1 2 3 4  6 7 8 13
When does a loaf turn into a sandwhich? (I know, this is a slippery slope to the minefield of fervent philosophical ponderings...)

A sandwich has to have some sort of filling.

Steny '08!
Jukka Aho filted:

^^
Noticed it before you guys! Do I now get the privilege of OY!ing myself?

Depends...what were you trying to underline?...actually, I see it now, but what I originally saw highlighted was "n into a sand"..r

And I saw "oaf turn int". Dadgum proportional fonts!
dg (domain=ccwebster)
Teachers: We supply a list of EFL job vacancies
^^
Noticed it before you guys! Do I now get the privilege of OY!ing myself?

Depends...what were you trying to underline?...actually, I see it now, but what I originally saw highlighted was "n into a sand"..r

My view is that Usenet news is officially read with a fixed-width font (as it has been done since the dawn of the time, making it possible to draw ASCII art and such) and anyone who doesn't follow this tradition - e.g. by deliberately choosing a proportional font instead - is only asking for trouble. (Sadly, the new Google Groups Beta does not seem to have any respect even for this tradition but breaks things by displaying messages with a proportional font by default.)
Anyhow, the underlined non-word was "sandwhich".

znark
Thinking back, I realise that there was a time in my childhood when the nature of Australian white bread changed. ... plastic; - you couldn't buy it hot, as it was already many hours old by the time it was delivered;

This was because the slicing machines used couldn't work on hot bread, which would have been squashed instead of sliced.

Mervyn Doobov,
Jerusalem, Israel.
^^
Depends...what were you trying to underline?...actually, I see it now, but what I originally saw highlighted was "n into a sand"..r

My view is that Usenet news is officially read with a fixed-width font (as it has been done since the ... this tradition but breaks things by displaying messages with a proportional font by default.) Anyhow, the underlined non-word was "sandwhich".

Of course it was. It was done properly too.

Skitt (in Hayward, California)
www.geocities.com/opus731/
Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.
Charles Riggs infrared:

I do the same with hamburger buns and submarine rolls. ... that is acceptable is sourdough, I think you will agree.

Agreed for the sourdough, although I don't recall ever finding really good sourdough outside the San Francisco Bay area.

Me neither. I even doubt if much of the sourdough bread sold elsewhere can legitimately be called that. Am I to believe Irish bakers, for example, were sent a batch of San Francisco's dough or yeast to start the process of making more?

Charles Riggs
They are no accented letters in my email address
When does a loaf turn into a sandwhich? (I know, this is a slippery slope to the minefield of fervent philosophical ponderings...)

A sandwich has to have some sort of filling.

A filling not being a toping, some people contend. And are all types of fillings, or toppings, admissible?
No-one would argue about the sandwich nature of peanut butter sandwiches, BLTs, and many others. What gets complicated is naming, sandwich-like things that aren't such, accompanied by good reasons why. For example, I claim the traditional hamburger, i.e., a patty in a bun, is a sandwich and that sandwiches lacking an uppermost slice of bread are correctly named, but not everyone here agrees.

My reasons are that anything edible can make up the filling in a sandwich and that open-faced sandwiches are often eaten in the same way all other sandwiches are generally eaten, and they provide the same food value and have essentially the same taste, given the same ingredients, even though lacking a top. Furthermore, the goodness of a sandwich is due to its ingredients, and bread generally ranks lowest in the relative importance of those when considering the usual all-American sandwich, meaning I'd exclude any sandwiches originating in the middle-East since the bread taste and excellence is essential.

Often the bread is only there so you can pick the thing up, although I still contend Cap's Reuben isn't a Reuben since it isn't made from rye bread, a far nicer product than the mushy slices used there, so sometimes the bread is very important even in America, although I'd already excluded sandwiches not originating in the US, as I believe Reubens didn't. Still, their Reuben must be called a sandwich by any definition, but since I'm rambling a wee bit, I'll stop.
Charles Riggs
They are no accented letters in my email address
From what I have gathered, "loaf" is generally used for ... can you also use it for the above (flattish) examples?

In SupermarketE a single integral pita thing is a "loaf".

Less things are worse than SupermarketE.

Charles Riggs
They are no accented letters in my email address
Students: Are you brave enough to let our tutors analyse your pronunciation?
A sandwich has to have some sort of filling.

A filling not being a toping, some people contend. And are all types of fillings, or toppings, admissible?

No. It has to be a filling that has sufficient sandwich-fillingness in quality.
No-one would argue about the sandwich nature of peanut butter sandwiches, BLTs, and many others.

The interesting thing about peanut butter is that it can serve as both a filling and as a topping.
What gets complicated is naming, sandwich-like things that aren't such, accompanied by good reasons why. For example, I claim the ... is a sandwich and that sandwiches lacking an uppermost slice of bread are correctly named, but not everyone here agrees.

I agree with the latter contention, that there can be a sandwich despite the absence of an upper slice. (However, this does not mean that any single slice of bread with something on top of it is a "sandwich".) I do not agree that a hamburger is a sandwich, though a patty melt may be one. I also think it possible that a hamburger used to be a sandwich.
My reasons are that anything edible can make up the filling in a sandwich and that open-faced sandwiches are often ... provide the same food value and have essentially the same taste, given the same ingredients, even though lacking a top.

I do not entirely agree with your reasoning here, though I accept much of it. I think there are edible things that cannot serve as the filling of a sandwich. But otherwise, yes, open-faced sandwiches are sandwiches.

I also think that, perhaps unwittingly, you've explained why hamburgers are not sandwiches:
(1) Sandwiches are often sliced before they are eaten. This is rarely if ever done with hamburgers, where the integrality of the patty is considered to be of great importance.
(2) I am not sure that hamburgers typically provide the same food value as a normative sandwich. I see them as serving distinct dietary functions. (3) Hamburgers do not have essentially the same taste as normative sandwiches (there really is no normative sandwich that is close in concept to a hamburger).

Steny '08!
Show more