Americans call chicken burgers 'chicken sandwiches'

>americans call chicken burgers 'chicken sandwiches'
can someone explain this meme to me? it's a fucking burger.

Other urls found in this thread:

eater.com/2015/4/15/8414107/louis-lunch-new-haven-connecticut-burger-invented-history
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

The meat isn't ground therefore not a burger? We don't call fish sandwiches "burgers" either. What clearly defines a "burger" over a sandwich? The bun? If I put sliced turkey on a bun it's not a burger.

>The meat isn't ground therefore not a burger
that's retarded, it's between burger buns and has burger ingredients in it. mushroom burgers are a thing.

>mushroom burgers are a thing
mushroom patties*

no, i mean a big mushroom cap. not ground.

>it's between burger buns

Hamburg steak is not served in a bun, and neither is hambaagu

Would you seriously call sliced turkey and cheddar on a bun a burger? What if you put it on a bagel? Or a small loaf of bread, cut open? What about a roll?

no you retard, it has to be cooked and in the form of a burger. this isn't that hard to comprehend.

>raw turkey

you know what i mean, it has to be hot.

turkey is cooked. are you're saying that if I cut a piece of turkey like the chicken in the OP and put it on a bun, it would be a turkey burger? or does it have to be fried if it's not ground(or minced, as you would say)?

there are grilled chicken burgers and fried ones, so yes that would be a grilled turkey burger.

yeah but a burger is a sandwich so your argument was invalid from the start.

are you one of those kids that couldnt comprehend a square is a rectangle?

>a burger is a sandwich
debatable.

yeah it's the bun

what if it's a roast turkey, hot out of the oven, that I've cut into a burger shape? at what size / shape would it cease to be a burger and become a sandwich? and what temperature? if I let it cool to room temperature, is it still a burger?

yeah maybe if you're autistic as fuck

A "burger patty" is made from ground meat

there's a sliding scale between roll and burger and you would be pushing it.

no it's not

If a stupid fucking britbong called my chicken sandwich a chicken burger to my face I'd kick his ass right there

>no it's not
Yes it is

>if i define a burger as being this you're wrong
idiot. just because that's your definition of burger it doesn't mean there aren't others.

>a roll
You mean a sandwich? Turkey on a roll is a sandwich. Egg on a bagel is a sandwich. Ground beef on a bun is a sandwich. Bacon on toast is a sandwich. A hoagie/submarine/grinder is a sandwich. A banh mi is a sandwich. If you put fillings between or on precooked bread products, it's a sandwich.

a hot dog is a sandwich

is a taco a sandwich?

is a pizzaboli a sandwich?

is a hotdog a sandwich?

are oreos sandwiches?

>literally from a country mocking referred to as "burgerland"
>not the authority on burgers
The hamburger sandwich was invented by German immigrants in the midwestern United States. It's as American as food can get.

pizza is an open sandwich

Yes
>taco yes
>pizzaboli
I don't know what that is
>hotdog
yes
>oreos
cookie sandwich / sandwich cookie

moron

Wrong. The bread has to be precooked for it to be a sandwich. Pizza is a type of flatbread. A flatbread with toppings baked into or onto it is still a flatbread.

This thread

dude I'm weed lmao, but I'm still right about all of this. my sandwich parameters are unassailable. i'm a sandwich god and you're fucking nothing.

Turkey burger
Chicken burger
Veggie burger
Beef burger
All these have 2 components in common - a patty of ground something (meat or veggies) and a bun (either a classic bun or a roll serving as a bun).

I'd saying the bun isn't even necessary for it to be a burger, just the meat. A grilled hamburger patty between white toast is still a hamburger.

say*

chicken burgers aren't ground

that's absurd.

eater.com/2015/4/15/8414107/louis-lunch-new-haven-connecticut-burger-invented-history
>Inside Louis' Lunch, the 120-Year-Old Birthplace of the Hamburger
> As legend has it, Louis' Lunch served its first hamburger in the year 1900, when the spot was still a lunch wagon. After a diner specifically requested something to-go, owner Louis Lassen — whose portrait still hangs in the cozy space — responded by offering a sandwich featuring "ground steak trimmings" in between two slices of toast. The unconventional hamburger "bun" still reigns at Louis Lunch, and according to Kerry Lassen, whose husband Jeff is Louis's great-grandson, "most people, after having it on toast, enjoy the toast more," she says. "It makes the taste of the burger come out versus the bun."
>between two slices of toast

No because name "burger" have it's long ethymology even older than you think. It all have started in Austrian village Straßberg. It was famous from it's cows and farms. Once they've taken a small part of poland centuries ago, austrian government had to do something with all these silesian scum, and as we know, silesian people have been working in mines for ages. And so you can't call a chicken sandwich a burger.

then explain this please, directly off kfc's website.

