mac11 wrote:Would anyone like to tackle flammable/inflammable/uninflammable? How did we get three words to represent two ideas?
The way this was taught to me in school, the story I mean, was that it dates back to wartime in Britain, when there were a lot of American servicemen here.
They were unfamiliar with the British use of the word "inflammable", and things had to be labelled FLAM or NON-FLAM to avoid confusion.
I realise that this is in no way an answer to your question, but I thought I'd put it in anyway.
I personally have never much liked the use of "flammable", although I like most Americanisms; they are generally pithy and useful. In fact that's why an expression get's adopted, isn't it? Because it's useful? Or captures the spirit of the moment, or something similar. Zeitgeist.
( Gesundheit!
)