Jump to content

Talk:Tuna fish sandwich

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Tuna fish vs tuna salad vs tuna sandwich

[edit]

There are a few hints online that there might be regional differences, presumably within the US, over what a tuna fish sandwich is called. Some call it a tuna salad sandwich instead, or just a tuna sandwich. I'm not so sure they are all the same kind of sandwich or that there is anything regional about the difference. In a typical New York deli, for example, a customer can request a tuna salad sandwich, which is made from a bin of tuna salad, or a tuna fish sandwich (individual can), which is made from a freshly opened individual serving sized can of tuna. When the latter is prepared, it is not mixed into what might be described as a salad but simply placed on the bread or roll and spread out a bit. It's applied sort of like any other lunch meat and gets lettuce, tomato, mayo, etc. I'm not sure what a hunk of tuna on a roll might be called. Maybe that would be a tuna sandwich? Maybe "tuna fish" implies the meat is canned and chunk style? --Pat (talk) 08:22, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In Canada, the term "tuna fish" does not exist, and sounds very strange. All tuna are fish, so it's redundant. It's like saying "chicken fowl". I don't know about regional differences within the United States, but it is widely believed in Canada that "tuna fish" is a uniquely American phrase. I have even seen a standup comedy routine about this: "I ordered tuna, and they gave me the tuna horse! I wanted the tuna fish!" --74.56.127.163 (talk) 06:37, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
in the UK people find it funny that americans call it Tuna fish when there are no other kinds of Tuna, its a bit like saying Cow Mammal or Crab Crustacean. This sandwich is always called a tuna mayo sandwhich but this isn't mentioned in the article.
It's stateside idiom. Gwen Gale (talk) 13:34, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The OED gives... tuna fish, the flesh of the tunny as food. Lame Name (talk) 13:50, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This calls it an Americanism, now I'm almost thinking the fish could be a contraction of flesh, tunny flesh --> tuna fish. Gwen Gale (talk) 14:08, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's a big grammatical pet peeve for a lot of people, since the word "fish" is totally redundant. I vote that it be removed. I attempted to move the article to "tuna sandwich," but was blocked. It's embarrassing to see "tuna sandwich" redirect to "Tuna fish sandwich."--Scottandrewhutchins (talk) 18:09, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Personally as a Canadian I prefer Tuna Fish Salad Sandwich, as you know what you're getting - a salad like chicken salad, but made with tuna fish. Presumably a Tuna Sandwich would be made with Tuna Fish steak. 67.193.252.186 (talk) 01:06, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you keep saying fish after tuna? Tuna salad sandwich, a salad like chicken salad, but made with tuna. It’s not “chicken bird salad”. Presumably a tuna sandwich would be made with tuna steak. 2607:FEA8:545D:EB00:59D5:6D2A:1D3F:77DB (talk) 23:46, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple issues

[edit]
  • The lead section veers into tangential topics from the 2nd sentence.
  • History of tuna fish is off-topic for the sandwich
  • Citing StarKist and sentences like "Large chain sub shops such as Subway, Quiznos, and Blimpie often feature tuna subs as a daily deal or featured sub" make it sound like and advertisement.
  • Most if not all nutritional information pertains to food chains in the US.

This message approved by: VG ☎ 10:56, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

history

[edit]

A sourced history section would be helpful :) Gwen Gale (talk) 11:57, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Should be "Tuna sandwich"

[edit]

Tune fish sandwich, rather than tuna sandwich, is a very specific colloquialism. Google gives 5 times more hits for "tuna sandwich" than "tuna fish sandwich". This page should be moved. 150.203.35.113 (talk) 03:20, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, "tuna fish" is an American idiom, this website is in English, not a specific branch or dialect of English, it should therefor be the blandest sort and mention the regional variations in names in article. Pretty sure thats even policy, if I cared to look. 108.161.125.33 (talk) 04:17, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why no mention of cucumber?

