"Каша слишком сладкая."

Short answer: honestly, I don't know, which is why I haven't been reporting it and have been trying to train myself to use cereal or porridge instead :-/

In my experience, kasha Russian style is really not exactly synonymous with porridge or cereal, but I don't know if it's actually a common enough word for English speakers to make it a valid translation...? And porridge is probably the closest widespread English word that covers similar ground to kasha, and definitely what we call porridge generally would fit within the wider meaning of what would be called kasha.

Most English speakers would see porridge and think quite narrowly of oats, possibly cooked with milk, eaten for breakfast, but if you cooked buckwheat and call it buckwheat porridge people would know what it meant.

I think probably the only people I personally know who would use kasha in English are either Eastern Europeans, study(ied) a Slavic language, or picked it up from someone who fits in one or other of those categories.

I guess you could argue that anyone who knows to translate it as kasha will know it well enough to recognise it as a type of porridge, so you're not going to be teaching anyone 'wrong' by making it an acceptable translation? I guess that's a judgement call.

Yeah, the short answer is really that I don't know, which is unhelpful but sadly truthful. Sorry. I won't complain if you start allowing it ;-p but in the meantime I'm trying to retrain my fingers to see каша and write porridge ;-)

I'm waffling! ... and now I've made myself hungry!

I would definitely allow it. I sometimes see kasha at American supermarkets here in Boston. Mostly very metropolitan or very Slavic people would use it though (not that the two are by any means exclusive) seeing as it isn't a very popular food.

It's definitely my first choice for the translation (and in the US, "porridge" is a rarely-used word outside of fairy tales - I've been feeling kind of weird using that.)

I've seen kasha sometimes in English translations of Russian books. I'd say it should be accepted.

I don't think kasha would generally be translated as porridge, which as said, is to the anglophonic mind quite narrowly oats cooked in milk (or sometimes water, but usually milk). I do notice upon checking that GT translates it that way, though.

Since it's a close equivalent, I'd still accept porridge, but perhaps not as a best translation, since it creates a response of "But this is not kasha" / "But this is not porridge"

I'd certainly suggest accepting kasha since we don't really have an exact name for that dish. We have things like buckwheat / pearl barley and so forth, but "we" tend to use them to bulk out soups rather than as a dish alone - seeing them more as an ingredient than something to be eaten as a meal.

I'd also suggest accepting kasha as per general good practice when not having an extant translation / cultural presence of the thing in question, outside from as a cultural import that kept its name.

For example, in English we say "omelette" / "omelet", not "pancake", since an omelette is not a pancake; it's just that they look a bit like each other and have similar ingredients.

Most on topic regards kasha itself, if it's of any value as an international standard, the EN wiki article about kasha just calls it kasha:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kasha

I think you should. The word kasha is not a super-common English word, but it definitely has a life of its own!

The course is made for the American English speakers, and there's a term for "каша" - "hot cereal".

Большое Спасибо :)