+0
Hello, teachers!

[1] Please help me with this.
1. Let me go and get something for lunch.
2. Let me go and get something for a lunch.
I know that #1 is correct. But I heard someone says that #2 is also correct and there is a slight difference in meaning with/without an article. She says "for lunch" means "it is time to eat and I'll grab something," and "for a lunch" means that "I'll pick up something to eat at lunch time, which may be later." Is she correct?

[2] Would you please tell me which is correct or natural, 'lunch' or 'a lunch'?
1. That's not enough for [lunch, a lunch]. Add some more!
2. That's not enough for [lunch, a lunch] for 10 people. Add some more!

[3] Please check and correct these.
1. He brown bags (it) to save money.
2. He packs ( a ) lunch to save money.
3. He brings ( a ) sack lunch to save money.

Thank you very much.
Peace!
+1
Interesting questions, Ms. Jandi, and I surmise that you will get a range of answers.

In my view, 'lunch' refers to the idea of the meal or mealtime, while 'a lunch' refers to the particular collection of foodstuffs constituting the meal. So that, for instance, 'I had lunch today at 11:30, and it was a lunch of sushi, miso soup and green tea'.

Therefore:

[1]
1. Let me go and get something for lunch. FINE-- THE SPEAKER IS CONSIDERING THE MEAL.
2. Let me go and get something for a lunch.-- OK, BUT NOT USUAL TO ME; THE SPEAKER HERER MUST BE WONDERING ABOUT SPECIFIC ITEMS.

She says "for lunch" means "it is time to eat and I'll grab something," and "for a lunch" means that "I'll pick up something to eat at lunch time, which may be later." I DON'T SEE THIS DIFFERENCE AT ALL, MS. JANDI.

[2]
1. That's not enough for [lunch, a lunch]. EITHER, WITH THE SAME DIFFERENCE IN MEANINGS THAT I INDICATED ABOVE, AND WITH 'LUNCH' THE MORE EXPECTED FORM.
2. That's not enough for [lunch, a lunch] for 10 people. EITHER, WITH THE SAME DIFFERENCES.

[3]
1. He brown bags (it) to save money. 'IT' SOUNDS MORE NATURAL TO ME.
2. He packs ( a ) lunch to save money. 'A' SOUNDS MORE NATURAL, AS WE ARE CONSIDERING THE SPECIFIC PHYSICAL PACKAGE.
3. He brings ( a ) sack lunch to save money. ONLY THE 'A' SOUNDS RIGHT HERE-- IT IS, AFTER ALL, AN OBVIOUS COUNTABLE 'SACK'.

I await a variety of opinions, however.
+0
Let me go and get something for lunch. That way I'll have it when it's time for lunch later.
Let me go an get something for a lunch. Then we can have a lunch right now.

The "now"/"later" distinction doesn't seem to be an adequate explanation for the difference.

The difference I'm picking up is this:

Let me go and get something already prepared and ready to eat for lunch.
Let me go and get some ingredients which I can [ put together to form / use to prepare ] a lunch.

Yet this in itself also seems inadequate!

Maybe:
"lunch" is the ordinary mid-day meal.
"a lunch" is an occasion - a "lunch occasion"

The next two can be said with or without "for ten people".

That's not enough (for ten people) to eat for lunch.
That's not enough to make a lunch (with) (for ten people).

The second is less awkward as: We'll need more to make a lunch (for ten people).

He brown bags it to save money.
He packs lunch to save money. (OR a lunch OR his lunch OR his lunches)
He brings a sack lunch to save money.

Emotion: smile