So, this is tangentially nutrition related, and I wanted to get your opinions.

I went out for pho With a friend of mine today and apparently I offended him greatly with my order.

He's Vietnamese tried and true, and this DOES relate to our argument.

I was remembering Mark's recent post on whether or not pho is primal. He said he orders his with reduced noodles and several people commented that they order theirs without noodles at all, and with extra veggies and meat. I decided to ask the waitress to hold the noodles and put extra meat and veggies in it. She said that was fine.

When the waitress had left my friend turned to me and said "We're at a pho restaurant and you didn't order pho. Are you stupid?"

"How did I not order pho? We both have great bowls of soup coming. I just got mine sans noodles."

"Pho means 'noodle broth' dude. Without noodles it's no longer pho."

"What? How so?"

"God man, I'm so embarrassed. I take my friend out for pho and he doesn't order pho. Way to make the Vietnamese guy look like an idiot. I can't ever have pho with you again. Ugh, why do you have to offend my culture like that?"

So, uh, I'm still not sure why he made such a big deal out of it. Yeesh. He was really pissed at me.

Do the noodles REALLY define what pho is? Does a lack of noodles mean that it immediately ceases to be pho (since the word TECHNICALLY means "noodle broth"), or am I missing something here?