Why does flammable and inflammable mean the same thing? Usually the prefix (in) means not. ************************************************************* 06-11-02, 07:34 PM referenth There are two "in-" prefixes. One means "not" (sensitive/insensitive). The other means "into" (inscribe, write into something) or adds emphasis (inflammable).
Most (perhaps all) trucks in the U.S. carrying inflammable gas now say "flammable" gas to avoid confusion.
06-12-02, 07:48 AM Elexina Actually, nothing is truly "inflammable." Anything will burn if you get it hot enough. The phrase "flammable" is used for materials that are dangerous and easier to ignite, while the term "inflammable" (which does mean NOT flammable) refers to less ignitable materials.
06-12-02, 10:36 AM TiCkeM According to Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary:
Main Entry: in·flam·ma·ble Pronunciation: in-'fla-m&-b&l Function: adjective Etymology: French, from Medieval Latin inflammabilis, from Latin inflammare Date: 1605 1 : FLAMMABLE 2 : easily inflamed , excited, or angered : IRASCIBLE
06-17-02, 08:31 AM Alec Cawley Sorry, Elexina, I don't think you are right. Something that is already fully burt cannot burn any further - e.g. sand. It may melt, or even boil into gas, but once something is fully oxidized, it cannot change further. In fact, if you heat it up really hot it will break apart into a plasma, absorbing rather than emitting energy. But that usually requires temeratures of thousands of degrees.
06-17-02, 01:03 PM Elexina All right, Alec, I'll rephrase. If you get anything hot enough, a reaction will take place. It may not burn, but it *will* react, at the proper temperature. Whether it melts, oxidized, or vaporizes, something will happen. Nothing is inflammable.
06-17-02, 01:46 PM referenth
quote:Originally posted by Elexina: Nothing is inflammable.
Don't you mean "Nothing is nonflammable"?
"Flammable" and "inflammable" mean the same thing. But "inflammable" has a nuance of bursting into flame rather than just igniting and burning easily (hence the Latin "in-" intensifier prefix).
06-17-02, 11:11 PM coldfuse We are starting to get into nuances that require other words, such as combustible, to more acurately describe!
06-18-02, 01:43 PM referenth
quote:
Originally posted by coldfuse: We are starting to get into nuances that require other words, such as _combustible_, to more acurately describe!
Good point, coldfuse. Sorry, I think I wanted there to be some (intensifier) difference between "inflammable" and "flammable" and was mislead by a definition I read.
As for "combustible," it's interchangeable with the figurative sense of "inflammable" and pretty close to literal "(in)flammable." But the latter may give a nuance of burning easily or rapidly.
source
(in)flammable
combustible
Random House Unabridged
easily set on fire; combustible (offline)
capable of catching fire and burning; inflammable; flammable (offline)
[This message was edited by referenth on 06-18-02 at 01:51 PM.]
07-25-02, 06:58 AM Elexina I just wanted to add something. As "flammable" and "inflammable" are interchangeable [yes, I realize my error... I was perhaps not entirely correct... ;-)], so are "valuable" and "invaluable," n'est ce pas? Curiouser and curiouser.
07-25-02, 12:43 PM kittypal How about famous and infamous?
This message has been edited. Last edited by: DorianGreyed,
