What is the difference between flammable and inflammable

Question

What is the difference between flammable and inflammable

Answer 1

There is NO difference whatsoever.

Inflammable is the much older word used for something that may catch fire (i.e. it can 'inflame').

The accepeted opposite these days is non-flammable, though in some countries inflammable (worryingly!!) has been adopted to be the opposite of flammable.

Best to stick with flammable and non-flammable to avoid any confusion.

Answer 2

Flamable (goods) can catch the fire instantly which inflamable(goods) can't.

Answer 3

Well...flammable can be set on fire easily....and....inflammable can't be set on fire.....i think...lol

Answer 4

the meaning is the same, they r synonyms....both means "easily ignited"

Answer 5

Well...flammable can be set on fire easily....and....inflammable can't be set on fire.....i think...lol

or

Very simply explained: flammable substances burn with a flame - this would usually apply to liquids and gases.

Inflammable substances are the opposite - they burn without a flame - generally applied to solids.

When you make a fire say with coal, then first of all it burns with a lot of flames - this is the flammable gases being burnt off. After a while the flames die down or disappear completely and the coal then burns inflammably. It is not possible for gases or liquids to burn inflammably.

or

the meaning is the same, they r synonyms....both means "easily ignited"

  or  

Flamable (goods) can catch the fire instantly which inflamable(goods) can't.

  or

Both words mean that the object being discussed can catch on fire; the difference is in the connotations and context for which the words are used. Flammable objects are ones that are put to flame on purpose. Inflammable objects that should usually not be on fire. Adding the prefix makes it appropriate for use on warning labels. While some objects may be made for burning, such as charcoal, they may still be called inflammable if they are being sold to consumers that need to take extra caution.

Answer 6

object which can be burned is known as flammable . and object which get burn at very low temp. is called inflammable.

Answer 7

No Difference. other is non-flammable.

Answer 8

Linguistics: Flammable vs. inflammable

Look up flammable, inflammable in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/inflammabl...

The word "inflammable" came from Latin inflammāre = "to set fire to", where the prefix in- means "in" as in "inside" (compare English "in flames"). But there have been instances of people thinking that this "in-" prefix means "not" as in "invisible" and "incombustible" etc, and thus wrongly thinking that "inflammable" means "cannot burn". To avoid this safety hazard, the shortened word "flammable" has come into use in recent years.

    Flammable. An oddity, chiefly useful in saving lives. The common word meaning "combustible" is inflammable. But some people are thrown off by the in- and think inflammable means "not combustible." For this reason, trucks carrying gasoline or explosives/ organic solvents such as methanol, chloroform etc are now marked FLAMMABLE.

Answer 9

Very simply explained:  flammable substances burn with a flame - this would usually apply to liquids and gases.

Inflammable substances are the opposite - they burn without a flame - generally applied to solids.

When you make a fire say with coal, then first of all it burns with a lot of flames - this is the flammable gases being burnt off. After a while the flames die down or disappear completely and the coal then burns inflammably. It is not possible for gases or liquids to burn inflammably.

Answer 10

THE FINAL WORD:

There is NO difference.  It's one of the weird things about the English language.  Both words simply mean that things that are flammable or inflammable can burn.  That's all.  There's nothing about flames or no flames.  No other subtle nuances.  Flammable substances burn.  Inflammable substances burn.  That's it.

Answer 11

Both words mean that the object being discussed can catch on fire; the difference is in the connotations and context for which the words are used. Flammable objects are ones that are put to flame on purpose. Inflammable objects that should usually not be on fire. Adding the prefix makes it appropriate for use on warning labels. While some objects may be made for burning, such as charcoal, they may still be called inflammable if they are being sold to consumers that need to take extra caution.

Answer 12

I checked it online and the usage differs region to region. However, Modern English sees no difference between the 2 words. I gave the explanation based on what I learnt.

Flammable implies it can be easily set on fire.

Inflammable implies it can be easily set on fire.

To see how the words evolved, check this - http://www.write101.com/W.Tips215.htm (look for bulk text in blue)