# I'll have a soup /  I'll have a soup / I'll have soup



## usingenglish

Hello.

In a restaurant how do we say?

-  I'll have a soup.
-  I'll have a soup.
-  I'll have soup.

Thanks.


----------



## El escoces

Ideally, since soup is not considered countable, you would say either "I'll have soup, please" or "I'll have some soup". 

However:

If there is one soup option on a restaurant menu, people will often say "I'll have _the_ soup" (which is OK since there is only one type of soup available).

Occasionally people might say "I'll have a soup" as a form of shorthand way of saying "a portion of soup", but I think that's far less common, and best avoided from a learner's point of view.

EDIT: please read this post in conjunction with post #5 below


----------



## curlyboy20

Very well explained. Soup is not a countable noun (like you don't say a soup, two soups, 3 soups) but soemtimes people might say "I'll have a soup". I'd say, "I'll have some soup" but if I want to be specific as to what kind of soup I want to order, I'd say, "I'll have that soup" or "I'll have this soup"


----------



## Transatlantic

Actually, it's not a countable noun in most senses, but it is in sentences like, "They had five different soups on the menu.", meaning "five different kinds of soup."


----------



## El escoces

Transatlantic said:


> Actually, it's not a countable noun in most senses, but it is in sentences like, "They had five different soups on the menu.", meaning "five different kinds of soup."


 
You're quite right: soup is of course perfectly countable when talking about different varieties.  And, having taken the order, the waitress might then report back to the chef: "Two soups [and three salads]".  What one can't say is, for example "I'm making a soup", or "I ate a soup for lunch".


----------



## SwissPete

In a restaurant, what you are most likely to say, is "I'll have a cup / bowl of soup".


----------



## Thomas Tompion

El escoces said:


> You're quite right: soup is of course perfectly countable when talking about different varieties. And, having taken the order, the waitress might then report back to the chef: "Two soups [and three salads]". What one can't say is, for example "I'm making a soup", or "I ate a soup for lunch".


 We don't often disagree, EE, but did you really mean to say we can't say 'I'm making a soup'?  I say it quite a lot, particularly now the pound's so weak.  I could easily say 'I'm making two soups': a friend of mine has a child who loves home-made soup but is, like most children with their sensitive taste-buds, very fussy about flavour.  When they come I often make two soups.


----------



## El escoces

Maybe it's regional.  I would say "I'm making soup" or "I'm making a pot of soup".  I can't imagine myself ever saying "I'm making a soup".

To the extent that you - and presumably others - do so, I of course withdraw the statement that one "can't" say it.

I reserve judgment on the question of "two soups" - I'm sure it's correct but it's way beyond my culinary abilities ever to have attempted to make two at once.


----------



## Thomas Tompion

I suspect it may have to do with how often one cooks. I cook all the time, so I wouldn't naturally say 'I'm making soup' because that suggests that one soup is very like another for me.

On the other hand, I rarely make bread and could easily say 'I'm making bread'. If I was fond of making bread and made it often and made different kinds, I can imagine saying 'I'm making a bread', which now sounds odd to me, as you say 'I'm making a soup' does to you.

Just in case you wondered, I'm absolutely not trying to be rude about your soup-making.


----------



## panjandrum

Like Thomas, I make soup often.
I have no objections to _make a soup_, though it's not what I'd most likely say most of the time.

In the restaurant, I would not _order a soup_ or _have a soup_, though by the time it gets to the kitchen I am sure it has become _a soup_, or one of a number of soups in our order  (as in post #5).


----------



## El escoces

Thomas Tompion said:


> Just in case you wondered, I'm absolutely not trying to be rude about your soup-making.


 
If you tasted it, you might.

I don't have to tell anyone - least of all you, TT - that it all boils down to what one is used to saying and/or hearing. Perhaps I think of soup as a liquid - I cannot refer to "a milk", for example - whereas if I thought of it as a foodstuff, a type of cooked product - like sauces and stews - I might be able to imagine it with an indefinite article.

But equally, I would never say "a bread", I would always say "I'm baking a loaf of bread" - or simply, "I'm baking bread".

Perhaps I should just stay out of the kitchen, happen it's too hot for me.


----------



## cuchuflete

usingenglish said:


> Hello.
> 
> In a restaurant how do we say?
> 
> -  I'll have a soup.
> -  I'll have a soup.
> -  I'll have soup.
> 
> Thanks.



