I think that this type of question is not off topic for the site.
If this was a pure replacement of a dictionary service, I would be against it. But note that cooking terms seldom have a 1:1 translation between languages. OK, so probably a fruit has a name in the languages of all countries where it is available. But when you move into cooked goods, the matters get murky. This is because different cuisines think in different ways about food. Therefore, pure translations can not be available, or might be plain wrong even when wildly accepted. For example, the English category "cake" does not encompass the same foods as the German category "Kuchen", although there is a significant overlap and no better terms, so everybody uses it as the translation. But for a cook following a recipe not internationalized for his/her tradition, it can be very important to know the details of these differences, to avoid pitfalls and use of the wrong ingredients.
As we can't very well predict which single-word-translations will result in an interesting explanation of culinary differences and which ones in a single word in a given language, I would say keep them all, unless they become a nuisance and need stricter control. After all, such a translation is something a large group of cooks is interested in, and there is no rule that a question should be interesting to everybody on the site. The number of home cooks using liquid lecithine is probably smaller than the number of Hindu speaking cooks. The "too localized" criterion (which was removed due to frequent misunderstanding) is meant for cases when the answer is probably going to be useless for anybody but the OP and maybe a handful of people who know him/her personally.
That being said, I think that while such questions should be tolerated, there is no need to specifically invite them. So I am very happy with Jefromi's idea to make it a synonym of the much broader language.