Linguistic integrity? Royal order of linguistic prejudice?

People often assume to know my position on English Only laws and proposals - but my take is nuanced and complicated. Linguistic integrity is an interesting idea - but it hasn't been tried yet.

WHY do Asian menus refer to squid by an Italian word? The picture comes from a Japanese restaurant - examples like it can be found in most Chinese menus. Is the assumption that Americans developed a taste for squid only because they don't know what it really is? Chinese menus should call it Yo Ewe, (乌贼 or "oil fish," which reminds you of the high cholesterol). I'd like to know what it's called in Japanese (FYI: Octopus is called "taco" in Japan). And do people who support English only legislation eat Mexican food? If so what do they call tortillas? Or tacos? Are there "English" words for these?

I suspect a royal order of linguistic prejudice. In America monolingual speakers code-switch according to a hierarchy of non-English languages: French and German come first, followed by other languages spoken by white WASPish countries, then Japanese, other Asian languages - the least popular language to gather words from is Chinese. This explains why there are so few cognates and why Americans use the word "Kangi" in the least appropriate circumstances.

"Kan gi" (or Kanji) - is Japanese language way to say "Chinese characters," as in (Kan = Chinese) + (gi = characters) - but American hipsters will refer to Chinese characters as "kangi," even when discussing texts in and/or from China! Boing boing - one of my favorite blogs - is a great place to find this. See comments - here - where if you scroll to comment #57 you can see where I have broached this issue , or here (scroll thu comments) where moderators and commentators alike use a Japanese phrase to say the word Chinese when talking about China. It amounts to China bashing.

In America, there are no small eggs.

We do something illogical with in American culture regarding our language used to describe sizes. An Ivy League educated linguist I worked for in Taiwan used to ponder about this, and ask me, "Why, in America, don't you have small eggs? Some recipes call for one or two small eggs, but the grocery stores only carry medium, large, extra large and jumbo. What happened to the small eggs?"

She wasn't a native English speaker - but she was a citizen and she lived in the states about 20 years, raised a couple native English speakers, and held advanced degrees (including a PhD) in English language and linguistics. This issue seriously intrigued her and has been on my mind for well over a decade.

The issue may be fairly recent. My grandparents (both born before the 1920's here in the US) insisted on buying small minnows for crappie fishing because even larger fish may prefer a small bait. I remember buying small minnows. I defy you to go into any bait store today and find small minnows.

I just ordered a small chicken noodle soup for my toddler at a chain restaurant. The clerk was so concerned, "Oh my. I'm sorry. We only have medium and large." His concern touched me, but isn't medium half-way between to extremes - small and large. How is it logically possible to have only two sizes and one of them is medium?

The descriptive linguist in me speculates that these words have become homonyms of themselves - in effect a sort of headless noun. Medium is a proper name for a choice - not a description of a size. So I said, "Oh, you mean "Medium" with a capital 'M', I meant small with a lower-case 's'"... which caused him to just stop talking and give me the soup - which btw came in a cup not much bigger than a thimble.

Or is it a popular/cultural fetish that equates large with good and small with inferior? This isn't always so. Small vegetables often have a better texture and flavor - and fine restaurants prefer them. btw - I grew up eating baseball bat sized zuccini - but they should be picked at 6-8 inches or smaller. I worked on a commercial vegetable farm that supplied some of the finest cafe's on the plaza and had the chance to talk with some chefs.

If anyone has insight - or similar experiences - or an opinion re: my linguistic theory, please weigh in.

And yes, I know Pinker uses "headless nouns" almost exclusively to discuss idiosyncratic pluralization - but that doesn't mean the phenomena is restricted to that context. If you have an equally viable explanation share. A comedian could have fun with this coming at it from a cultural perspective.