I therefore had to choose the latter. A more appropriate target for your ire might be the user interface, which forces users into choices that look rude.

For the record, all suggestions have been gratefully received, even if none was entirely satisfactory.
David Hollywood Apr 3, 2017:
super :) closed without any explanation love it :)
Björn Vrooman Apr 2, 2017:
Back to a food example:
https://www.regenbogenkreis.de/inspiration/gesundheit-und-er...

"Kakao in Rohkostqualität" only shows up in the heading; further below, it reads "roher Kakao" or "Rohkakao." Consequently, the "in ...qualität" doesn't mean something like has the same properties/is of the same quality as, but it merely confirms that this product actually is what you'd consider a raw produce.

The translation into English may be a bit trickier, but I'd see this as a question of who your target audience is. If this is indeed addressed to people from the "raw food movement," who have a (somewhat) clear definition of what "raw" means to them, then there is no point to picking any other word. However, if it is supposed to appeal to the "general public," I'd favor a more marketing-heavy approach, i.e., describing it as "purely natural" or "entirely natural" (see my link below).

I don't know Marc's source document, so I can't tell.

Best wishes

BTW, this here got me confused:
"Rohkostqualität is an adjective"
You mean it should be one in English? The German's just a prepositional phrase (preposition + compound noun).
Björn Vrooman Apr 2, 2017:
@Ramey As so often, I'm mainly focused on explaining the German. It may seem paradoxical to you, but I don't agree with your explanation, although I'm leaning towards your answer.

Let me explain (and maybe Marc is interested as well):
Just add one word ("gewohnter") and an asterisk to your search, as I did here:
https://www.google.de/?gfe_rd=cr&ei=XoffWOWkGoTZ8AehmKyYAg#q...

You should be able to see three links called
"Audi Original Zubehör - Zubehör in gewohnter Audi Qualität"
"Geekserver – Die volle Freiheit in gewohnter cyon-Qualität"
"ECOLINE - INNENTÜREN IN ÖSTERREICHISCHER TOP-QUALITÄT"

[All three show up as headings on Google; last one w/o "gewohnter," but equally valid as an example]

Obviously, the first doesn't mean it is of the same quality as an Audi product; no, it actually is an Audi product.

The second doesn't mean it's a server that offers the same features as a cyon one; no, it actually is a server offered by that company.

The third one, of course, doesn't mean that it's on par with Austrian products; no, these actually are items manufactured in Austria.
Ramey Rieger (X) Apr 2, 2017:
@Björn uncooked, not unheated. That's the point of many raw foodies, the low-temperature warming does NOT constitute cooking. Rohkostqualität is an adjective, which is a very flexible area. My main point is that 'raw' does not cover it. Whole, yes, integral, yes, natural, yes, unrefined, yes, non-homogenized, yes/yes.
Björn Vrooman Apr 1, 2017:
"It is not a definition that, as far as I can see, has general currency. "

I just thought I post it, since I don't know who your client is. Did you see the link from Switzerland? There you have another definition. Apparently, opinions are pretty divided about what constitutes "Rohkost": http://eatsmarter.de/ernaehrung/ernaehrungsarten/rohkost

The only definite criterion is that it's nothing heated above 40 °C (cooking is like a 100, so...).

"The other problem is that this definition (no additional intervention) contradicts the suggestion offered by Ramey (see below) that the produce is uncooked but may have been subject to some kind of processing (e.g. drying)."

I think I understand Ramey's point, but I don't agree with her. "in ...qualität" could (emphasis on "could") mean that one product has the same properties as another (read: "as if it were"). However, this doesn't seem to be the case here. It's raw. An entirely different example:
https://www.schlueter.de/schlueter-produkte-in-edelstahlqual...

Here, "in Edelstahlqualität" does not mean that the material is of the same quality/has the same properties as stainless steel; no, the steel is actually part of it.
Ramey Rieger (X) Apr 1, 2017:
@Marc Yes, 'roh' means 'raw' or uncooked and Rohkostqualität means having the same quality (attributes) as raw. BUT there IS an English translation, it's just NOT raw, it's natural, whole, pure - although WHOLE would be the best bet as it is not only tried and true (whole foods), but infers the ingredient, whatever it is, is still in its raw or whole form.
Marc Rothman (asker) Apr 1, 2017:
Björn – under the definition you have provided, Rohkostqualität means not just raw, but that the produce in question has not been subject to any interference (e.g. GM). That is a useful and valid distinction. The problem is, as you point out, that is the company's own definition. It is not a definition that, as far as I can see, has general currency. The other problem is that this definition (no additional intervention) contradicts the suggestion offered by Ramey (see below) that the produce is uncooked but may have been subject to some kind of processing (e.g. drying). So there still doesn't really seem to be any common agreement as to what this term means exactly.
Björn Vrooman Apr 1, 2017:
There's of course this explanation in English:
"Raw food is, technically speaking, food that has not been heated above 48 degrees centigrade (117 degrees Fahrenheit). This usually means uncooked foods, or more specifically, foods in their natural state – nothing more, nothing less."
http://therawfoodcoach.com/what-is-raw-food/

