c4countdown

Explain your reasoning please.

Two halves - I'd've presumed it self-explanatory...

Michael Wallace wrote:Two halves - I'd've presumed it self-explanatory...

I wouldn't have asked you to explain your reasoning then, would I?

An empty plate if my son is about

Well, you could've inferred my reasoning from that comment - if you cut something in half you get two halves of the whole. I can't really explain it any more than that.

Edit: Presumably the idea of calling two half-sandwiches two whole sandwiches was an elaborate ploy developed by shops/mothers to trick people/children into thinking they were getting a meal out of one sandwich (two half-sandwiches) when we all know that lunch has to be at least two (proper) sandwiches, or four halves. Unless you count halves as wholes, in which case you want 8 sandwiches.

I think a more important question is - triangles or rectangles?

And what if you cut them into quarters??

Michael Wallace wrote:I think a more important question is - triangles or rectangles?

And what if you cut them into quarters??

HAS HAS HAS HAS HAS HAS to be triangles! They're so much more aesthetically pleasing. With rectangles the corners are so much more obtuse that when you bite into them you barely reach the big pocket of filling in the middle. Rectangles are a no go.

Sheesh I came out quite aspergic on the matter there, didn't I?

What exactly is a sandwich?

Dinos Sfyris wrote:

Michael Wallace wrote:I think a more important question is - triangles or rectangles?

And what if you cut them into quarters??

HAS HAS HAS HAS HAS HAS to be triangles! They're so much more aesthetically pleasing. With rectangles the corners are so much more obtuse that when you bite into them you barely reach the big pocket of filling in the middle. Rectangles are a no go.

Sheesh I came out quite aspergic on the matter there, didn't I?

Yeah, I'm with you on that, but triangles are harder work - you have to slice further.

As for Jon's question I'd say 2 sandwiches. I've grown to accept a cut in half triangle sandwich to be the standard norm for one sandwich, as you get in shops etc. Whole square sandwiches are a bit gay IMHO cause they take longer to eat. I like to take my time, get to know a sandwich, buy it a drink etc. Also if you hold them vertically there's too much to grab and sometimes all the filling falls to the bottom half which is very unsatisfactory.

When I am prime minister this shall be the law.

Michael Wallace wrote:triangles are harder work - you have to slice further.

Not if you buy them or get your mum to do it for you (but if she does rectangles I have to lock her in the abuse dungeon)

This seems to be turning into a question of whether you generally make your own sandwiches or have them made for you. From this I conclude that I am less posh than anyone who thinks a half-sandwich is a whole one.

If cutting a sandwich in half makes 2 sandwiches then it's possible to generate an unlimited number of sandwiches from 1 sandwich by repeatedly slicing it in half. I find this unsatisfying, so I went for the other one.

If you make a sandwich with 2 whole slices of bread, and then cut it in half, you get two sandwiches. If you cut each of the two new sandwiches in half, you get two sandwiches cut in half. The poll is not sufficiently detailed to cover this option. Boo. Be ashamed.

As Tom Bosley implied, it depends on your definition of sandwich. Is there a correct definition? If you cut an apple in half, you clearly get two halves of an apple. But if you cut a chunk of cheese in half, you don't have "two halves of a chunk of cheese", you clearly now have two chunks, albeit smaller ones.

So does a sandwich have a clear definition? What if you don't know the "history" of the bread it is cut from? If you're at a party, and there's a plate of little triangular sandwiches with different fillings, and someone asks you to "pass them a cheese sandwich", do you simply locate one of the little triangular sandwiches that has cheese in, or do you frantically try and rebuild whole slices to satisfy their request?

A sandwich is what you can make from one piece of bread. If you've used two bits and haven't cut anything, what you have is a big floppy mess and not a sandwich. Chopping your big floppy mess in half makes a sandwich, and chopping that in half makes half a sandwich.

I had no idea people might consider half a sandwich to be a sandwich. This is a momentous day for me.

