Why is there no such thing as an empty bottle of Scotch?
Leave your answer as a Reply to this post.
Scroll past the white space to find the Reply box.
In class today, we talked about the grammatical errors in writing. Starting with a riddle about Scotch. (The difference between an empty bottle of Scotch vs an empty Scotch bottle.) The riddle helped me think about my writing, and to be careful how I use grammar.
1. She hit me with an empty bottle of Scotch.
2. She hit me with an empty Scotch bottle.
3. She hit me with a bottle that had been emptied of Scotch.
4. She hit me with a bottle from which all the Scotch had been emptied.
5. She hit me with a bottle emptied of Scotch.
6. She hit me with a bottle she had emptied of Scotch.
Only one is wrong. The rest are logically similar but grammatically different and variously nuanced. Three of them seem logically identical but not as interesting as the only version that suggests that she was drunk when she hit me.
Number 6 doesn’t say she was drunk. It doesn’t say she drank the Scotch. But it certainly hints that she did so. Consider the equally possible and much more straightforward alternative:
She emptied the Scotch bottle into a glass and drank it down. Then she hit me with the empty bottle.
It’s clear. It communicates the facts. But it is NEARLY as effective as collaborating with the reader. The trick to REALLY effective writing is making the reader do THE RIGHT AMOUNT OF WORK.
“She hit me with a bottle she had emptied of Scotch” doesn’t just communicate facts; it lures the reader into the insinuation that she drank the Scotch and was therefore more likely to strike me with the bottle. Readers who COME TO THEIR OWN CONCLUSIONS (conclusions you have carefully set for them like traps) are much more likely to find your work persuasive.
777sunflower777
babyyoda1023
bloguser246
Urbie
ANONYMOUS
coldice234
confusedpinky
coolraccoon318
davidbdale
eric cartman
gingerbreadman27
hdt1817
hockeyplayer
hotgirlsemester
hurtnowitzki
koolsaxophone
ichverdustehier
indigo143
jreggie20
kevinjames
ladybug122718
laflame
maxxpayne
millycain
nothingxtoxsay
planefan25
propel78
puffer
rebelpilot64
stoneharbor91
sunflower828
JetsFan2
thad711
thefirstmclovin
TheFrogSprog
thekidfrombrooklyn
tonysoprano44
chich_
youngthug03
Counterintuitive Fall 2023 
No idea.
I think that there are no empty bottles of scotch because once that bottle is empty…every feeling that it has made you feel is now inside of you (words, emotions, thoughts, etc)…almost like your body is now the bottle
Because its nasty
The reason why there is no such thing as an “empty bottle of scotch” because a “bottle of scotch” implies that it is a bottle that contains something, and it is not empty.
Because there is no scotch left
once it’s empty its just an empty
Maybe there is no such thing as an empty bottle of scotch because if its an empty bottle then its not an empty bottle scotch its just an empty bottle.
Once you empty the bottle of scotch, it becomes just a glass bottle. So technically speaking there would be no such thing as an empty bottle of scotch because once emptied it just becomes a glass bottle with no necessary connotation to scotch.
When you empty a bottle of scocth it will always be a bottle of scotch because it was made for it
Once a bottle is emptied, it no longer contains what it previously had, making just a bottle and no longer a bottle of what it contained.
If there’s nothing in the bottle it can’t be a bottle of scotch, it can be a scotch bottle but not an empty bottle of scotch.
I think that there is no empty scotch bottle because there is always a drop left
The reason for the bottle of Scotch never being empty is because you put the scotch inside of you. You become the bottle, because in theory you are acting as the same as the bottle. The bottle was just holding the scotch, now you are too.
There is no empty bottle of scotch because it will always carry the aroma and essence like a constant intrinsic part of the scotch it contained. So, even when the scotch in the bottle is finished, it is still a bottle of scotch rather than an empty bottle.
Theres no such thing as an empty bottle of Scotch because a bottle of Scotch contains Scotch, isn’t not empty, but if it were empty, it would just be a bottle. Or it could be a bottle that used to contain scotch but it cannot be considered empty if the bottle is using language considered to have contained something.
Reply
An empty bottle cannot have a descriptive label attached to its emptiness. The importance of using descriptive words and phrases towards anything can make a difference in context clues and such. While the bottle may have had some scotch in it at some point or it may even have a label describing it as a scotch bottle. The emptiness dictates what its properties are.
An empty bottle of scotch is always filled no matter how empty it is there’s always something that will make it filled.
When the Scotch is poured out of the bottle, it is then just an empty bottle. It no longer has Scotch inside so it is referred to as an “empty bottle”.
you can make a bottle out of the scotch itself, or drink molten glass. but if it is empty, it is merely an empty bottle, not full of anything
There is no such thing as “an empty bottle of scotch” because once the bottle is empty it is considered, an empty scotch bottle.
There is no such thing as an empty bottle of scotch because if the bottle is empty, that means that no scotch is present in the bottle, and it shouldn’t be considered an empty bottle of scotch. It would just be an empty bottle.
There is no such thing as an empty bottle of scotch because it would just be a bottle when its empty. It should be an empty scotch bottle.
Because when it’s empty is just an empty bottle that had scotch in it