There is nothing actually incorrect about the phrase "lunch meal", and a rapid search will find a number of uses of the phrase. There is, however, no good reason for using it, as lunch is and has always been a meal. The phrase is redundant and not idiomatic. Use of this phrase might give the erroneous impression that the word "lunch" refers to a time of day, rather than a meal.
Saying a a lunch meal is incorrect English, you should just say lunch
The correct English would be, "I had my lunch in a park".
Correct. In other words, nothing in this world is free. Say if you were taken to lunch by your boss, and he paid then even though you had a free lunch, the meal still cost money.
The correct form of invitation in "you are invited to lunch" or "you are invited at lunch" is "you are invited to lunch". You could also say, "you are invited to lunch at my house" as this would be grammatically correct.
The correct way to say this would be "Mark HAD lunch." This means he already ate it. You could also say "Mark WILL HAVE lunch," meaning sometime in the future. Another correct sentence would be "Mark HAS lunch." This means that he is in possession of lunch but has not eaten it yet.
take your lunch to school becuz you are taking it today
le repas de midi literally: midday meal
Both are correct with different meaning. I'm on lunchmeans either "I'm on my lunch-break" or "I'm the one taking care of the lunch-duty." I'm at lunch means simply means "I'm at lunch."
dinner time Well if you were having breakfeat and lunch you could say brunch but just lunch i guess you could say mid day meal sorry hope i was of much help!!:)
Your host or hostess should have been thanked directly after the meal.
You can, but it is not idiomatic English. If you mean that people worked straight through their lunch time, use No one took lunch
it is not correct English, you rather say still
You can, but it is not idiomatic English. If you mean that people worked straight through their lunch time, use No one took lunch