Jane went to the kitchen

[alpacinou]

Is this correct and natural?

Jane went to the kitchen and came back with a glass of bourbon. Her friends whooped and hollered as she raised the glass with both hands as if it were a sports trophy. She searched the dark room for Harry, her gaze settling on him. "You know what I want Harry?"

"Let me hear it."

"I want to dance on bourbon. I want to dance the night away on bourbon."

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

Is this correct and natural?

Jane went to the kitchen and came back with a glass of bourbon. Her friends whooped and hollered as she raised the glass with both hands as if it were a sports trophy. She searched the dark room for Harry, her gaze settling on him. "You know what I want, Harry?"

"Let's hear it."

"I want to dance on bourbon. I want to dance the night away on bourbon."

Nope, sorry. We use on when we talk about being on drugs, but we don't use on for booze.

No one knows why.

 

[Tdol]

If bourbon has some perceived intoxicating qualities not found in, say, gin or vodka, the preposition sounds OK to me.

 

[alpacinou]

Nope, sorry. We use on when we talk about being on drugs, but we don't use on for booze.

No one knows why.

How can I fix it? What words should I use to make that work?

 

[Tdol]

drinking/full of

 

[alpacinou]

drinking/full of

Is this okay?

"I want to dance full of bourbon. I want to dance the night away full of bourbon."

 

[emsr2d2]

It might be more compelling as something like "I want to dance the night away in a bourbon-fuelled haze!"

Going back to the use of "on" with alcohol, it can be used. In BrE, we say things like "Uh oh. Grandma's on the gin again!" and "You've tripped over three times since breakfast. Have you been on the vodka?" As you can see, it's "on + the + name of alcohol".

 

[Tdol]

Or non-specific terms for drinking in general- on the lash/piss/sauce, etc.

 

[jutfrank]

I think it's fine to use on Bourbon in the context of the OP if the idea is that she's behaving under Bourbon's particular effect.

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

If bourbon has some perceived intoxicating qualities not found in, say, gin or vodka, the preposition sounds OK to me.

It doesn't.

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

I think it's fine to use on Bourbon in the context of the OP if the idea is that she's behaving under Bourbon's particular effect.

I'd just say drunk.

 

[jutfrank]

It doesn't.

Sure it does. All alcoholic drinks, and all drugs in fact, have distinctly different effects. That's the point that alpacinoutd was getting at, I guess.

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

Sure it does. All alcoholic drinks, and all drugs in fact, have distinctly different effects. That's the point that alpacinoutd was getting at, I guess.

Bourbon does not do anything to you that gin or vodka do, booze mythology notwithstanding. I speak from extensive field research.

In American English, you can be on coke, smack, speed, or acid, but we're not likely to say someone is on booze or any of its varieties. We'd typically say someone is drunk (or one of its myriad colorful synonyms).

When we want to be more specific, then we might say someone is drunk on bourbon or gin or wine or beer or whatever.

British English might be different.

 

[emsr2d2]

I think there's some confusion here. I don't think anyone has said that "is on + name of booze" is the same as saying "is drunk". It's used to mean "is drinking + name of booze".

Me: I feel dreadful. I was on neat vodka at the party last night.
Friend: I feel fine, but I stayed on beer all evening.
Me: I'll never learn! Mind you, at least I didn't start on vodka then swap to whisky.
Friend: True. You'd probably be dead this morning, not just hung over!

 

[jutfrank]

I have to disagree that the effects of gin, vodka, and whisky are all the same and I'm quite surprised one would think so. Also, I'm pretty sure there's no difference between British or American usage here.

I think the oddness of the phrase on Bourbon simply comes from the fact that you don't imagine that Bourbon can have a distinctive effect. If you think it can, then it sounds fine. That's not a cultural difference, it's a personal one. I personally think it's okay in principle, although I do think the context of the OP is odd because it's so hard to imagine that anybody could think or say such a thing.

 

[jutfrank]

It's used to mean "is drinking + name of booze".

Yes. And by extension, 'is under the effect of'.

I didn't mean to suggest that if you're under the effect of alcohol that you're necessarily drunk.

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

I have to disagree that the effects of gin, vodka, and whisky are all the same and I'm quite surprised one would think so. Also, I'm pretty sure there's no difference between British or American usage here.

I think the oddness of the phrase on Bourbon simply comes from the fact that you don't imagine that Bourbon can have a distinctive effect. If you think it can, then it sounds fine. That's not a cultural difference, it's a personal one. I personally think it's okay in principle, although I do think the context of the OP is odd because it's so hard to imagine that anybody could think or say such a thing.

We agree to disagree. I've never heard anyone say "on bourbon," "on vodka," or "on gin."

Never, as in not ever.