Considering what I wrote below, I'm just not sure you wouldn't need at least another qualifier besides "raw" (if you don't want to take one of Ramey's suggestions).
Björn Vrooman Apr 1, 2017:
Hello Marc In reply to this part of your question:
"However no such classification exists, either in Germany or the US or UK. Ingredients are simply either raw or they aren't."

Maybe not an official one. However, there are labels such as this one:
"Was bedeutet 'Rohkost-Qualität' bei Keimling? Das Siegel Rohkost-Qualität finden Sie bei sehr vielen unserer Produkte. Z.B. An den Anbau unserer Trockenfrüchte stellen wir höchste Ansprüche. Diese gehen sogar über die Kriterien für ökologischen Landbau hinaus! Gen-Technik und Bestrahlung sind bei uns genauso tabu wie Trocknungs-Temperaturen von über 50° C. Hier haben wir noch weitere Informationen zu unserer Rohkost-Qualität zusammengestellt. Achten Sie daher bei Ihrem Einkauf von Rohkost auf dieses Siegel."

In this case, it's a company label. You'd need something more than "raw" here. It's not just the processing issue you need to be aware of.

Another example:
http://www.skr.ag/Def_Rohkost.pdf

This isn't just about "uncooked." It needs to be "entirely natural," as this business from NJ calls it (shows up a lot, BTW):
http://www.earthwisebeverages.com/natural.shtml

Not genetically modified, nothing.
Marc Rothman (asker) Mar 31, 2017:
If I understand you correctly, 'roh' means the food in its original state, straight form the field, whereas 'Rohkostqualität' means it has been processed in some way (e.g. dried) without actually being cooked. That is a valid distinction. The problem is, that distinction is not observed in English. As far as I can tell, the term 'raw' is widely used to mean both 'straight from the ground' and 'processed but uncooked'. (For example, there are many brands of crackers on the market that are marketed as 'raw', even though the ingredients have been processed. You can also buy 'raw brownies', which have obviously been processed.) So, to come back to the original point, there is no precise EN translation for 'Rohkostqualität'. The only valid translation is simply 'raw', unless you want to say something like 'raw but processed', but I have never seen that term used in the industry.
Ramey Rieger (X) Mar 31, 2017:
Raw, on the other hand, is merely uncooked, in a given food's original form, resh from the field or garden. The raw foods movement includes many processed foods and the heating issue is well-discussed. The quality of being raw has been 'stretched' to include any processing that does not detroy nutrients, minerals, etc. But this processing ramains a 'Rohkostqualität' not 'Rohkost' or raw. Fine with me, I did my vegan/raw foods stint 40 years ago - it was great!
Ramey Rieger (X) Mar 31, 2017:
SORRY! I didn't realize that was desired. Okay. Rohkostqualität denotes the purity or holistic quality of the food in question. The, let's stick with almond butter, has Rohkostqualität - the butter has all the nutritive, mineral and inherent attributes of a raw almond, of raw oil, of unrefined salt and whatever other ingredients are involved. Rohkostqualität speaks of the inherent attributes (qualities) of raw foods, not the characterstic of being raw itself. Is that clearer?
Marc Rothman (asker) Mar 31, 2017:
But you don't explain what the difference is.
Ramey Rieger (X) Mar 31, 2017:
Not just raw! the phrase in question refers to the nutrients/qualities/attributes/purities that can only be found in the raw form. It does NOT simply refer to the uncooked state. Taking the wonderful example of almond butter, thanks Sarah, this native english site uses 'natural' to express the nutrient quality of 'raw'.
"Try our top selling stone ground nut butters! Dastony uses an ancient method known as stone-grinding in the production of its products. Originally used for turning olives into luscious and delicious olive oil, stone-grinding applies pressure with powerful, perfectly smooth granite wheels. Although "old world" in its approach, it is revolutionary in terms of preserving nutrients and flavor. This natural preservation is accomplished by maintaing a consistently low temperature throughout the entire process. Another unmatched result of stone-grinding is a silky smooth texture and mouth feel that is truly beyond words."
More under http://www.rawguru.com/store/stone-ground-nut-butter-4-pack....

