6

When I learned English, I learned that "luggage" an uncountable noun, meaning the collection of all your bags and suitcases (and/or their contents). From https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/luggage :

luggage (usually uncountable, plural luggages)

  1. (uncountable) The bags and other containers that hold a traveller's belongings.
  2. (uncountable) The contents of such containers.
  3. (countable, nonstandard or obsolete) A specific bag or container holding a traveller's belongings.

Recently I have been noticing it being used more and more for a single large bag used for travel, what I would call "a piece of luggage", or "a bag". First I heard it used this way by my former roommate, who is not a native speaker, but more recently, I have heard it from my girlfriend, who is a native speaker, and I have seen/heard it used this way more and more. To be fair, I learned mostly British English, and I heard it used in this other way in the United States, so maybe it is a regional difference?

Here is an example: https://www.amazon.com/AmazonBasics-Hardside-Spinner-Luggage-20-Inch/dp/B071NJ24R9/ :

Hardside spinner luggage for work travel, weekend getaways, or as international carry-on

The change I'm wondering about might not be about countability, but rather about some related property. Here is source which is not an amazon listing: https://www.nytimes.com/wirecutter/reviews/best-carry-on-luggage/ where they say for example:

(as long as you register the luggage within 120 days of purchase, which is easy to do on any smartphone)

Here is a Google Ngram for "a luggage" vs. "piece of luggage", I realize that "a luggage" also finds "a luggage cart", etc. but there is an increased use of it since 1980, and a sharp decline in the use of "piece of luggage" since 2012. https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=a+luggage%2Cpiece+of+luggage&year_start=1800&year_end=2019&corpus=26&smoothing=3

Is this a change that is happening, and what is causing it? Or have I just been wrongly pedantic about the word (I have never corrected anyone, but using "luggage" as a countable noun does sound wrong to me)?

Thomas
  • 69
  • 9
    I imagine what you're seeing is the consequence of more *non-native Anglophones* writing in English on the internet (in contexts where there's little if any proofreading). So you're more likely to see references to *a software, their equipments, or some luggages. But I seriously doubt many actual native* speakers are involved. – FumbleFingers Nov 30 '21 at 17:10
  • 2
    Does this answer your question? Is "a software" really never correct? – FumbleFingers Nov 30 '21 at 17:17
  • 1
    Hmm, definition 3 says it is nonstandard (i.e. emerging?) as well as obsolete. So it was used idiomatically as a count noun long ago and possibly in the future. But right now? It's not idiomatic. – Lawrence Nov 30 '21 at 17:24
  • Didn't Terry Pratchett add to the confusion with 'The Luggage'? Unitary if not countable. – Edwin Ashworth Nov 30 '21 at 17:37
  • @FumbleFingers I feel like I have seen native speakers use it, and I'm assuming whoever wrote the text in the amazon link is a native speaker; it's in the official description of the object, not in a review, the "luggage" is from Amazon Basics, which is Amazon's own brand. – Thomas Nov 30 '21 at 17:42
  • @FumbleFingers Assuming it's caused by non-native speakers, the "a software" question might be a partial answer: I was assuming it was (or used to be) incorrect, but I am curious about whether it is actually changing among native speakers, and if so, what's driving the change (the internet, it sounds like). – Thomas Nov 30 '21 at 17:47
  • 1
    There will always be a tiny number of native speakers pushing the boundaries. But trust me - mainstream English isn't about to endorse using words like *software, equipment, luggage, furniture* as countable nouns. And we're certainly not gonna start treating Amazon product descriptions as "reference examples" epitomising good use of language any time soon! :) – FumbleFingers Nov 30 '21 at 17:47
  • Your first example is not necessarily or even probably a countified usage. The heading, telegraphese format could well be short for 'This is Harmony Hotwear luggage ...' etc. – Edwin Ashworth Nov 30 '21 at 17:48
  • 1
    @FF 'Furnitures' is approaching (at least) standard usage in the antiques domain. // Just checked online, Google: common for different styles etc in furniture retailing. – Edwin Ashworth Nov 30 '21 at 17:49
  • Look at how long it's taking us to completely discard the "aspirated H" in *Whom am I speaking to?* (not to mention using *whom* there anyway, which I though was "quaint" over 60 years ago, but there are still people who stick with it). – FumbleFingers Nov 30 '21 at 17:51
  • @EdwinAshworth: Oh, really? The bottom line there is that plural *furnitures* (underlined here by my browser, not even a full-blown spell-checker! :) continues to *flatline* against the standard singular / non-countable form. – FumbleFingers Nov 30 '21 at 17:55
  • @FF Wiktionary picks up the rare count usage. I wonder how many sales / auctions catalogues the GNgram survey includes. // 2,4-dinitrophenylhydrazine is well known in certain circles. It's a proper usage. But it's possibly rarer than 'furnitures' now. – Edwin Ashworth Nov 30 '21 at 17:57
  • @EdwinAshworth: I glanced briefly at the results in your earlier link, and couldn't help noticing that several "furniture retailers" on the first couple of pages were actually based in Europe, not the UK. I'm pretty "tolerant" when it comes to linguistic innovation, but I really can't see any big change coming in this area. By the time it did change, English would probably have abandoned the whole idea of different inflections for singular and plural nouns! – FumbleFingers Nov 30 '21 at 18:06
  • I agree that it’s possibly a non-native speakers usage which became nonstandard in English. For a French, an Italian or a Spanish speaker, luggage is a queer word for being uncountable. – user 66974 Nov 30 '21 at 19:42
  • @EdwinAshworth that's true. I'm having trouble finding more examples, especially from native speakers speaking normally, Googling "a luggage" gives mostly results from stores, reviews, etc.,. I will add more (better) examples if I find them. – Thomas Nov 30 '21 at 19:46
  • 1
    But your quote and the page concerned only uses "luggage" as an uncountable noun. The title doesn't say for example "A hardside spinner luggage." The linked-to page has no examples of "luggage" being used as a countable noun!!! The fact that luggage is uncountable means that it can refer to any amount of luggage. This is exactly the same way that information can refer to a single piece of information, or accommodation can be used to refer to a single flat/house, or help to a single action and so on and so forth. – Araucaria - Him Nov 30 '21 at 23:18
  • @Araucaria-Nothereanymore. Hmm, I think you're right. There seems (to me) to be something that is changing about the use of the word luggage, but it might not be whether it's countable or uncountable. Wiktionary, Merriam-Webster and the Oxford Learners' Dictionary all say that luggage means bags, but lately I've seen people (like the Amazon link) that seem to use it to refer to bag. – Thomas Dec 01 '21 at 01:42
  • 2
    Many supposedly non-countable words can be used in countable ways in some contexts to make some distinction -- "so you guys want 3 waters?" at a restaurant, for instance. I find this a little weird if we mean "bags," but I might find it less strange if we were talking about different classes of luggage, for instance. – Casey Dec 01 '21 at 08:26
  • 1
    If it's changing (I haven't come across it), it'll join research, which is now very commonly used in nonnative school Englishes to refer to what I would call "research paper", or just "paper", as in the phrase -- which is seen here frequently -- "I am doing a research on ..." – John Lawler Feb 24 '22 at 21:55
  • I die a little bit when I hear of a luggage. Much like a training. I have only heard it hear and look to see it no more. – Elliot Jun 03 '22 at 03:48
  • Why doesn't anyone mention the obvious? luggage: one piece of luggage, two pieces of luggage, etc. Just like furniture and several other nouns. – Lambie Aug 02 '22 at 15:51
  • Suggestion for new SE question: When did "water" become a countable noun? (E.g. "Would you go get me a water from the fridge?" Possible response-- "Well I'm kind of busy now but I'll get you one later, if you send me a text or an email to remind me.") – quiet flyer Feb 08 '23 at 18:46

