Re: Oxidation Reduction!!!

farooq_w_at_hotmail.com
Date: 11/02/04 

Date: 2 Nov 2004 01:50:07 -0800

Bob wrote:
> >Someone having Mellor's treatise (donald J. haarman in sci.chem)
would
> >definitely be able to answer that or better mulitvolume Oxford
English
> >Dictionary is the best source for getting the answer.
>
> Ah, good idea. I have access to OED online. But as much fun as it may
> be to read, I am not sure it actually answered the Q. Certainly the
> term reduction goes way back. But what is missing is the reasons for
> the evolving terminology.

Does the OED tell us when this term was first used in its *chemical*
sense? The chemical meaning might have been borrowed from other
languages, say French or German. Perhaps looking up oxidation would
give an idea of that (since oxidation sounds more like a chemical
term). I am sure Mellor' treatise would have discussed that. An old
article in J.Chem.Ed might give a clue (it would be easier for you to
get it online):

"A consistent treatment of oxidation-reduction."
VanderWerf, Calvin A. J.Chem.Ed , 1948, 25, 547

> When it came to be said that the opposite of
> ox is reduction, was the term reduction chosen because of its
> metallurgical use, because of the decline in valence, or because of
> the change in ox #?

Wasn't the first properly studied reaction was oxidation of mercury by
Lavoisier (forget the metullurgical meaning for the time being). I
guess the terms oxidation and reduction were introduced much later.

>The latter is almost certainly a newer idea,
> though I can't be sure. Certainly electrons per se came along later.
>
> bob
>
>
>
> >However the term
> >"oxidation number" has been traced to Otis Coe Johnson in Chem. News
> >1880, 42, 51 (courtesy Dr. Andraos).