Proposed translations

12 mins

natural/wholly natural/purely natural

Often the marketing speak wants to avoid natural, as it has been cudgled to death. Still, one can qualify natural, but can't really qualify raw without getting loquacious.
Of course there is-
in their raw form
untreated
non-processed
Something went wrong...
+1
1 hr

raw

I've spent quite some time in vegan/health food/raw food Facebook groups and on recipe sites.
In this context, 'Rohkostqualität' does not neccessarily mean completely unprocessed and isn't simply a synonym for the tired 'natural' . It just means that none of the ingredients have been processed at temperatures higher than 40/42/49°C.

For instance, almond butter, which is arguably quite processed is still referred to as "Rohkostqualität" because the manufacturer guarantees that the ingredients have not been subjected to temperatures above 40°C. Yet there seems to be no official standard for that magical temperature cut-off, which also varies from 40°C to 49°C between manufacturers .
English speaking raw foodists simply express this concept with 'raw'

Sorry, this was a bit long winded, but I thought you might appreciate an opinion from someone who has has been part of raw food communities. I also added two links two websites of two popular raw food brands, Keimling and lovechock. You can see that only the specific definition of 'raw' applies to these foods, because they are definitely processed.
Example sentence:

Per Hand werden die Mühlen so langsam und schonend betrieben, dass die Kerne nie wärmer als 40 °C erhitzt werden. Auf diesem Weg bleiben alle wichtigen Nährstoffe erhalten, die Rohkost-Qualität ist gewährleistet und der Geschmack ist unbeschreiblich

A tempting, hand made raw chocolate bar, lovingly prepared using entirely natural ingredients, including raw cacao, almonds and figs.

Reference:

http://www.keimling.de/rohkost-mandelmus.html

https://superfoodies.com/collections/chocolate/products/lovechock-almond-fig?variant=7828768325

Note from asker:
In other words, then, it just means 'raw'!
Peer comment(s):
agree Axel Dittmer : or 'raw food quality', meaning the best quality organic produce ensures the raw food is of the highest quality
2 hrs
Something went wrong...
16 hrs

unprocessed

have read the whole lot and I would go with this

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 17 hrs (2017-04-01 02:49:09 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

or: nonprocessed

www.livestrong.com › Food and Drink

8 ene. 2014 - A nonprocessed food is any type of food found in its natural state that has not been altered. Fresh fruits and vegetables are perfect examples of.
Note from asker:
Except it contradicts the suggestion put forward by Ramey that Rohkostqualität means the produce is raw, but has been subject to some other process that doesn't involve cooking. So according to Ramey, 'unprocessed' is precisely what it *doesn't* mean.
Something went wrong...
+1
1 day 3 hrs

of finest unrefined quality

There's definitely a bit of branding flowing into that term. "Rohkostqualität" is not a bare bones purely descriptive term. Compare with source below:
http://www.ebay.com/p/Finest-Quality-Unrefined-Organic-Cocoa...

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2 days5 hrs (2017-04-02 15:19:24 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

The way I see it, the question of whether “raw” must be included in the translated term is a function of English usage. My impression is that English mostly uses “raw” to express a contrast with “cooked.” That’s too narrow for the German definition of Rohkost: “Rohkost umfasst in einem weiteren Sinne jede frische, unerhitzte Nahrung sowohl pflanzlicher als auch tierischer Herkunft. Im engeren, allerdings sprachlich dominierenden Sinne meint der Begriff nur unerhitzte oder sogar gänzlich unverarbeitete Nahrungsmittel pflanzlicher Herkunft.” https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rohkost
Note from asker:
Except it doesn't explicitly mention raw. I appreciate it *implies* raw, but I think raw needs to stated explicitly somewhere in the definition.
Peer comment(s):
agree Armorel Young : I think this is the closest suggestion so far.
19 hrs
Something went wrong...

Reference comments

1 hr
Reference:

Whole foods are foods that are unprocessed and unrefined, or processed and refined as little as possible, before being consumed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whole_food#cite_note-pmid10682...

IMHO, deepending on the context, this could be used or - as here - "produce in its natural state" as a combination of Ramey's and Michael's suggestions.
Peer comments on this reference comment:
agree Ramey Rieger (X) : I'll eat it!// ONLY ORGANICS, including meat products. It was just time to eat meat again, but I don't go whole hog on it. :-)!
4 hrs
The whole of it! And shame on you for abandoning your "raw food stint".
Something went wrong...
Close search
Term search
  • All of ProZ.com
  • Term search
  • Jobs
  • Forums
  • Multiple search