Hi usingenglish,

The first two look identical to me.  Is there a secret way to tell them apart?


----------



## Dimcl

Like TT and Panj, I could imagine myself saying "I'm making a soup".  When I would be likely to say it, however, is if there was originally some question about what I'm taking to the potluck.  Suzy is bringing a salad, Jane is bringing a dessert and I'm bringing a soup.


----------



## Egoexpress

I am wondering if the following one can be applied to what you have said.
At a pub - May a I have a beer? to mean that you'd like to have a pint of it?

Thank you!


----------



## Loob

cuchuflete said:


> Hi usingenglish,
> 
> The first two look identical to me. Is there a secret way to tell them apart?


Yes, I was intrigued by that, too.

I was wondering if the OP wanted to contrast:
I'll have a soup
I'll have some soup
I'll have soup

...


----------



## foucrazyfoucrazy

I think the confusion here is that you can say you are making a soup, but in a restaurant you would not ask for a soup, you would ask for a bowl of soup, unless you want the entire soup the restaurant is making.

I wonder whether that helped clear up the confusion, or just made it more confusing  I assure you, my intention was the former.


----------



## panjandrum

Egoexpress said:


> I am wondering if the following one can be applied to what you have said.
> At a pub - May a I have a beer? to mean that you'd like to have a pint of it?
> 
> Thank you!


The indefinite article with beer is a well-established usage.  It is not the case with soup.  
For more information on this point, and any further mention of beer, see:
A tea/ a coffee/ a beer/ ... non-count beverages with an article.


----------



## Thomas Veil

Loob said:


> Yes, I was intrigued by that, too.
> 
> I was wondering if the OP wanted to contrast:
> I'll have a soup
> I'll have some soup
> I'll have soup
> 
> ...


Or perhaps "I'll have the soup".  This would be a common answer to the question "Do you want soup or salad?"


----------



## Thomas Tompion

While when I'm cooking I might well say 'I'm making a soup', I wouldn't say in a restaurant 'I'll have a soup' unless there were several on the menu - and even then I'd probably say 'I'll have one of the soups'.

Before going to the restaurant, discussing what we would like, before seeing the menu, 'I'd like a soup' would be as entirely normal as it would be to me in the kitchen.


----------



## El escoces

Thomas Tompion said:


> While when I'm cooking I might well say 'I'm making a soup', I wouldn't say in a restaurant 'I'll have a soup' unless there were several on the menu - and even then I'd probably say 'I'll have one of the soups'.
> 
> Before going to the restaurant, discussing what we would like, before seeing the menu, 'I'd like a soup' would be as entirely normal as it would be to me in the kitchen.


 
This is clearly simply a question of personal usage or preference.  For once, it's not a BrE/AmE split!  I would never use "like a soup" or "have one of the soups", but as I said before it's just a question of what you're used to saying.  TT includes soup in the category of items with which the indefinite article is used, and I have been very interested to discover that some people do that.


----------



## Junwei Guo

Thomas Tompion said:


> We don't often disagree, EE, but did you really mean to say we can't say 'I'm making a soup'?  I say it quite a lot, particularly now *the pound's so weak*.  I could easily say 'I'm making two soups': a friend of mine has a child who loves home-made soup but is, like most children with their sensitive taste-buds, very fussy about flavour.  When they come I often make two soups.


Hi, Thomas~ What do you mean by "pound"?
Thank you


----------



## Thomas Tompion

Junwei Guo said:


> Hi, Thomas~ What do you mean by "pound"?
> Thank you


I meant the UK currency.  I made that remark in 2009, I think.


----------



## Junwei Guo

Thomas Tompion said:


> I meant the UK currency.  I made that remark in 2009, I think.


Thank you


----------



## Junwei Guo

I have a quesiton:
In a restaurant, can I say "I'll have *a chicken* soup"?
Thanks!


----------



## Hermione Golightly

'I'll have the chicken soup' is more likely.


----------



## Junwei Guo

Hermione Golightly said:


> 'I'll have the chicken soup' is more likely.


Here's a sentence from my textbook:
The book says we can say "*A* chicken soup, please" when we order the kind of soup.
Is it correct? Thanks again~


----------



## Barque

Yes, it's possible. The intended meaning is "A _bowl of_ chicken soup, please".


----------



## Rover_KE

I seem to be the only one who says 'Soup, please', or if there's a choice – 'Artichoke soup, please', or 'A cup/bowl of minestrone, please'.

