• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Hot Dogs, Sandwiches, Cereal & Soup

Is Cereal a Soup?

  • Yes

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • No

    Votes: 27 100.0%

  • Other - Please specify

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    27
Yithian said:
One of the above links claimed Oreo Cookies as a sandwich - insanity.
Click to expand...
In that case, the bloke standing on the corner advertising Pizza Hut is also a sandwich. If I find my car blocked into a parking space by 2 inconsiderately-parked cars, is it a Toyota sandwich? Pah!

The sausage roll argument at the end of the last page makes an interesting point - if you pop into Greggs early in the morning, you can have a bacon roll, which is a bun with bacon in it (and therefore, to me, a sandwich) or you can have the same but with sausage, yet I couldn't call that a "sausage roll", because that name has been taken by the more common pastry product. The best I can come up with is "sausage breakfast roll" to denote the one with bread and a dab of HP sauce. I digress... I don't think that this scenario constitutes a "Schrodinger's sausage" problem, as both can clearly exist in the same branch of Greggs at the same time, and you could eat either, or both.

The early example on this thread of a whole chicken between 2 slices of bread is however, to me at least, describable as a "Schrodinger's Chicken" situation. That is, a thought experiment purely designed to show how silly we get when we take a perfectly sensible question, and then take it to illogical extremes.
 
Peripart said:
The best I can come up with is "sausage breakfast roll" to denote the one with bread and a dab of HP sauce. I digress...
Click to expand...

I'd say - sausage in a roll, rather than sausage roll.

Breakfast roll? What if it's being eaten at lunchtime?
 
Swifty said:
Good point .. and not everyone calls a rounded bit of baked bread a 'roll' .. depending on where you live, it's also a 'bap' or a 'bun' .. this regional pedantic description has caused me problems in the past so I've learned to specifically describe what I want my bacon or what not to be inside when ordering it around the country ..
Click to expand...

It was cobs where I grew up, it's all baps down 'ere.
 
Ermintrude said:
... Note to self in the future: can we blame the Americans? For this terminological indeterminancy? ...
Click to expand...

Oh, hell yes - we dare you to ignore the peril of pushing on that subject again! We'll then kick your asses a third time for the sake of a dispute that helped motivate the first go-'round almost a quarter-millennium ago! :mad:

Do you not know, or at least not recall, the forgotten history of overbearing British impositions relating to meat-on-bread, and how those impositions inflamed our forefathers to take up arms?

Let's review ...

An aristocrat - one eventually regarded as a model of corruption and incompetence - spends considerable portions of his time languishing at the gaming table. Too preoccupied a fop to be bothered with trivialities such as proper meals, he adopts the habit of ordering his servants to take good beef and sliced bread (staples to a high-born wastrel; luxuries to his long-suffering underlings) and place a proper helping of the former between two slabs of the latter - insisting that the handheld sustenance be constructed and configured exactly thus. To further nurture his vanity, this earl accepted the association of his title with this narrowly-prescribed snack as if it were truly novel - ignoring the fact that similar portable breaded victual-vehicles had been in use among commoners worldwide for centuries.

Once his purported invention became widely known in Britain and the colonies (Grosley's English edition of A Tour to London, 1772), the stage was set for the then-inevitable gambit - assuring the Crown accrued a cut from this new fad.

The little-known Sandwich Act forbade all forms of portable food save those assembled to the earl's arbitrary personal specifications and burdened colonists with Sandwich Tax administrivia on a daily basis. All substantial finger-food had to be of the earl's specific variety, and redcoats publicly destroyed any and all non-compliant menu items to intimidate the colonials.

To add insult to injury, the Sandwich Act delegated prosecutorial jurisdiction for Sandwich Tax violators to the admiralty courts (following the example established under the earlier, reviled, Sugar and Stamp Acts). This effectively closed the loop on the lunacy, because the First Lord of the Admiralty at that point was none other than the Earl of Sandwich - the same ne'er-do-well whose sole unsullied reputation was based on the taxed foodstuff!

It was therefore no surprise that firebrand Thomas Paine, in his seminal Common Sense, included a deeply-coded allusion to this particular episode's critical role in the road to revolution:

"... there is a peculiar delicacy, from whom, or in what manner, this business must first arise ..."

Bring it on! Just be sure you bear in mind:

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." - Santayana

:evil:
 
EnolaGaia said:
Do you not know, or at least not recall, the forgotten history of overbearing British impositions relating to meat-on-bread, and how those impositions inflamed our forefathers to take up arms?
Click to expand...

Ah, yes indeed, who could forget the 'no digestion without representation' precept.

Underpinned of course by the "Don't step on my sandwich!" doctrine, esposed by the fast food founding fathers.

I was thinking more, though, of the sometimes skew-mapped snack-and-foodstuffs nom nom nominations that can differentially-delineate delicacies eaten either side of the Atlantic.

My suspicion is that a key uber-liberal application of the term 'sandwich' (meaning, really, British burgers and baps) crept into the UK via Ronald McDonald. The guy is just a total clown.

We've now become substantially reprogrammed to call what are really (for us) chips, by the fries word. But we shall never give up our crisps. We shall fight them on this vital point...when the chips are down, even fundamental differences of flavour/flavor factions are put aside...
 
Ermintrude said:
Ah, yes indeed, who could forget the 'no digestion without representation' precept.

Underpinned of course by the "Don't step on my sandwich!" doctrine, esposed by the fast food founding fathers ...
Click to expand...

Few now recall the inaugural version of the colonial rebels' serpent flag didn't include the eventual "Don't Tread on Me" caption, but rather referred directly to the Sandwich Act outrage using the then-common label for such snacks:

"Don't Bread-on-Meat!"
 