2 Answers2

3

Luggage can be used in the case of "...a single large bag used for travel..." but still remains a collective noun - a group of one. At airport check-ins one is often asked "how much luggage do you have" ("much" here signals an uncountable noun) rather than being asked "how many pieces of luggage do you have" ; the answer can be one bag but not one luggage.

I suspect that this is what has caused luggage to become synonymous with one bag in the ad which you quote, but luggage still remains an uncountable noun. I have never heard a US or UK or New Zealand speaker respond '2 luggages'.

The only way this could accurately checked is by referring to a corpora (but these often lag behind common usage). The Oxford English Dictionary defines the use of "luggage" in plural as indicating an impediment:

In plural. nonce-use. = impedimenta n.
1864 T. Carlyle Hist. Friedrich II of Prussia IV. xv. i. 8 His whole Army with its luggages.

KillingTime
  • 6,206
JJJ
  • 31
0

No. Luggage does not become a countable noun. If it is plural it is still referred to as luggage, not luggages. Just luggage. For the actual answer now. No, 'a luggage' would not be is not becoming commonplace in mainstream English usage. Most people would just say luggage as 'a luggage' would make it hard to understand and luggage is mainly used either plural or singular. So a luggage wouldn't make since in the English mainstream due to it already being known as plural and singular making 'a luggage' not compatible with conversations.

