Talk:lightning in a bottle

lightning in a bottle
Sense 4: Stored electricity, as in a capacitor.

Neither of the citations gives any evidence that "lightning in a bottle" means "stored electricity" - in fact, they're both incompatible with that reading (*"you could shut up the stored electricity"; *"But they say Franklin succeeded in putting stored electricity and corking it") - and even if it did, it's SOP. Franklin was after all working with literal lightning at a time when capacitors were literal bottles. Smurrayinchester (talk) 14:43, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Is this an RFD as opposed to an RFV matter? You're saying it's SoP because it's actual lightning in an actual bottle? When has that ever occurred? Renard Migrant (talk) 15:15, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I think treating it as an RfV allows us more time to find valid cites, which, though unlikely, may exist, especially from the 19th and early 20th centuries.
 * In neither of the citations does in a bottle function as a modifier of lightning, rather as a locative or instrumental modifier of the verbs. It seems like citing home in a taxi from I went home in a taxi. DCDuring TALK 16:19, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
 * There is a dubious brand of cider in the UK called "White Lightning", which comes in a bottle of course. Donnanz (talk) 19:09, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Ah memories of being a teenager. Renard Migrant (talk) 19:36, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Now in the past tense, withdrawn from sale in 2009 apparently. Donnanz (talk) 09:40, 17 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Closed as not an RfD matter: Nobody's made any valid RfD arguments; all the discussion is about citations, and therefore this should be taken to RfV. Pur ple back pack 89  14:33, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

RFV discussion: August 2015–February 2016
Rfv-sense: "Stored electricity, as in a capacitor"

The two purported citations are not of the term in question. They are of lightning and in a bottle, where in a bottle is adverbial. To make this clear: "I went home in a taxi." is not valid attestation of home in a taxi. DCDuring TALK 15:22, 30 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Agree. If you "catch a fish in a net", you are not catching the entire fish-in-net object, but using the net to do the catching. Equinox ◑ 16:37, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Neither of them seem to support the definition that's in question. So I consider the grammar question moot. Renard Migrant (talk) 14:29, 1 September 2015 (UTC)


 * The analysis above is sound. RFV failed. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 02:45, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Non-idiomatic
Are we sure about this? lattermint (talk) 11:57, 1 August 2023 (UTC)