[edit]

Why does the section on ingredients not point out that, just how cress goes with egg sandwiches, cucumber goes well with tuna sandwiches? ACEOREVIVED (talk) 23:10, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Got a reliable source that says that? If so, add it. Fences&Windows 02:05, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I enjoy cucumber with my tuna for luncheon as well, why would he need a reference for that? I doubt there would be a scientific peer reviewed study into tuna and cucumber. If there was it would be one word "delicious". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.241.37.187 (talk) 00:44, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
why no mention of Cucumber? 90% of tuna sandwiches in the UK are served with sliced cucumber
In the UK, prepacked 'tuna' sandwiches (no mention of 'fish') are often found with cucumber. On the other hand, I've never found celery in a tuna sandwich. Peridon (talk) 19:17, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Celery in a tuna salad sandwich is very common in the US. Here are some links to examples: [1], [2], [3], [4]. --Potentatus (talk) 21:42, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Eating one right now, no cucumber. Sounds good though, personally I like chopped celery and a piece of lettuce, maybe some tomato and a slice of cheese, but not at home when I make it myself, too much effort for a practically effortless meal. Seem to be many variations, such as in the pictures, guacamole, olives. All need some kind of sources (the pictures don't obviously), just cause someone might decide it's good with mangoes in Thailand doesn't mean that its a common recipe, or that Thai people eat it with mangoes. I would imagine most are plain, at least here in Canada, most fast food ones (sold in plastic triangle boxes) have at most lettuce, also the standard if you get one at a coffee shop or SubWay, not that I haven't gotten them to put jalapeno's, just takes more work convincing them your not insane. 108.161.125.33 (talk) 04:15, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Literally 95% of tuna sandwiches include cucumber it's not a niche concoction 109.145.122.57 (talk) 00:00, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Tuna fish sandwich. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:35, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 17 February 2017

