3 ms·
Another confusing one: inflammable, which means capable of being set on fire but follows the same pattern as other words in which the prefix in- connotes negati
by RyanMcGreal 14y ago
Another confusing one: inflammable, which means capable of being set on fire but follows the same pattern as other words in which the prefix in- connotes negation, e.g. inflexible.
- fratis 14y agoFurther confusing the issue: inflammable means exactly the same thing as flammable.
- pavel_lishin 14y agoUgh, what a country! Such a nice day. I think I'll go out the window!
- saraid216 14y agoFlammable was invented precisely because people assumed "inflammable" meant its opposite. At some point, language consistency becomes less important than random fires being started accidentally.
- baddox 14y agoApparently that dual usage for the "in-" prefix existed in Latin as well. Inflammo means to burn, but insanus means not healthy.