The server's never offended by my failure to articulate a complete and grammatical sentence.


----------



## Junwei Guo

Barque said:


> Yes, it's possible. The intended meaning is "A _bowl of_ chicken soup, please".


Thanks!
Which one is more common when we order the kind of soup:
1. "a bowl of chicken soup, please"
2. "a chicken soup, please"
Thanks!


Rover_KE said:


> I seem to be the only one who says 'Soup, please', or if there's a choice – 'Artichoke soup, please', or 'A cup/bowl of minestrone, please'.
> 
> The server's never offended by my failure to articulate a complete and grammatical sentence.


Can I just say "minestone, please"?
Thanks!


----------



## Andygc

You can say "Minest*r*one, please", but you won't get the chicken soup you wanted earlier.


----------



## Junwei Guo

Andygc said:


> You can say "Minest*r*one, please", but you won't get the chicken soup you wanted earlier.


Thanks


----------



## Junwei Guo

Barque said:


> Yes, it's possible. The intended meaning is "A _bowl of_ chicken soup, please".


Hi, Barque~
1. Chicken soup, please
2. *A* chicken soup, please
3. *A bowl of* chicken soup, please
They're all possible, right?
Thanks!


----------



## Barque

Yes, they are all possible but option 1 seems the most likely.


----------



## Thomas Tompion

Junwei Guo said:


> Hi, Barque~
> 1. Chicken soup, please
> 2. *A* chicken soup, please
> 3. *A bowl of* chicken soup, please
> They're all possible, right?
> Thanks!


You've forgotten 'The chicken soup, please'.  If it's on the menu, that might seem the most natural.


----------



## Rover_KE

You only need to say 'a bowl' or 'a cup' when a choice of serving sizes (large and small respectively) is offered on the menu.


----------



## Junwei Guo

I've got it. Thanks all for your kind help


----------



## Super Saiyan

Hi, if I buy a lot of cans of the same kind and brand of soup and put them in a kitchen. Then others see them and say "Canned soups are bad for you." Can I use soups as plural here because there are many cans? Thanks.


----------



## Edinburgher

Super Saiyan said:


> Can I use soups as plural here because there are many cans?


Yes, you can use the plural here, but no, it would not be because there are many cans.
You would use the plural because you are generalizing to all kinds of canned soup.  You can do this even though there is only one kind of soup on the table.  You could do this even if you had bought only one can.


----------



## Barque

In that context I'd expect "Canned _soup is_ bad for you".

There may be many cans, but the reference is to canned soup in general, not to any specific cans.

On the other hand, if you'd bought cans of different brands or types, "Canned soups are..." could work. I suppose it could also work with the same brand and type, as in your example, but I think the uncountable "soup" is better there.


----------



## Edinburgher

Barque said:


> I'd expect "Canned _soup is_ bad for you".


I agree, and I should have mentioned that too, but I find the plural is also acceptable if the idea is "*all kinds* of soup".


----------



## Super Saiyan

Thanks, if you are in a store and on a shelf, you see the staff cans of same brand and types. Can I say ‘the staff is putting a lot of can soups on the shelf.’ ? I want to know whether soups can take plural because there are a lot of cans.


----------



## Linkway

Super Saiyan said:


> I want to know whether soups can take plural because there are a lot of cans.


It depends on context and the level of formality/informality.

In the context you gave, it would be better to say:

_The staff are putting a lot of cans of soup on the shelf.  
The staff are putting a lot of soup on the shelf.   _[This is a bit open to humorous interpretation.]
Supervisor's instruction to shelf-filler:   _Put those soups on shelf 57.   _[This is a concise way of telling the employee what to do - no need for full 'correctness'.

Also:
_The staff are putting several types of soup on the shelf.
That store has a great range of soups on offer at the moment. _ ['Soups' to indicate several different types of soup.]

The customer picked up a can of soup.  
The customer picked up a soup.  

_In the restaurant, I ordered a tea, two coffees, a soup, some bread, and a double-whiskey._


----------



## Edinburgher

Super Saiyan said:


> I want to know whether soups can take plural because there are a lot of cans.


No.  Certainly "a lot of can soups" sounds odd to me.  I'd say "a lot of *canned* soup {singular because we treat this as a mass noun}".  Pluralizing that would work, but only if the intended meaning is a lot of varieties of canned soup.  If you want to focus on there being many cans, then it is the word "can", not "soup", that you want to make plural:  I would change it to "a lot of soup cans" (or, better, as Linkway said, "a lot of cans *of* soup".