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No move. We have some interesting evidence here. While the phrase "tuna sandwich" does seem to be more widely used now, it seems that many uses of the phrase are not for the topic of this article (ie, a sandwich using tuna salad, as opposed to other kinds of tuna). The present phrase appears to be less ambiguous (at least, no evidence was presented showing it in use for other kinds of tuna-based sandwiches), and it remains in wide use. Stepping out of my closer role, I suggest knowledgeable editors consider expanding the article to include different types of tuna sandwiches, with the version using tuna salad included as one variant, as we currently lack coverage on the wider category (assuming sources exist). In that case, a rename may well be appropriate. But that's beyond the scope of the current RM. Cúchullain t/c 18:53, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Tuna fish sandwich → Tuna sandwich – Talk:Tuna_fish_sandwich#Tuna_fish_vs_tuna_salad_vs_tuna_sandwich and Talk:Tuna_fish_sandwich#Should_be_.22Tuna_sandwich.22 Bod (talk) 20:06, 17 February 2017 (UTC) Relisted. Jenks24 (talk) 06:23, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support per WP:COMMONNAME. Interesting. Per Google Books ngrams they were evenly used through 1980, then usage for "tuna sandwich" skyrocketed [5]. On nytimes.com I get 184 for "tuna fish sandwich"[6] and 356 for "tuna sandwich"[7]. I'm not seeing a reason to not move at all. --В²C ☎ 22:24, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment. Using raw hits is misleading, as many of the results for "tuna sandwich" on NYT are clearly not the type of sandwich for which this article is about, for instance using whole-flesh or steak/filet of tuna. Which supports the contention that many in the US distinguish the two because these recipes are called "tuna sandwich" and not "tuna fish sandwiches" on purpose. Also, the NYT is not a metric to use to speak to the entirety or prevalence of US usage. JesseRafe (talk) 16:36, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Common name. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:02, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Warning: anecdata used on determining common name, but I have never heard of a "tuna sandwich" and I would think it means "tuna steak" and be pieces of pink filet, rather than what this article is about which is a sandwich made from the contents of a can/tin of tuna which I exclusively know of and have heard of as solely "tuna fish" and never "tuna". Do we need separate articles for these separate things or, are they the same thing and there is a compromise word to be found like elevator/lift? JesseRafe (talk) 15:44, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • No, they're exactly the same thing. In Britain we'd never say "tuna fish" (any more than we'd say "cod fish", "haddock fish" or "mackerel fish", because the second word is utterly unnecessary - you don't have a "chicken meat sandwich" either, do you?), but putting that aside due to WP:ENGVAR, it appears from the above that "tuna" is more common in the USA as well. -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:15, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
      • That's a willfully obtuse argument because people on this talk page have made it abundantly clear that to those who make a distinction, "tuna fish" is distinct from "tuna" as the latter is for the ways steak, sushi and sashimi are prepared/served from the fish and is never from a can. The redundancy argument is also superficial and poor factually. "Codfish" is actually the worst example you could have led with because that's a very common name that began in ENGLAND from earlier centuries to distinguish it from "cod" (as in "codpiece"), similarly to "swordfish". But in general saying it's bad because it's redundant has no linguistic merit. We say "grapefruit" and "walnut" and "strawberry", etc. We also say "Rock of Gibraltar", "East Timor", "Greenwich Village", "Sahara Desert" and even "White Album". Don't extrapolate it to "chicken meat sandwich" because that has no basis and is a perfect strawman argument. Please state your position without resorting to logical fallacies. Also there is no contention that "tuna" is more common in the US than "tuna fish" for the meat from the can presented in this talk page. Care to explain? JesseRafe (talk) 16:30, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
        • Has "codfish" been used in Britain in the past? Yes. Is it used now? No. Do we still live in the past? No. So no, it's not a poor example at all, since no modern British person would say "codfish" (and I believe I was speaking in the present tense). "Those that make a distinction" presumably means "Americans who make a distinction"! The rest of us don't. Since tuna is clearly a fish in whatever form it comes, why on earth would "tuna fish" mean one sort of tuna as opposed to another sort of tuna? That's nonsensical. It may be American idiom, but it certainly ain't logical. "Care to explain?" See В²C's post above. Also note that I was merely answering your question as to whether they were the same thing and pointing out that while "tuna fish sandwich" may be common in America, it is not normal usage elsewhere, as has already been pointed out several times on this talkpage. -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:58, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
          • Could you be missing the point any more? Nowhere did I make the claim that is common usage elsewhere, stop making these logical fallacies. You also seem to be under the woefully mistaken impression of how language works: people didn't sit down and decide to call something something, but it happened/happens naturally. There's no need to establish a reason why a word or lexical chunk was devised to mean something, it either does or it doesn't and we report on what is actually used. There's obvious evidence that "tuna fish" does mean something different than "tuna" to some English speakers. Again, you are completely miscategorizing the argument.
          • I am even more flummoxed than ever by your response that "I was merely answering your question as to whether they were the same thing" because never have I asked such a question. I asked whether you could explain why you were intentionally and flagrantly misrepresenting my argument into '"tuna" is more common than "tuna fish"' and I previously asked if the article could have a common name based on the analogy of Elevator where it simply says "lift" in the opening sentence as this article already does.
          • Also "codfish" is still frequently used, see the otherwise still relevant discussion here which mentions codfish prominently: http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/19628/why-do-americans-say-tuna-fish as well as wikt:codfish which doesn't mark it as archaic. The parallel is not there, so don't miscategorize my arguments further: codfish/cod are alternate names, whereas "tuna fish" is a specific type of "tuna".
          • Whether something is American or not should not be an issue. "Truck" and "elevator" are also "American", and guess what, they're also English because "American" isn't a language. There are probably millions of people more who call it "tuna fish" than live in all of the UK so I don't understand the nationality point you are trying to make as if "Americans who make a distinction" matters whether or not "anyone" makes a distinction. JesseRafe (talk) 17:36, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
            • Good grief, you're a very serious person! We're talking about a flaming sandwich! It really doesn't matter! You said: "Do we need separate articles for these separate things or, are they the same thing and there is a compromise word to be found like elevator/lift?" So I am somewhat flummoxed as to your response that you never asked whether they were the same thing. Er, yes you did! Also, I never said you said it was common usage elsewhere. I said it was. I really think you need to reread posts before you go off on one! You seem to have missed my point that "tuna fish is a specific type of tuna" (to quote you) only in America. Everywhere else we just say tuna. Which is of course a fish. So doesn't need to be called tuna fish... I have expressed my opinion above based on the ngram. The rest is just a bit of fun. So don't take yourself and your "tuna fish" so bloody seriously! Incidentally, I really don't much care what the article's called given that even the smell of tuna makes me feel bilious and the thought of eating it just makes me question people's sanity! -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:48, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Let's all be tolerant of the Americanism "tuna fish sandwich". I've known and chuckled about it for decades, but there's no reason to be insulting over a little WP:ENGVAR. (If ever there was a time to WP:TROUT someone.) We all have our own peculiarities. WP:TITLEVAR says that all national varieties of English are acceptable in article titles. The article seems to have used the "tuna fish" variant since its creation in 2007, and I don't really see a huge reason to change this established precedent. If it helps Americans and doesn't particularly confuse non-Americans, what's the problem? - Reidgreg (talk) 19:28, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Oppose per JesseRafe. I'm not convinced that the ngrams result that B2C cites means what he thinks. To me, a "tuna sandwich" would be a continuous slab of the same tuna, or more generally something you'd get at a restaurant, and a "tuna fish" sandwich is the horrible cheap ground-up fishburger stuff from a supermarket aisle. The prevalence of the "tuna sandwich" has greatly increased since the 80s as more and more sushi / fish places have started offering this, which is why the ngrams has gone up for it. But the old-style "cheap" ground tuna is still a tuna fish sandwich. SnowFire (talk) 20:22, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Upgrade to normal oppose. Bodhi Peace's comment below cuts at usual presumptions that nom did the research. "Let's help English make more sense?" That is not how Wikipedia works. SnowFire (talk) 16:14, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I have never seen filet of tuna on a sandwich. Even the can doesn't say "tuna fish". It's time to do away with this nonsense. Let's help English make some sense. Bod (talk) 03:43, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment. "Filet of tuna on a sandwich" is one of the many "hits" that Born2Cycle used to prove that "tuna sandwich" was more popular than "tuna fish sandwich" a) under the mistaken belief that that was the argument, and b) despite actually proving the point that to many English-speakers the two items are different and his/her "hits" included recipes such as this one which unambiguously call for tuna steak, hence why it is called a "tuna sandwich" and not called a "tuna fish sandwich". You also comment that you want "English to make some sense" which is another way of assumedly couching the redundancy argument, which again has no merit for language development or history in English. Have you never heard or said a "chai tea", "cheese quesadilla", "rice pilaf", or "shrimp scampi"? It's a natural process and it occurs in every language. Sometimes things become redundant, but it's not up to encyclopedia writers to "correct" this "problem", but only to state/describe what occurs. JesseRafe (talk) 14:26, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