What do you call ground beef?
>Hamburger
What do you call ground beef between buns?
>A Hamburger

What do you call a chicken filet?
>Chicken
What do you call a chicken filet between buns?
>Chicken Sandwich

Not that hard.

>>What do you call a chicken filet between buns?
>Chicken Sandwich
no i call it a chicken burger you retard

It's from Kentucky, they have their own reasons mate. They didn't took part in parting Poland

So as we know. Kentucky is from Kentucky. They all have been working in corn crops in 1856 and so were the cowboys from Minessota. There is a "mine" in Minessota. Fill in the blanks by yourself. It will really make you think.

For me it is the McChicken

excuse me?
>double crunch crispy chicken sandwich
>chicken sandwich

Chicken sandwiches aren't burgers. Anyone that says otherwise is objectively wrong.

It's the KFC Australia website, I'd recognise it anyware - you've been bamboozled by the other poster.

9/10

it's not really bamboozling considering that's the actual website and i haven't edited it

Apparently KFC doesn't know what the fuck they are talking about.
BK was offering a chicken burger for a while. It was a ground chicken patty.

It's just Australian user, we don't give 2 shits about murka's rules on burger designation.

If you put a steak on a burger bun we'd call it a steak burger - those are our rules.
We'll also put egg and beetroot on those burgers, because it's better that way.

yeah I agree. Anything between burger buns is a burger and anything between slices of bread loaf is a sandwich

Reminder that England invented the English language and also the sandwich. Whatever we define it as, is the correct answer. All other answers are regional alternatives.

So I say it is classified as a sandwich because it features the primary characteristics of a sandwich. I'll accept 'burger' as a widely accepted alternative slang term.

A hamburger sandwich specifically refers to the ground beef do as served by the Hamburger people. Taking the suffix -burger to mean any kind of sandwich is exactly what an amerinigger would do.

When an object is placed between two other objects it is said to be 'sandwiched' between them. The beef patty is between two buns, it is a sandwich

the word sandwiched literally comes from the name of the food sandwich. that's an anachronism, friend.

There will always be local differences. in America you can only call it a burger if it has beef. Likewise, a lot of craft beers wouldn't even be allowed to be sold as "beer" in countries like Germany.

>in America you can only call it a burger if it has beef.

No, we call it a burger if the patty is made from ground/minced meat.

If OP's patty were made from ground chicken then it would be a chicken burger. If it were made using a single piece of chicken (not ground/minced) then it would not be a burger.

All burgers are sandwiches, sort of like how all squares are also rectangles. One is a subset of the other.

Is a rectangle a square?

Nope. One is a subset of the other.

If A is equal to B, but B is not equal to A, was A really equal to B in the first place?

A 'sandwich' involves slices of bread.
Depicted here is a bun or a bread roll.

This is a fried chicken roll, not a sandwich.

subsets have nothing to do with equivalence

>A 'sandwich' involves slices of bread.

Bread yes. Slices no.

>is a hotdog a sandwich?
See, it depends. If it's made with sausage, the meat is ground, which would then make it a burger.

This is the only definition that makes sense. Otherwise you're stuck calling hotdogs, wraps, filled pitta, and indeed burgers "sandwiches" and this is evidently not the case.

But then it would be a sandwich because a burger is one of many types of a sandwich.

Please provide an example of a sandwich that is not made with slices of bread that wouldn't be better served by calling it something else.

so from reading the arguments here it seems that americans think EVERYTHING is a sandwich. why are you people so opposed to specificity? a chicken sandwich, chicken burger, and chicken roll are all very different things. to an american those would all apparently be chicken sandwiches.

>Otherwise you're stuck calling hotdogs, wraps, filled pitta, and indeed burgers "sandwiches" and this is evidently not the case.

Those aren't commonly called sandwiches during casual conversation. However, when you think about the definition of a sandwich you must conclude that they are types of sandwiches because they involve a filling stuck between two pieces of bread.

In other words, the choice of terms during casual conversation has nothing to do with the actual classification of those foods.

You can google various patents that McDonalds has for their hamburger assembly processes and the legal text in those patents refers to them as sandwiches.

Or you could just define a sandwich as being composed of slices of bread and not run into that problem. That's what's up for debate here, the definition of sandwich. The only reason you can demonstrate that we should not do this is with a counterexample.

It's not about what it's most commonly called. It's about the the strict definition of a sandwich.

Take OP's pic for example. It's clearly a type of sandwich because it's a filling between two pieces of bread. Same thing for a basic hamburger. Just because we call it a hamburger doesn't mean that it isn't technically a type of sandwich.

Why do you want to define sandwich as something that includes things that obviously aren't sandwiches and aren't thought of as sandwiches?

