1
$\begingroup$

I am a bit confused about the correct name of $\mathrm{LaMnO}_3$. Is it lanthanium manganate or lanthanum manganite?

I was assuming that since $\mathrm{SrTiO}_3$ is called strontium titanate, $\mathrm{LaMnO}_3$ would then be called lanthanium manganate, but I got confused when I heard a collegue referring to it as manganite and after reading a wikiepdia article on $\mathrm{La}_x\mathrm{Sr}_{1-x}\mathrm{MnO}_3$ where they also used the term manganite.

Which is the correct form, or are they simply interchangeable?

Improve this question
$\endgroup$

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
0
$\begingroup$

Let's go down the ladder. $\ce{KMnO4}$ is permanganate, Mn(VII). $\ce{K2MnO4}$ is manganate, Mn(VI). $\ce{K4MnO4}$ is manganite, Mn(IV). $\ce{LaMnO3}$ is called both manganate and manganite, but Mn(III). In a proper world it should be lower than that manganite. They are pedagogically both wrong if it is La(III).

http://dictionary.sensagent.com/potassium%20manganite/en-en/

Manganese oxidation state nomenclature is a real world mess. Drawing nomenclature parallels to Cl(VII) and downward is not valid. Drawing nomenclature parallels to titanium is poor, for Ti(IV) is the highest common oxidation state. $\ce{SrO + TiO2}$ gives $\ce{SrTiO3}$, properly called titanate, for it is Ti(IV) on both sides.

Organic had the same problem. The highest valence carbocation was tricoordinate, hence a carbonium ion. Magic Acid gave $\ce{CH5^+}$. Carbonium ions were renamed carbenium ions to general confusion. Then, $\ce{CH6^{2+}}$. Organic dropped the ball with direction of optical rotation versus geometric left and right. It was flat out stupid designating E ("trans") and Z ("cis") olefins. The designation should have been abstract rather than language-originated.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ The last paragraph of your answer does not seem to have anything to do with with the admittedly clunky nomenclature of the metal oxyanions. $\endgroup$
    – Ben Norris
    Apr 22, 2014 at 15:16
  • $\begingroup$ Also, your statement about optical isomerism is confusing, given that the direction of rotatation of plane-polarized light is generally unrelated to the absolute spatial geometry of the chiral molecule $\endgroup$
    – Ben Norris
    Apr 22, 2014 at 15:19
  • $\begingroup$ Do better: mazepath.com/uncleal/norbors.gif mazepath.com/uncleal/norone.png P3(1)21 quartz and P3(2)21 berlinite are both levorotatory despite being opposite geometric hands, J. Appl. Crystallogr. 19, 108 (1986). CIP notation flips within unchanged geometry (L-(S)-alanine, L-(R)-cysteine). Achiral PhCOCH3 impurity changes resolved PhCH(OH)CH3 optical rotation, J. Org Chem. 38(10), 1870 (1973). $\endgroup$
    – Uncle Al
    Apr 24, 2014 at 22:17

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge that you have read and understand our privacy policy and code of conduct.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.