Jon Corby wrote:So does a sandwich have a clear definition? What if you don't know the "history" of the bread it is cut from? If you're at a party, and there's a plate of little triangular sandwiches with different fillings, and someone asks you to "pass them a cheese sandwich", do you simply locate one of the little triangular sandwiches that has cheese in, or do you frantically try and rebuild whole slices to satisfy their request?

I've always gone for the "frantically try and rebuild whole slices" option. In the days when I was still invited to parties, that was.

It's just occurred to me as I'm eating my butties for dinner (same rule applies for a butty, I think?) that even as I eat my sandwich, I still have a sandwich left. Not half a sandwich. Until the last bite disappears, it's a whole (but small) sandwich.

Option B: TWO HALVES OF A SANDWICH.

Reasoning: If you chop a child in half, you don't get two children. Not functioning, working children anyway.

Matt Morrison wrote:Option B: TWO HALVES OF A SANDWICH.

Reasoning: If you chop a child in half, you don't get two children. Not functioning, working children anyway.

See chunk of cheese above.

Edit: Shit, that puts 'two halves' into the lead. Idiots.

These days there's one rule for chopping cheese in half, and another rule entirely for chopping children in half.
It's political correctness gone mad.

Jon Corby wrote:See chunk of cheese above.

But where do you draw the line? Or is even the tiniest two-bits-of-bread-with-stuff-in-the-middle a sandwich in your eyes?

This is going to be more popular than GOTW

Michael Wallace wrote:

Jon Corby wrote:See chunk of cheese above.

But where do you draw the line? Or is even the tiniest two-bits-of-bread-with-stuff-in-the-middle a sandwich in your eyes?

If you get sandwich in your eyes, rinse thoroughly with warm water.

Erm... kinda, yes. If a deli has a 'Valentine's Day' special of 'heart-shaped sandwiches', which are simply hearts cut from whole slices of bread, are you gonna accuse them of false advertising because it's not actually "a sandwich" by your stringent definition? Loaves can be different sizes - how would you know the difference if the crusts have been removed? Or does it cease to be a sandwich once crusts have been removed in your crazy little world?

Michael Wallace wrote:

Jon Corby wrote:See chunk of cheese above.

But where do you draw the line? Or is even the tiniest two-bits-of-bread-with-stuff-in-the-middle a sandwich in your eyes?

Absolutely, I'm with Jon on that. The sandwich title comes from the action of sandwiching, not a minimum size.

Jon Corby wrote:Erm... kinda, yes. If a deli has a 'Valentine's Day' special of 'heart-shaped sandwiches', which are simply hearts cut from whole slices of bread, are you gonna accuse them of false advertising because it's not actually "a sandwich" by your stringent definition? Loaves can be different sizes - how would you know the difference if the crusts have been removed? Or does it cease to be a sandwich once crusts have been removed in your crazy little world?

I've asked the other half this and I think he has won me round to this compromise:

If you make a sandwich and then cut it in half, that is two half sandwiches. If you buy any sort of bread-filling-bread item from a shop, or are presented with one by someone else, then that is a sandwich, regardless of its origins, since as you say, you don't know where it comes from.

But as for your original question - if I make a sandwich and cut it in half, then that's two half sandwiches.

Michael Wallace wrote:But as for your original question - if I make a sandwich and cut it in half, then that's two half sandwiches.

That wasn't my original question.

Edit: also, from your earlier post, are you claiming you are unable to make 'a sandwich' from a single piece of bread?

Cakes are quite often called 'sandwiches' without any other cake-based indicator attached that would distinguish them from bread sandwiches.
You cut these cakes into plenty of slices, a whole new headfuck.

Matt Morrison wrote:Cakes are quite often called 'sandwiches' without any other cake-based indicator attached that would distinguish them from bread sandwiches.

Srsly? I've never heard that.

This reminds me of a conversation I had in Starbucks once, which will probably amuse those of you who are down with Starbucks lingo.

