Sarcocarp vs Pulp - What's the difference?
sarcocarp | pulp |
(botany) The fleshy part of a stone fruit, situated between the skin, or epicarp, and the stone, or endocarp, as in a peach.
Any fruit which is fleshy throughout.
(Webster 1913)
(fiction) Of or pertaining to pulp magazines; in the style of a pulp magazine or the material printed within such a publication.
* {{quote-usenet
, year = 1997
, monthday = July 22
, author = Eric Gimlin
, email =
, title = Re: Annual theme '98
, id = 33D504B4.105@swbell.net
, url = https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.arts.comics.dc.universe/h6fDoLuqLi4/pgvPYWi2DZIJ
, group = rec.arts.comics.dc.universe
}}
* {{quote-usenet
, year = 2003
, monthday = January 3
, author = Mark Wheatley
, email =
, title = Re: PULP 2003 READING
, id = 3E159FC7.70409@insightstudiosgroup.com
, url = https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.pulp/lPi5SkZJfHo/KeinLoXh5_4J
, group = alt.pulp
}}
A soft, moist, shapeless mass or matter.
A magazine or book containing lurid subject matter]] and being characteristically [[print, printed on rough, unfinished paper.
The soft center of a fruit
The soft center of a tooth
A mixture of wood, cellulose and/or rags and water ground up to make paper.
Mass of chemically processed wood fibres (cellulose).
As nouns the difference between sarcocarp and pulp
is that sarcocarp is (botany) the fleshy part of a stone fruit, situated between the skin, or epicarp, and the stone, or endocarp, as in a peach while pulp is a soft, moist, shapeless mass or matter.As an adjective pulp is
(fiction) of or pertaining to pulp magazines; in the style of a pulp magazine or the material printed within such a publication.As a verb pulp is
to make, or be made into pulp .sarcocarp
English
Noun
(en noun)pulp
English
(wikipedia pulp)Adjective
(en adjective)- The Nightwing annual had what felt like a very 'pulp-ish' plot, and the Superman annual was great, with a very pulp plot and a incredible Doc Savage tribute cover.
- Rather than Asimov I might suggest Stanley Weinbaum (since he died young and early in his career, he is far more "pulp " than Asimov - and remarkably readable - there is a LANCER collection of some of his short stories).