>Or you could just define a sandwich as being composed of slices of bread

But that would be inaccurate because there are plenty of things that we call sandwiches that are inside of buns, rolls, croissants, etc, rather than just sliced bread.

I don't call those things sandwiches, I call those things buns, rolls, croissants etc.

Why do you want to call them sandwiches instead of their name?
Croissants aren't even bread ffs

in america, "burger" is defined by the meat (ground beef)

in europe, "burger" is defined by the bread (sesame bun)

Because "what we commonly think of" is not strict criteria for setting a definition by. That sort of thing varies from person to person.

And like I said, there is already legal precedent for it. McDonalds has many patents for their burger assembly procedures that refers to them as "sandwhiches".

Terminology used in casual conversation varies too much for it to be used as criteria for setting a definition.

I agree that it sounds really silly to call a hamburger a sandwich, but that has no bearing on whether or not it actually is one. And when you think about it, it clearly is.

It's just like rectangles and squares. Nobody refers to a square as as rectangle in normal conversation, but when you think about the details it clearly is a type of one. Same thing here.

There's no universal objective truth behind word definitions, user

Define the word as best suits its use in its linguistic context. Which, in this case, would be ingredients between slices of bread.

Your personal choice of terminology is a poor thing to set a standard by. It should be something that's clearly understood, not something that varies from person to person.

>Why do you want to call them sandwiches instead of their name?

I do call them by their specific names. But again, a person's choice of name has nothing whatsoever to do with what they technically are. I think those things are technically sandwiches because they consist of a filling between two pieces of bread. Would I call them a sandwich in casual conversation? No. But that has nothing to do with a technical discussion of whether they are or are not sandwiches.

Why should a word's definition be completely unrelated to how people use it? That theoretical definition is just meaningless.

>There's no universal objective truth behind word definitions, user

Why do I get the feeling you've never taken a math class in your life?

>Which, in this case, would be ingredients between slices of bread.
Why are you hung up on "slice"? Why would it matter if it was a slice as opposed to a bun?

Because if it's a bun, you have to call burgers, hotdogs, wraps, and pita breads all sandwiches. That's silly, those things have their own names. There's no reason for these definitions to need to overlap.

>comparing language to maths
why do i get the feeling you've never taken a linguistics class in your life?

I'm an accredited engineer, which come to think is probably part of why I think it's important that our words should have sensible definitions without ambiguity.

>Why should a word's definition be completely unrelated to how people use it?

Because a definition needs to be specific, whereas different people use words differently. It's pointless to use something so fluid and inconsistent as a standard for a definition.

>Because if it's a bun, you have to call burgers, hotdogs, wraps, and pita breads all sandwiches.
Yes. I fail to see the problem here

>That's silly, those things have their own names
Sure. And the two concepts are not mutually exclusive.

It's no different than squares and rectangles, user. Nobody calls a square a rectangle during normal conversation, but it technically is one.

The concept of a sandwich is very broad, and there are many subsets under that definition. Hamburgers are one of them. (again, refer to McDonalds patent documentation)

"Ingredients between two slices of bread" isn't fluid and inconsistent, user.

Maybe you should invent a different word for encompassing all bread-and-filling based items, but that word shouldn't be sandwich. You wouldn't intuitively call a wrap a sandwich, would you?

People don't call those things sandwiches, so the theoretical definition you're proposing is unrelated to the way people use the word.

I bet you still think 'gay' means happy.

>why do i get the feeling you've never taken a linguistics class in your life?

What does linguistics have to do with assigning a clear definition to something? Linguistics varies too much to be used as a standard for anything.

>linguistics varies too much to be used as a standard for anything
why do I get the feeling you've never taken a linguistics class in your life?

>"Ingredients between two slices of bread" isn't fluid and inconsistent, user.

But it is, because not everyone agrees with that definition. In fact, there are many common and clear counter-examples (McDonalds, for example)

>You wouldn't intuitively call a wrap a sandwich, would you?
1) No, I wouldn't. But what I intuitively call something sounds like a really poor basis for a definition.

2) A wrap contains a single piece of tortilla. It doesn't meet the definition of a sandwich because there is only one piece of "bread". Sandwich requires two pieces.

Are you going to explain yourself or are you going to keep parroting?

We've already discussed in this vary thread how terms vary greatly from place to place. For example, see It seems retarded to use something so varied as a basis for a definition.

I'm implying that maybe you should take a linguistics class, or at least google the concept of linguistics before spouting nonsense

England is cucked by muslims now so nothing you say means anything. Its also hard to understand what youre saying with a brown rod in your mouth.

plenty of sandwiches only have one piece of bread

hoagies and subs for example

They are cut in half, therefore there are two pieces.

hot dogs are sandwiches

It's a chicken sandwich not a hamburger sandwich

>using KFC as an authority for anything

Is a hotdog a taco?