In the case of "inflammable" the -in is not a prefix. The original usage was inflame, therefore, if something easily burned it was "inflammable" or easily inflamed. Inflammation of the hemorrhoids, for example, does not mean my piles are "not" flaming.
Just so you know.
BTW, where can I get a "Frigerator"?
NO! The root word is 'inflame'. The 'in' in 'inflame' is NOT a prefix, it is part of the word itself.
OSHA, the ASTM, NBS, Underwriter's laboratory etc have agreed on standard definiton:
Inflamable means the flashpoint is below 140 degrees F. Or, as a practical matter, the vapors can form an explosive atmosphere at ordinary temperatures. Example: gasoline
Combustible is not the same as inflammable. Combustible liquids have a flashpoint above 140 degrees F. Or, as a practical matter, the vapors cannot form an explosive atmosphere at ordinary room temperatures. Example: kerosine.
NO! Linseed oil is combustible. Asbestos is noninflammable, also noncombustible.
"Flammable' and 'Nonflammable' are recently coined words invented in a hopefully nonfutile effort to keep people such as yourself from being burned.
Don't trust me, consult a dictionary.
It used to be inflammable iwth a flash point below 140. Has that changed recently?
Indeed.
There is no inconsistency, only confusion. Read my earlier posts, or Robert Bonomi's, in this thread. The "in" in "inflammable" is not a prefix meaning "not", it's part of the root word, which is "inflame".
-- Regards, Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)
Get a copy of my NEW AND IMPROVED TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter by sending email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com You must use your REAL email address to get a response.
Dunno if it changed... but DAGS on , and the first hit you get is
Compare this definition to combustible, which indicates a liquid that is somewhat harder to ignite (flash point above 100 oF)."
-- Regards, Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)
Get a copy of my NEW AND IMPROVED TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter by sending email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com You must use your REAL email address to get a response.
Replies such as this should enshrined somehwere as a shining example of good posting and a friendly attitude. Robert, I have enjoyed learning from you. This also highlights that it has been entirely too long since my Latin classes. :)
Yes, the English language is silly at times, but we can only do our best to work with it and not "blow ourselves up" with cement and such.
Chris
I'll admit, I had the 'non-opposite-ness' of those two words drummed into me at an _early_ age. One of the hazards of growing up in a household where
*both* parents had professional journalism backgrounds. :) They did a fair amount of writing for the construction-engineering industry, and also the transportation industry. Using the *correct* one (basis the trade-specific _technical_ meaning) of the two terms, in those in those environments, was an absolute necessity.Beyond that, I cheated. For the history, I grabbed the handy dictionary (a serious one, with derivations), and looked up both words. Then it was just pontification, based on the 'half a line' of derivation, in each listing.
'Silly' doesn't _begin_ to cover it -- Have you ever heard of anyone making an _ane_ remark? Is the politician who waffles on the issues, ever called _cisive_ ? How about words that sound exactly alike, and have exactly *opposite* meanings? e.g. 'raise', and 'raze'.
Seen in a science-fiction novel: "I was hardly gruntled at the summons." (That line has been a personal favorite for many years.) [ trivia: my spell checker questioned 'ane', and 'cisive', but did *not* object to 'gruntled'. ]
And a sci-fi short-story (concerning an alien that crashes on Earth) that starts out: "I awoke with a ringing in my ears. Two in the right, and one in the left. But who on Earth knew *my* number?"
Then, go look up the 'Retief' sci-fi short stories, written by Keith Laumer. And contemplate the poor editor(s) who had to _deal_ with those stories. And the number of proof-readers that must have been driven into complete nervous breakdowns.
Lastly, hunt up a James Thurber story called 'The Wonderful O'. The story premise is laughable cum ridiculous, but it is _well-told_. Not unexpected, considering the author. There's a line in that story -- "'Geep', whuppled the parrot." -- that, _in_context_, is one of the funniest bits I have ever read.
There was an old George Carlin routine...
"Flammable, nonflammable, noninflammable... why are there three?"
-CJ
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.