Flammable and inflammable

[Joel S. Berson]

Many years ago the U.S. federal government required truck signs to
display (change to) "flammable" and "non-flammable".  Because many
people were confused.

For the requirement to change from "inflammable" to "flammable", see
"Code of Federal Regulations", Title 49, Parts 71 to 90, Revised as
of January 1, 1964, http://tinyurl.com/k4swopn (GBooks) -- page 7,
note 1:  "Where the word 'INFLAMMABLE' is now painted [etc.] on tank
cars, ... portable tanks, or other containers, it may be continued
until such tanks or other containers are repainted ... and at such
times shall be replaced with the word 'FLAMMABLE' unless otherwise
ordered by the Commission."

(These regulations also control the color of signs for hazardous substances.)

I suspect the terminology has been standardized internationally by convention.

Joel

At 3/28/2014 09:06 AM, David A. Daniel wrote:
>When I was a kid in the 60's fuel trucks all had inflammable written on
>them. I distinctly remember being behind one of these one day and my mother
>having a bit of a rant saying this was confusing to the great unwashed who
>thought that it meant not-flammable, and so there was a movement afoot
>whereby we would all have to dumb down and start calling it flammable. She
>thought this was just terrible that the educated would have to stoop to
>appeasing the hoi polloi. But there you go. There was a gradual, purposeful
>shift and now I don't know for sure but I suspect that you will not see
>inflammable in public-warning use in the US, unless some truck has gone
>unpainted since the 60's. (BTW, stuff that wouldn't burn at the time was
>noninflammable)
>DAD
>
>Poster:       Michael Quinion <michael.quinion at WORLDWIDEWORDS.ORG>
>Organization: World Wide Words
>Subject:      Flammable and inflammable
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>---
>
>A questioner to World Wide Words has raised the issue of "flammable" and
>"inflammable". As I'm from the wrong side of the Atlantic, it would be a
>great help if list members would comment on the assertion in the draft
>that "Americans now use 'flammable' widely in non-technical speech and
>writing."
>
>Printed works and social media suggest this is so, but appearances may
>deceive. The statistics suggest that US speakers actually prefer to use
>"flammable" than "inflammable" (the former is much more common in current
>newspapers, for example), unlike non-technical usage in Canada, Britain or
>Australia.
>
>--
>Michael Quinion
>World Wide Words
>Web: http://www.worldwidewords.org
>
>------------------------------------------------------------
>The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org