Me: Could I have a cup of tea please?
Salesgirl: Full English?
Me: (puzzled) Urm, no. Tea please.
Salesgirl: Yes, Full English?
Me: Why would I want a full English with my tea? It's 6 o'clock in the evening.
Salesgirl: No, it's a type of tea.
Me: What type?
Salesgirl: I can't tell you.
Me: What?!
Salesgirl: I can't tell you for brand reasons.
Me: Right. So...
Salesgirl: Full English then?
Me: Great!


She went off to make it and I saw behind the counter that it was PG Tips, but I guess Starbucks employees are forbidden from mentioning the brand for some reason I can't imagine.

Jon Corby wrote:

Michael Wallace wrote:But as for your original question - if I make a sandwich and cut it in half, then that's two half sandwiches.

That wasn't my original question.

Edit: also, from your earlier post, are you claiming you are unable to make 'a sandwich' from a single piece of bread?

Lord Sandwich, whom invented the sandwich has got a lot to answer for. He could start a war.

(Sits back waiting for somebody to accuse me of getting my facts wrong, then I will be educated like wot you blokes are)

Jon Corby wrote:

Michael Wallace wrote:But as for your original question - if I make a sandwich and cut it in half, then that's two half sandwiches.

That wasn't my original question.

"If you cut a sandwich in half, what do you get?" - I presumed that if I was cutting a sandwich in half, then I'd also made it. It's not often I'm brought sandwiches to cut in half myself.

Jon Corby wrote:Edit: also, from your earlier post, are you claiming you are unable to make 'a sandwich' from a single piece of bread?

I think if you've made it from one slice of bread then that's a sandwich, but I think it depends where you're coming from (as in, if *I* personally make a sandwich, and then cut it in half, that's two half sandwiches - like Charlie I don't like the idea I can make an infinite (give or take) number of sandwiches just by cutting them in half over and over again).

Michael Wallace wrote:

Jon Corby wrote:See chunk of cheese above.

But where do you draw the line? Or is even the tiniest two-bits-of-bread-with-stuff-in-the-middle a sandwich in your eyes?

Yes. When I was younger I used to make loads of little sandwiches by cutting one big one into 16. Having remembered that, I'm now off to have a mini-sandwich feast.

Charlie Reams wrote:

Matt Morrison wrote:Cakes are quite often called 'sandwiches' without any other cake-based indicator attached that would distinguish them from bread sandwiches.

Srsly? I've never heard that.

Here are a selection of cakey sandwichy images: google images

Most often 'sandwich' and 'cake' are used together for a Victoria Sandwich.

By the way, loved your Starbucks story!

Michael Wallace wrote:"If you cut a sandwich in half, what do you get?" - I presumed that if I was cutting a sandwich in half, then I'd also made it. It's not often I'm brought sandwiches to cut in half myself.

What an odd presumption to make.

I've amended the poll now (without changing the wording before anyone accuses me of shenanigans) so that you can change your vote should you choose to, having carefully considered the arguments put forth.

Edit: Plus, the only thing that raised my eyebrows during your Starbucks story Charlie is that you seem to imply a Full English breakfast can't be enjoyed at 6pm. There's no bad time of day for one of them.

Roxanne wrote:

Michael Wallace wrote:

Jon Corby wrote:See chunk of cheese above.

But where do you draw the line? Or is even the tiniest two-bits-of-bread-with-stuff-in-the-middle a sandwich in your eyes?

Yes. When I was younger I used to make loads of little sandwiches by cutting one big one into 16. Having remembered that, I'm now off to have a mini-sandwich feast.

Gosh, how could you possibly eat 16 sandwiches?

Whoever makes the sandwiches defines what the sandwiches are. If someone butters two slices of bread, sticks them together with a filling of some sort and then cuts them in half, they have made two sandwiches. If the person eating them then cuts one in half (e.g. to share with someone else, or because they're two feeble to pick up a sandwich made from two half slices of bread), they have made two half sandwiches.