----------



## dojibear

Super Saiyan said:


> Can I say ‘the staff is putting a lot of can soups on the shelf.’ ?



No, there is no expression "can soup". The expression is "canned soup" for the soup.

Each can is an item (a noun), so they are "cans of soup". A single one is "a can of soup".


----------



## Packard

Egoexpress said:


> I am wondering if the following one can be applied to what you have said.
> At a pub - May a I have a beer? to mean that you'd like to have a pint of it?
> 
> Thank you!


Beer seems to be a special case that brings emotions to the argument.  

Strictly speaking, "I'll have four beers" means that you want four different brands, or types of beer.  

"I'll have four beer" is the "correct" form, as shortened form of "four bottles/glasses/pitchers/of beer."

"Aspirin" is another case that creates arguments.  Strictly speaking it is not "I'll take two aspirins", it should be "I'll take two aspirin [tablets]", but "aspirin tablets" is a form that is rarely used and you won't hear many people saying "I'll take two aspirin".


----------



## dojibear

Packard said:


> "Aspirin" is another case that creates arguments. Strictly speaking it is not "I'll take two aspirins", it should be "I'll take two aspirin [tablets]"



If "an aspirin" means "an aspiran tablet" (which it does to most people, I think), then "I'll take two aspirins" is correct, and means the same as "I'll take two aspirin tablets".


----------



## Packard

dojibear said:


> If "an aspirin" means "an aspiran tablet" (which it does to most people, I think), then "I'll take two aspirins" is correct, and means the same as "I'll take two aspirin tablets".


I disagree.  It is verging off-topic so  I won't pursue it here.  But I do disagree.


----------



## kentix

I agree with Edinburgher that you can say "canned soups are bad for you" if you are conceiving of all the different soups made by all the different manufacturers. It's basically saying there is no significant difference between manufacturers or styles.

"Canned soup is bad for you" is also possible, as a description of an entire category of food.

Neither has anything to do with whether you currently possess 1000 cans of soup or one can of soup or no cans of soup. It's a reference to a general condition of life (as perceived by that speaker).


----------



## Roxxxannne

Packard said:


> Beer seems to be a special case that brings emotions to the argument.
> 
> Strictly speaking, "I'll have four beers" means that you want four different brands, or types of beer.
> 
> "I'll have four beer" is the "correct" form, as shortened form of "four bottles/glasses/pitchers/of beer."
> 
> "Aspirin" is another case that creates arguments.  Strictly speaking it is not "I'll take two aspirins", it should be "I'll take two aspirin [tablets]", but "aspirin tablets" is a form that is rarely used and you won't hear many people saying "I'll take two aspirin".


To me, 'I'll have four beers' is exactly what I would say if I'm standing at the bar ordering for myself and three friends at the table over there.  I'd follow it with details: how many bottles of which brand.


----------



## Packard

Roxxxannne said:


> To me, 'I'll have four beers' is exactly what I would say if I'm standing at the bar ordering for myself and three friends at the table over there.  I'd follow it with details: how many bottles of which brand.


Beer/Beers should follow the fish/fishes format.  It doesn't because there are more drunk beer drinkers than drunk fish eaters.


----------



## Roxxxannne

And aspirin/aspirins doesn't follow the fish/fishes format because the speaker is in too much pain to use proper English?


----------



## Edinburgher

I don't understand.  To me "four beer" is ungrammatical because I regard beer as a count noun in the context of buying four servings of it at a bar.  When using beer as a mass noun, "four beer" is in any case impossible by definition (mass noun is the opposite of count noun, therefore you can't count things expressed as a mass noun); you would have to say "four gallons (or whatever) of beer".  What, for example, would "four flour" mean?  It's nonsense.  (Four flour*s* is fine, that means four types of flour).

The problem with fish/fishes is that it is a bit of an exception, and therefore not suitable as a model to be followed in other circumstances.

I'm less fussy about aspirin.  I will happily take three aspirins or three aspirin.  In the former case, singular aspirin *means or represents* an aspirin tablet, and therefore is pluralized on behalf of the word "tablet" (you would otherwise say "three aspirin tablets"), while in the latter case we are dealing with elision, where in the singular case "tablet" is elided, and in the plural case "tablets" is elided, leaving singular "aspirin" in both cases.