https://www.answers.com/english-language-arts/What_is_the_plural_of_luggage

Nora Smith
  • 25
  • Please don't spam us with links. Answers should be self-contained and not require us to go haring off looking for a princess in another castle. If there's info we need in your spam link, reproduce it here. Links go dead. As is, this looks like spam. What is your affiliation with that site? – tchrist Jun 02 '22 at 18:07
  • @tchrist This is not a spam link. It was a resource to help understand. Next time I'll keep it in mind and I find no fun in spamming people. My family member works on the site so they get paid and I use it if anyone has questions so they understand. – Nora Smith Jun 02 '22 at 18:10
  • Welcome to EL&U. Consider reviewing the Help Page on how to write a good answer...answers which are "link-only" are often viewed with suspicion. – Cascabel_StandWithUkraine_ Jun 02 '22 at 18:14
  • 1
    Hello, Nora. Please have a look at some of the other threads here on the countness/non-countness of nouns-in-context. I think it's largely agreed that (a) it is far clearer to speak of usages ('The two coffees most often used in making the beverages are arabica and robusta' / 'Coffee is my favourite hot drink') rather than nouns being count or non-count, end of story. And that (b) countification and massification certainly take place, and a traditional view could well be outdated. Wiktionary is certainly one of the first dictionaries to endorse such changes. – Edwin Ashworth Jun 02 '22 at 18:17
  • Hello, Edwin. Thank you for clearing me up on this but I am still confused why my answer wouldn't work. It still explains it maybe just not as detailed as someone else would. Hello Cascabell. I didn't use only a link, I also explained why it wouldn't be correct. – Nora Smith Jun 02 '22 at 18:19
  • I'm afraid 'Luggage is an English word which stays the same in the plural form. ' is awful. [A] If it is deemed a noun that never countifies, it only has the non-count usage. Some non-count nouns (if they never countify, the label does work) are in 'plural form', like 'Clothes [were] strewn across the room', while most are in 'singular form' ('Happiness is egg-shaped'). This is a matter of morphology. 'Luggage' has singular form. / [B] If it is conceded that 'luggage' is a synonym of bag, 'luggage' and 'bag' are the singular-form count usages, – Edwin Ashworth Jun 02 '22 at 18:31
  • while 'luggages' like 'bags' is the plural-form count usage. – Edwin Ashworth Jun 02 '22 at 18:31
  • Replying to @EdwinAshworth Thank you for shining light on this but I can not explain everything as detailed as you and I think a made a point that luggage is still non-countable. – Nora Smith Jun 02 '22 at 18:33
  • Replying to @EdwinAshworth "while 'luggages' like 'bags' is the plural-form count usage." If you were to go through the dictionary or see if it says the plural is incorrect, luggages wouldn't be deemed as the plural for luggage. Luggage is what most call luggage even if there is more than one. And your system of explaining, isn't very profound or talking about the actual topic of why luggages would be deemed correct for the plural of luggage. Luggages should be luggage not luggages. the plural form is luggage. – Nora Smith Jun 02 '22 at 18:35
  • 4
    Hi, Nora. I think that your answer is sincere (and not spam). However, it doesn't advance the discussion beyond what the question asker included in the original question above from Wictionary. That is, he knows that English speakers generally treat "luggage" as an uncountable noun, but he wants to know whether "a luggage" is becoming commonplace in mainstream English usage. This isn't really a question about what the "rule" governing the countability of "luggage" is but about whether "a luggage" is an emerging change in mainstream spoken English. – Sven Yargs Jun 02 '22 at 18:37
  • Also, bags is plural for bag but luggages is not plural for luggage. Just because luggage and bag are the singular-form count usages doesn't mean luggages is correct as the plural for bags. – Nora Smith Jun 02 '22 at 18:37
  • Replying to @SvenYargs Thank you Sven. I beleive it is correct but others argue. I think you explanation is logical. – Nora Smith Jun 02 '22 at 18:38
  • Your answer could be improved with additional supporting information. Please [edit] to add further details, such as citations or documentation, so that others can confirm that your answer is correct. You can find more information on how to write good answers in the help center. – Community Jun 02 '22 at 18:50
  • Thank you. I just did. – Nora Smith Jun 02 '22 at 18:53
  • No, Nora, you're assuming that a singular-form noun (or perhaps a singular-form noncount noun) always refers to individual items. You need to distinguish etic denumerability (eg '3 shirts and 2 ties') from countness of noun usages (eg 'clothing' is always, to my knowledge, non-count, though we could use it to describe the 5-garment situation. But 'clothing', even though I've listed 5 items here, is a non-count noun.) (Additionally, it is in the usual form singular count-nouns show (no -s), and takes singular verb agreement.) – Edwin Ashworth Jun 02 '22 at 18:59
  • Alright. Why don't you put an answer in and see what everything thinks...cause you are confusing me a lot. – Nora Smith Jun 03 '22 at 13:58
  • Because this is covered elsewhere. For instance, look at this answer to the related Is 'surroundings' a plural noun or a mass noun that just happens to take the form of a plural? // Of course, whether or not a given noun which had hitherto had no count usage has become countified can be open to debate. This question looks at the particular case of 'luggage'. Wiktionary deems the count usage non-standard. – Edwin Ashworth Jun 03 '22 at 18:50
  • Nora, don't worry; I have picked up your pieces of luggage from the station. Also: pieces of clothing, pieces of furniture, etc. No one I know says "a luggage". Let's put this to bed along with the other non-count nouns. – Lambie Aug 02 '22 at 15:54