Notes:

1. The two notional persons referred to above may, in reality, be one and the same
2. A half sandwich obtained by cutting sandwich S1 in half may be indistinguishable from a sandwich S2 which was originally made half the size of S1

If the above were not true, then either the plates of little finger sandwiches you sometimes get at buffets would have to be called something other than sandwiches, or cutting such a mini sandwich in half would result in two further sandwiches and so on ad absurdum (the so-called "Reams conjecture").

The situation is analogous to the following. Someone takes a box having a capacity of one cubic metre, fills it with sand, then empties out the sand and gives it to you. What have they given you? A boxful of sand. Another person takes a box having a capacity of two cubic metres, fills it with sand, then empties out the sand, divides the sand into two piles and gives one pile to you. What have they given you? Half a boxful of sand. The fact that this half boxful is indistinguishable from the boxful that the first person gave you is irrelevant. The person giving you the sand has defined what a boxful is.

Instead of worrying about what constitutes a sandwich, I would advise you to focus instead on more concerning matters such as (a) why are all these people giving you piles of loose sand and (b) do you say "sand-witch" or "sand-widge"?

That's all I have to say about that.

Jon Corby wrote:

Michael Wallace wrote:"If you cut a sandwich in half, what do you get?" - I presumed that if I was cutting a sandwich in half, then I'd also made it. It's not often I'm brought sandwiches to cut in half myself.

What an odd presumption to make.

I asked the other half about this and he thinks you're joking, I'm not so sure. Are you really often brought sandwiches that you then cut in half yourself?

Michael Wallace wrote:

Jon Corby wrote:

Michael Wallace wrote:"If you cut a sandwich in half, what do you get?" - I presumed that if I was cutting a sandwich in half, then I'd also made it. It's not often I'm brought sandwiches to cut in half myself.

What an odd presumption to make.

I asked the other half about this and he thinks you're joking, I'm not so sure. Are you really often brought sandwiches that you then cut in half yourself?

The law of cause and effect. If you cut a sandwich in half, you create two smaller sandwiches. the original no longer exists as a single entity. (I've joined the war)

Michael Wallace wrote:I asked the other half about this

The half you hadn't already eaten, presumably?

Michael Wallace wrote:I asked the other half about this and he thinks you're joking, I'm not so sure. Are you really often brought sandwiches that you then cut in half yourself?

No, but if somebody says "if you cut [object] in half, what are you left with", I don't presume anything about [object] other than that which I am told.

Teacher: "Little Timmy has 5 apples. He eats 3 apples. How many apples does he have left?"
Young Raccoon Boy: "Wait, did he buy these apples, or grow them himself? How exactly did they come to be in his possession?"

Jon Corby wrote:

Michael Wallace wrote:I asked the other half about this and he thinks you're joking, I'm not so sure. Are you really often brought sandwiches that you then cut in half yourself?

No, but if somebody says "if you cut [object] in half, what are you left with", I don't presume anything about [object] other than that which I am told.

Teacher: "Little Timmy has 5 apples. He eats 3 apples. How many apples does he have left?"
Young Raccoon Boy: "Wait, did he buy these apples, or grow them himself? How exactly did they come to be in his possession?"

I don't really see how that's analogous, but irrespective, if I was presented with a sandwich, and then cut it in half, I would still consider it two half sandwiches. The whole sandwich I began with I would consider as 'my sandwich', and so then if I mutilate it in some way, it is by my definition. I think I'm with Phil on this.

You get a round of sandwiches. And if you cut those in half it's still a round of sandwiches. So I, er, abstain.

7-9 in favour of "2 halves of a sandwich"? Retards.

Jon Corby wrote:7-9 in favour of "2 sandwiches"? Retards.

Are you not the retard for getting that the wrong way round?
Or am I the retard for reading something wrong?
I think what is clear is that one of us is a retard.

Gary Male wrote:I, er, abstain.

I've given up abstinence for Lent.

Phil Reynolds wrote:

Gary Male wrote:I, er, abstain.

I've given up abstinence for Lent.

I bet if someone offers you one wish, you wish for three more wishes right?
And your new year's resolution is to not make any new year's resolutions, yeah?

