I have been lately in debate with my teacher as to why did the IUPAC name the compound with the current official IUPAC name of 2-methylpropanoic acid. (CN: isobutyric acid)
My argument is that:
You can't attach a methyl in carbon 1 (because the bonds in carbon 1 will exceed 4)
You can't attach a methyl in carbon 3 (because it will become butanoic acid)
- Placing the locant in a substituent with no other constitutional isomers will be useless when to be interpreted, will be a few more characters longer, and will be less pleasant for the eyes end ears (I mean, methylpropanoic acid a bit more pleasant to see and hear than 2-methylpropanoic acid, right?)
To verify my initial assumption, is the name of such compound 2-methylpropanoic acid? If it is, then we may proceed to the real question in the next paragraph.
So, where in the 2013 Blue Book or any updated IUPAC nomenclature guidelines with less complicated wordings in organic chemistry books (this has seniority over the former) can I see that you must not omit the locant in these cases (and why).
Additionally, how can I request to the Union to alter this notion to make it methylpropanoic acid because of the stated reasons? (It's a bit like ethan-1-ol and ethanol.)