Ermintrude said:
Yeah, but, no, but, yeah....there are many states (well, a few)
a 'morning roll' (bap) containing a sausage is called a "roll'n'sausage". Certainly in Scotland..

And lorne sausage is called 'square sausage on a roll'
Click to expand...

Neither of which is sausage roll. And your 'morning roll' containing a sausage is exactly the same as one of the existing states.

oldrover said:
Forget the bread, that's not the determining factor.
Click to expand...

Much as I enjoyed your fulsome analysis you are entirely wrong. It's the substance doing the sandwiching which is the determining factor.

Consider a sausage placed between 2 slices of Mothers Pride. Now consider the same sausage but placed between a roll which has been sawn in half.

Only one could possibly be called a hot dog. Or sausage roll.

If you ordered one but got the other, would you consider that acceptable?
 
If I cut a pizza slice into a sort of square shape and fold it half, or even two seperate squarish shapes and stick them together, I reckon that would make it a sandwich .. anyway, as you were .. (I'm cooking a pizza at the moment).
 
Swifty said:
If I cut a pizza slice into a sort of square shape and fold it half, or even two seperate squarish shapes and stick them together, I reckon that would make it a sandwich .. anyway, as you were .. (I'm cooking a pizza at the moment).
Click to expand...
I think it would be a calzone, but I've only learned that since eating at Frankie and Bennies!
 
I guess kebab in pita also can be classified as sandwich.

Just reading this thread makes me hungry.
 
hunck said:
If you ordered one but got the other, would you consider that acceptable?
Click to expand...

No, I'd be crushed.

But, that's just an emotional response. You need to be detached in a situation like this.

The other day my mate and I went to burger van to get hot dogs. I went up and asked the man who replied, 'I don't have any hot dogs, but I can do you sausages'. So that's a professional's take on it. A sausage in a roll can not be considered a hot dog.

You are right though in saying it's what's doing the sandwiching being the determining factor, but only in terms of that particular snack at that particular time.

You could a burger between two slices of Mighty White and that would make it a burger sandwich. Just as if you put a piece of chicken between the same and you'd a chicken sandwich. But a chicken outside of that isn't a sandwich is it? It's a chicken. The same as a burger will always be a burger.

As to the sausage in a roll or sausage roll, we have a way of dealing with that. We say sausage (pause) roll to indicate a roll with a sausage in it. And a sausage roll for a sausage roll. But sometimes we say sausage roll sausage roll for the latter for emphasis.

Vardoger said:
I guess kebab in pita also can be classified as sandwich.
Click to expand...

Oh really?
 
oldrover said:
Forget the bread, that's not the determining factor.

Taxonomy is where it'll be decided.

...Sandwiches, are a 'Wastebasket taxon', into which are placed any generally, if not exclusively, diurnal food stuff principally defined by a doughy exoskeleton. While the Weinnerids, hot dogs, wurtzels and false wurtzels are firmly rooted in the wider burger family the Teresimorphia or Minceoformes. Their exact phylogeny however has traditionally been problematically enigmatic. Most contentious has been their occasional inclusion in the Hesperoteresians or true burgers. An alternate proposal has been that they form the polyphyletic sister clade to Hesperoteresia, the Teresidermiads.

All extant true burgers are firmly rooted in the crown group Hesperoteresia whose most basal member is the immediate descendant of, but not including, Steak Tartare (Teres mongoliensis) which arrived in Western Europe from central Asia in the late Holocene.

There certainly were Teresimorphids in Western Europe already at this time, the koftids, rissoles, true pasties, Farcimenopmorphia (true and pseudo sausages), terrines, polpetturyids, including the Scandinavian meatball (Polpettis borealis) and the indigenous British meatball (Faggot faggot) being already well established.

However, like the extinct Mediterranean Isicia omentata, these are all non ancestral forms to the Hesperoteresians and, with the exception of the outlying Farcimenoformes, form a monophyletic group known as the false burgers or Pseudoteresinidae.

While there is firm indication that Weinnerids share strong affinities with Hesperoteresia, their distinct gross morphological similarity to the true Farcimeninae has always been problematic, most especially the sharing a conspicuous dermis, a feature otherwise unknown in any other Teresimorph.

Thus fine phylogentic inference reinforces the view that the Weinneridae represents a monophyletic subdivision within Hesperoteresia is not well supported. And that the otherwise novel features exhibited in Weinnerids and Fascimeninae are not explainable in terms of coincidental phenotypic homoplasy.

Instead it is proposed that the Weinnerids form a distinct polyphyletic group and sister taxa to the true burgers, Stemming from a probable hybridisation event between the proposed most basal Hesperoteresid Teres hiedelbergensis and an as yet unidentified Farcimenoform, where information and material was transported across the dermis....
Click to expand...
You sound like the David Attenborough of sandwiches! Brilliant!
 
Coal said:
With lavish mayo, chopped capers, black pepper and sliced gherkins...nom nom nom
Click to expand...

Very continental. I tend to go for the tomato or brown sauce option but yours sounds good.

oldrover said:
The other day my mate and I went to burger van to get hot dogs. I went up and asked the man who replied, 'I don't have any hot dogs, but I can do you sausages'. So that's a professional's take on it. A sausage in a roll can not be considered a hot dog.
Click to expand...

Which leads to the question, what is a hot dog?
 
I don't want to throw a spanner in the works regarding sausage rolls and sausages in a roll, but do remember that a sausage roll (pastry) doesn't contain an actual sausage but piped sausage meat. And yes, I very nearly typed 'butt piped' just then.


hunck said:
Which leads to the question, what is a hot dog?
Click to expand...

What's a hot dog? WTF is this?? ( the cooking starts at 1:32, before that it's fire making)

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top