Charlie Reams wrote:

Matt Morrison wrote:Cakes are quite often called 'sandwiches' without any other cake-based indicator attached that would distinguish them from bread sandwiches.

Srsly? I've never heard that.

This reminds me of a conversation I had in Starbucks once, which will probably amuse those of you who are down with Starbucks lingo.

Me: Could I have a cup of tea please?
Salesgirl: Full English?
Me: (puzzled) Urm, no. Tea please.
Salesgirl: Yes, Full English?
Me: Why would I want a full English with my tea? It's 6 o'clock in the evening.
Salesgirl: No, it's a type of tea.
Me: What type?
Salesgirl: I can't tell you.
Me: What?!
Salesgirl: I can't tell you for brand reasons.
Me: Right. So...
Salesgirl: Full English then?
Me: Great!


She went off to make it and I saw behind the counter that it was PG Tips, but I guess Starbucks employees are forbidden from mentioning the brand for some reason I can't imagine.

Lol, that's odd. Starbucks here uses Tazo Tea.

Re the sandwich debate; I plump for 2 sandwiches, on the grounds that we can reverse the problem thus:

If you take one single slice of bread, spread it and top it, then cut that in half, you quite obviously have one sandwich. It is plainly ludicrous to call this a half-sandwich, since you haven't used a half of anything; you've used one whole slice.

Hence, when you cut a 2-slicer, you're effectively making the equivalent of two, single-slice sandwiches, which you folded over. And isn't it always tastier when you fold the bread over instead of a clean cut?

Daniel O'Dowd wrote:Re the sandwich debate; I plump for 2 sandwiches, on the grounds that we can reverse the problem thus:
If you take one single slice of bread, spread it and top it, then cut that in half, you quite obviously have one sandwich. It is plainly ludicrous to call this a half-sandwich, since you haven't used a half of anything; you've used one whole slice.
Hence, when you cut a 2-slicer, you're effectively making the equivalent of two, single-slice sandwiches, which you folded over. And isn't it always tastier when you fold the bread over instead of a clean cut?

I don't agree with your argument at all.

Take two slices, put a filling in between, cut into four squares.
Everyone else is arguing about whether to call this four sandwiches or four quarters of a sandwich, whereas by your 'slices logic' this would still be a quite nonsensical two sandwiches. And would remain two sandwiches no matter how many times you keep cutting them.

When I make myself a sandwich lunch I start with two slices of bread, spread & fill to taste and put them together. Then I cut the assembled sandwich into 8 roughly triangular pieces for ease in eating - if anyone interrupted to ask if I'd finished my sandwich, I'd say no, as I wouldn't think of the pieces as one in its own right.
On the other hand, if I'd bought a plate of sandwiches in a pub, and asked a friend if he'd like a sandwich I'd think him greedy if he took all four quarters of one which we'd seen being cut up -so the answer apparently depends on the circumstances.

Peter Mabey wrote:so the answer apparently depends on the circumstances.

But the circumstance here is where you have one sandwich, which you have cut up. This eliminates most of the 'sandwich platter' arguments, I think. Either that, or one has a very small platter of sandwiches.

Peter Mabey wrote:When I make myself a sandwich lunch I start with two slices of bread, spread & fill to taste and put them together. Then I cut the assembled sandwich into 8 roughly triangular pieces for ease in eating - if anyone interrupted to ask if I'd finished my sandwich, I'd say no, as I wouldn't think of the pieces as one in its own right.

What you have there is a round of sandwiches (NB plural). See noun sense 9.

After thinking about it, I've changed my mind. A sandwich, unlike most other foodstuffs, still retains its sandwichy essence when chopped in half. Hence you have two sandwiches. Also, phrases like "plate of half sandwiches" sound horribly wrong.

I don't buy the infinite sandwich paradox as, thanks to crumblage, there must be a physical limit to how many sandwiches you can make from a single sandwich, just like you can only fold paper in half a certain number of times.

