Train Basics Ask Trains Cabooses, not cabeese

Cabooses, not cabeese

By Angela Cotey | June 1, 2017

| Last updated on November 3, 2020

Ask Trains from the June 2015 issue

Email Newsletter

Get the newest photos, videos, stories, and more from Trains.com brands. Sign-up for email today!

TRNAT0515_01
Volunteers at the Whitewater Valley Railroad in Connersville, Ind., prepare a string of cabooses (not cabeese) for an excursion in December 2013.
Steve Sweeney
Q If the plural of “goose” is “geese,” then is the plural of “caboose,” “cabeese?” What is the proper plural form of “caboose?” – William James, Manchester, N.H.

A Our collected evidence indicates that “caboose” takes a standard -s plural. The word caboose is a “count noun” and takes a normal count plural. For example: “To streamline operations, the railroads would like to permanently uncouple these little lookout cars from freight trains. ‘Cabooses are dead weight,’ says a vice president of a Western railroad. ‘They are inefficient and belong to a different era.’” John D. Williams, Wall Street Journal, March 18, 1982. “A Burlington Northern freight passes, and Brian calls my attention to the rear-end device that has replaced the cabooses.” Terry Pindell, “Making Tracks: An American Rail Odyssey,” 1990. – Neil S. Serven, associate editor, Merriam-Webster Inc.

2 thoughts on “Cabooses, not cabeese

  1. About 1999, I got called in early (3AM) to help haul crews at Northtown. One of the trains had Conductor Steve Johnson. I told him, one caboose, two cabooses–why aren’t two cabooses cabeese? He look at me (after a six or so hour trip from Dilworth), laughed, and said I had two much time on my thoughts! I took him to the Hump Tower, dropped him off, and got some breakfast in order to be on duty at 7AM as Terml Supt’s Clerk.

You must login to submit a comment