This is one of the worst Wikipedia articles

[edit]

Calling it a tuna fish sandwich is grammatically incorrect and an Americanism. All over the world it's called a tuna mayo sandwich or a tuna and cucumber sandwich. This leads to my second point I have never once seen this sandwich served with celery? Cucumber is the most common ingredient after the tuna itself but this is completely omitted from the article. 109.145.122.57 (talk) 00:06, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You are right, this is a terrible entry. There is some stuck up American that keeps reverting it. The term “tuna fish” is only used by a few Americans so the wikipedia entry has to follow that? Brutal. 2607:FEA8:545D:EB00:E9BB:12D6:D5D3:98E2 (talk) 01:13, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, there are many more terrible articles. "Tuna fish sandwich" may be an Americanism, but it has nothing to do with grammar. "All over the world" it can't really be called "tuna mayo sandwich", because in most of those places they probably don't speak English as their first language. As for "tuna fish"--well, you are welcome to start a renaming discussion. Drmies (talk) 01:17, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Tuna “fish” sandwich is definitely an americanism, not even used in the majority there.
Don’t be pedantic, no other culture uses their word for fish after their word for tuna regardless of their native tongue.
This article has been renamed several times (removing the redundant “fish”) but some cheeky stickler always reverts it 2607:FEA8:545D:EB00:59D5:6D2A:1D3F:77DB (talk) 23:52, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Tuna_fish_sandwich&oldid=1208550957"