Why does flammable and inflammable mean the same thing?

Answer 1

Because the English language likes to be obtuse. :)

From Dictionary.com
Inflammable and flammable both mean “combustible.” Inflammable is the older by about 200 years. Flammable now has certain technical uses, particularly as a warning on vehicles carrying combustible materials, because of a belief that some might interpret the intensive prefix in- of inflammable as a negative prefix and thus think the word means “noncombustible.”

Answer 2

Inflammable Means Flammable

Answer 3

Flammable And Inflammable

Answer 4

Inflammable is the English word, meaning that something is capable of being inflamed or in flames. The opposite is non-inflammable. This all proved too much for our American cousins who came up with the words flammable and non-flammable. In the general dumbing down of the English language, these words have crept into common use.

Answer 5

This Site Might Help You.

RE:
Why does flammable and inflammable mean the same thing?

Answer 6

Dr. Nick Riviera (The Simpsons) pondered that same question years ago after a firecracker explodes a can marked INFLAMMABLE. "Inflammable means flammable?! Boy, what a country."

Answer 7

My understanding of this is (in complete agreement with old_know_all):

British English : inflammable comes from the word enflame, to burst into fire.

However, the in- part of the word would convey the opposite meaning, i.e. resistant to fire. So to prevent confusion, the American version corrects this by saying flammable.

(Of course, the opposite is flame resistant or retardent!)

Answer 8

I work in a Fire Research Unit and:

Inflammable means the same as flammable, 'liable to catch fire', 'easily ignited'.

Because it is often taken to mean the opposite, it is best to avoid using it and it's also best not to set fire to things in any case, even though i get paid for doing so. lol...

Answer 9

Usage Note: Historically, flammable and inflammable mean the same thing. However, the presence of the prefix in- has misled many people into assuming that inflammable means "not flammable" or "noncombustible." The prefix -in in inflammable is not, however, the Latin negative prefix -in, which is related to the English -un and appears in such words as indecent and inglorious. Rather, this -in is an intensive prefix derived from the Latin preposition in. This prefix also appears in the word enflame. But many people are not aware of this derivation, and for clarity's sake it is advisable to use only flammable to give warnings.

-MM

Answer 10

Because something that burns can 'flame', can be 'enflamed' or can be 'inflamed', although 'inflammation' has become more of a medical term than one used in physics or literature.

Language is only useful if it is flexible. Any 'fixed' abbreviation or adaptation will 'overlap' with an entirely different meaning somewhere else. Occasionally, the conflict will appear in closely related words, such as in/flammable.

Most words that reverse their meaning, also die out in the original usage. 'Terrific' now means 'great', not 'horrifying'. 'Mean' now means 'vicious', instead of 'unremarkable' (as in "down these mean streets", meaning 'ordinary places'). 'Great' no longer means 'big', and 'monster' means bad instead of big, too.

Language evolves (artificial languages, such as 'Latin', always die out). Meaning is always slightly ambiguous, so it has to.