Is there a difference between admixture and mixture? I read the following and wondered why admixture, rather than mixture, was used:

"...I counted five variants of the AK-47, an odd admixture of army and navy personnel in the same platoons, and a dizzying array of uniforms."

From the AHD Online:

Synonyms: mixture, blend, amalgam, admixture, compound, 1composite
These nouns refer to a combination produced by mixing. Mixture has the widest application: She routinely drank a mixture of tea and honey. "He showed a curious mixture of eagerness and terror" (Francis Parkman). Blend and amalgam imply that the original components have lost their distinctness: The novel is a fascinating blend of romance and realism. The comedian's act was an amalgam of incisive wit and unceasing good humor. Admixture suggests that one of the components is dissimilar to the others: a perfume containing an essential oil with a large admixture of alcohol. A compound constitutes a new and independent entity: The school's program is a compound of scholarship and athleticism. A composite has components that may retain part of their identities: a musical suite that is a composite of operatic themes.

Tinman

Thanks, Tinman. I did go to the AHD, but I really didn't see any difference. In the example I gave "mixture" would work just as well, right?

So, why add the "ad" to it? There must be a reason.

Admixture suggests that one of the components is dissimilar to the others

Perhaps army and navy personnel are like oil and vinegar.

But, doesn't a mixture also suggest that the the components are dissimilar? You have a mixture of flour and sugar, but you don't call it a mixture if you add flour to flour, do you?

Why isn't a mixture of flour and sugar an admixture, or is it both? BTW, is there a verb "admix?"

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Kalleh,

Yes, Kalleh, "mixture" would have worked just as well and is the word I would have chosen. I'm assuming there was nothing else in the article which made "admixture" preferable. Blends, amalgams, admixtures, compounds, and composites are all types of mixtures; therefore "mixture" can be used for any of them. Therefore it can be used for any of the others. The others are more specific, however, and may be preferred in certain instances.

I suspect the author used "admixture" simply because it was a bigger, less used, and more "scientific" sounding word, much like peole use "sineage" for "signs", "utilized" for "used", and "utilization" for "use". In other words, it's a five-dollar word when a two-bit one would do. I'm not saying the longer words are never appropriate, but in many cases they are just verbiage (in the sense of wordiness).

Look up Arnie's link to How To Write Plain English by the Fowler Brothers and [i]The Complete Plain Words by Sir Ernest Gowers.

When you mix dry flour and sugar, both retain their identities. But if you add water or oil to that mixture, the sugar dissolves and a batter is formed. None of the ingredients retains its individual identity and you can't separate them. That's why your cookbook says to mix dry ingredients, but to blend them into a liquid. I hope that helps a little.

As for "admixture", I can't think of a situation where I would use it.

Tinman