For some reason, my fingers kept wanting to type "aspiring".


----------



## Roxxxannne

Edinburgher said:


> I don't understand.  To me "four beer" is ungrammatical because I regard beer as a count noun in the context of buying four servings of it at a bar.  When using beer as a mass noun, "four beer" is in any case impossible by definition (mass noun is the opposite of count noun, therefore you can't count things expressed as a mass noun); you would have to say "four gallons (or whatever) of beer".  What, for example, would "four flour" mean?  It's nonsense.  (Four flour*s* is fine, that means four types of flour).
> 
> The problem with fish/fishes is that it is a bit of an exception, and therefore not suitable as a model to be followed in other circumstances.
> 
> I'm less fussy about aspirin.  I will happily take three aspirins or three aspirin.  In the former case, singular aspirin *means or represents* an aspirin tablet, and therefore is pluralized on behalf of the word "tablet" (you would otherwise say "three aspirin tablets"), while in the latter case we are dealing with elision, where in the singular case "tablet" is elided, and in the plural case "tablets" is elided, leaving singular "aspirin" in both cases.
> 
> For some reason, my fingers kept wanting to type "aspiring".



Yes, four beer is ungrammatical to me also.  It's not the same as those few (mostly for animals) singular-as-plurals like deer, moose, fish.


----------



## Packard

Roxxxannne said:


> Yes, four beer is ungrammatical to me also.  It's not the same as those few (mostly for animals) singular-as-plurals like deer, moose, fish.



You would have to include the serving unit for it to be grammatical.  "Four bottles of beer."

But "four beers" does not mean "four bottles of Budweiser", it means (perhaps) one bottle of Molson, one bottle of Coors, one bottle of Budweiser and one bottle of Amstel light. .


----------



## Edinburgher

Packard said:


> But "four beers" does not mean "four bottles of Budweiser"


Heh, heh,  I certainly hope not.


> it means (perhaps) one bottle of Molson, one bottle of Coors, one bottle of Budweiser and one bottle of Amstel light


Well, it can mean that, but it's down to context.
If you go up to the bar and ask for four beers, there may be a default brand, and you will get four of that kind.  Or the bartender will ask you which brand you want.  Then you specify one, and will get four of that kind,. or you can specify a selection.

At home, you might have three friends over for a poker game, and a crate of beer in the fridge.  You call out to your wife, who happens to be in the kitchen, and ask her if she wouldn't mind getting four beers out of the fridge.  She isn't going to respond "Sorry, darling, there seems to be only one kind.", is she?


----------



## Packard

Edinburgher said:


> Heh, heh,  I certainly hope not.
> 
> Well, it can mean that, but it's down to context.
> If you go up to the bar and ask for four beers, there may be a default brand, and you will get four of that kind.  Or the bartender will ask you which brand you want.  Then you specify one, and will get four of that kind,. or you can specify a selection.
> 
> At home, you might have three friends over for a poker game, and a crate of beer in the fridge.  You call out to your wife, who happens to be in the kitchen, and ask her if she wouldn't mind getting four beers out of the fridge.  She isn't going to respond "Sorry, darling, there seems to be only one kind.", is she?



No it is like fish/fishes.

Fishes = separate species of fish.

Beers = separate brands/types of beer

In the vernacular that distinction has been lost; it does not mean it is not correct.


----------



## Roxxxannne

You're right, but in casual speech, as Edinburgher says in post #52, 'four beers' to me means 'four servings of beer' and therefore four individual, countable items with all the qualities of beer.   
And if it's good enough for the olive-sided flycatcher (song #2), it's good enough for me.


----------



## Packard

Roxxxannne said:


> You're right, but in casual speech, as Edinburgher says in post #52, 'four beers' to me means 'four servings of beer' and therefore four individual, countable items with all the qualities of beer.
> And if it's good enough for the olive-sided flycatcher (song #2), it's good enough for me.


I don't argue the point in bars.  If I am ordering, I will say, "I would like four bottles of beer; one Budweiser; two Molsons and one Amstel Light." 

I don't know why I would say "Molsons" is should be "Molson" (I'm nothing but inconsistent).

Note:  If anyone is wondering why the  each time I mention Amstel Light, it is only because they have never tasted the stuff.


----------



## Roxxxannne

Packard said:


> Note:  If anyone is wondering why the  each time I mention Amstel Light, it is only because they have never tasted the stuff.


----------

