Modern golf clubs: irons not made of iron, woods not made of wood.
Modern piano keys are not ivories.
More musical misnomers; many woodwinds are not made of wood, many brass instruments aren’t made of brass (or even any metal) and some reeds aren’t made of reed.
In fact, actual paper made from wood also is a misnomer, because it’s not made from papyrus.
That seems like the etymological fallacy to me. Paper does not mean papyrus.
A ‘pigskin’, AKA a ‘football’, as in “Can you hand me the pigskin”, is made of cowhide not pig skin.
Similarly, the football in soccer is often still called “das Leder” (the leather) by German sportscasters, though it’s been made from synthetics for a long time.
These are not easy. I think these are the only ones we have come up with so far that fulfill OP’s strict criterion of “objects”…
A glass
Glasses (i.e. spectacles)
A tin
A (pencil) lead
A marshmallow
A piece of gum (does this mean a piece of crystal counts too?)
A wood or iron (club)
A marble
The ivories
A film (and possibly a tape?)
A pigskin
Powder is an uncountable noun (except in the “take a powder” sense)… I think an “object” is generally a countable noun, although arguably “a piece of gum” should work.
(Discounting the fact that “baby powder” was not a serious suggestion anyway… )
And it’s not made of babies.
At least not since 1778, when Professor Tobias Talc invented the substitute baby, made from powder pressed into the shape of “a right beatific cherub, to be displayed by Lords and Ladies to whom the gifte of procreation hath been denied.”
[/needlessly pedantic]
Plastic silverware
Silverware is not a material.
I think I agree with this list – except I might be even stricter. Some things on this list are never made from the material they’re named for any more, and the meaning has changed. If I ordered a cocoa with marshmallows, and I was given a root vegetable, that’d be bizarre. Whereas a glass made of glass, a paper written on paper, a film filmed on film–these are all perfectly modern objects.
But yeah, it’s definitely cool to see the ones that work; thanks, y’all! And I know my last post was humorless. I figured that sort of rapid response might clarify what I was looking for.
The chamois that your neighbor is using to wipe down his mid-life-crisis '67 Mustang is probably not made from a chamois, a species of “goat-antelope native to mountains in Europe.”
Nor is a sponge likely made from a sponge.
“Bones”, as in dice or dominoes. Originally made of bone, now primarily plastic.
How about an iron (as in a clothes iron)?
In an episode of Frasier Daphne tells somebody that bread is known as ‘nature’s sponge’.
But there is still a fair chance that a sponge is the exoskeleton of a sponge.
Well, I think that the most important parts of an iron are still made from steel, aren’t they?
The paper in a “scientific paper,” as per the OP, morphed into a sense of an article or essay as early as the 1660s. It is far more of a concept than a physical object like powder.
I was of course being facetious with baby powder, which is not made of babies any more than gunpowder is made of guns. But if you want to parse connotations, I’m eager to play that game.
For a real suggestion, what about fur coat? They still are made but in increasingly small numbers.
LHoD seemingly prefers examples where the original version is still in use (glass glasses), but is no longer the exclusive (or necessarily dominant) type. So yeah, you can find sponge sponges, just probably not in the cleaning section at WalMart.