Perhaps it depends on how you make sandwiches- if your idea of a sandwich is one complete slice of bread big, then cut it in half and have two halves of a sandwich. If, however, you're the type who likes their triangles that are half the size of one whole bread slice, then it'd be two sandwiches for you. So, technically both definitions are right, and it's all really down to the individual.

Of course, if you were going for a universal decree on whether it's definitely one or the other, this requires lots more reasoning. In shops today (and people have mentioned this before me), for example supermarkets, your average sandwich is a two-triangle affair. Is this for regulation-sandwich reasons (i.e. this debate), or do they have an ulterior motive, namely to save on the size/cost of packaging and space? Triangle-shaped packaging that you get with them is smaller then square packaging, and I'd assume that reduces costs. Also, if people need to pack these sandwiches in a confined space to take to work, triangle is smaller than square. However, does this mean that if you get two triangle-sandwiches in one package, with square you would get one sandwich per package? This is hypothetical of course, but if they were to try the whole-bread-slice approach, we would get an answer. If there was one square sandwich per package, it would mean that the two triangles were two halves of that whole. If you got two square-shaped sandwiches, it'd mean that those two triangles were entities in their own rights! However, I fear that we'll never know what the major chains think as they don't do square sandwiches, as far as I know.

Supposing it's a baguette......?

Whoa, Kevin, you've just blown this whole debate wide open!

But seriously, you've shown that we're not thinking outside the box- at the moment we're thinking inside a very cramped and tiny quadrilateral. What happens with baguettes and other things?

If, when I was at school, I asked my mum to make me a sandwich for lunch, and when I opened it up at lunchtime it was the length and width of a quarter of a slice of bread, I would've smashed her face in. As such I will smash anyone's face in who argues that it constitutes a sandwich.

Jon O'Neill wrote:If, when I was at school, I asked my mum to make me a sandwich for lunch, and when I opened it up at lunchtime it was the length and width of a quarter of a slice of bread, I would've smashed her face in. As such I will smash anyone's face in who argues that it constitutes a sandwich.

You vs. Corby in the school playground tomorrow then.
And might I suggest you conduct the fight with a whole sandwich whilst Corby comes at you with two halves?

And to all those who are bringing up baguettes, get back on topic. Bloody French.

Hannah O wrote:However, I fear that we'll never know what the major chains think as they don't do square sandwiches, as far as I know.

Greggs do a small range of rectangular sandwiches but I have never tried them. Like I said I'm a triangle man.

Rectangular sandwiches offend me because they look like they're meant to insult people. Just the way they look leads me to believe they are wrong. I think that if anyone offered someone a rectangular sandwich, they would just walk away because it's the right thing to do. I just can't eat one without making myself feel really bad.

Jon O'Neill wrote:If, when I was at school, I asked my mum to make me a sandwich for lunch, and when I opened it up at lunchtime it was the length and width of a quarter of a slice of bread, I would've smashed her face in.

Then your mum - who is evidently a woman of infinite forbearance and sagacity, not to mention one long accustomed to suffering physical injury at your hands - was obviously sufficiently attuned to your sloppy use of English to realise that when you asked for a sandwich, what you in fact wanted was a round of sandwiches. She is a living saint.

Phil Reynolds wrote:

Jon O'Neill wrote:If, when I was at school, I asked my mum to make me a sandwich for lunch, and when I opened it up at lunchtime it was the length and width of a quarter of a slice of bread, I would've smashed her face in.

Then your mum - who is evidently a woman of infinite forbearance and sagacity, not to mention one long accustomed to suffering physical injury at your hands - was obviously sufficiently attuned to your sloppy use of English to realise that when you asked for a sandwich, what you in fact wanted was a round of sandwiches. She is a living saint.

Not really, she was a bit of a slag to tell the truth.

Matt Morrison wrote:You vs. Corby in the school playground tomorrow then.

Jon Corby wrote:7-9 in favour of "2 sandwiches"? Retards.

I thought he was on my side. I'm still gonna kick the shit out of him though.