A sensory comparison must be usable by its audience

Atomic Statement

A sensory analogy communicates only as far as the audience can interpret its reference; translate unfamiliar analogies into accessible observations while naming what is lost.

Claims

Counterpoints

Files & media

Literature Notes

MacLean’s Miscellany — Tasting language, audience and comparison

Maturity

Developing

Note Type

Synthesis

Originating Working Notes

Rationale and Implications

Review Notes

Root Area

Whiskey

Status

Active

Argument

MacLean’s discussion of audience-dependent vocabulary and unfamiliar cultural references (2016, printed pp. 256–259; PDF 258–261) suggests treating a tasting note as a communication task. “Smooth” also needs an explicit comparison or a more specific observation. This is a synthesis of practitioner guidance, not a tested communication intervention.

Provenance

MacLean’s Miscellany — Tasting language, audience and comparison

Connections

Descriptor words are retrieval tools, not molecule assignments distinguishes a descriptor from chemical identification.

Shared sensory vocabulary does not establish assessor calibration distinguishes shared language from demonstrated calibration.

Counterpoint

Translation can remove cultural resonance or precision. Retain the original term alongside its explanation when that loss matters.

Fresh source audit

The complete available-text traversal strengthens this communication principle without establishing an experimentally validated intervention. PDF 259's descriptor list was visually checked; PDF 258–261 supplies the audience and comparison discussion. Preserve culturally rich metaphors alongside explanations; a descriptor is neither proof of a molecule nor proof of a production method. The larger source remains incomplete because the original PDF and most visual content are unavailable.