Road crashes and road accidents

Looking at the ROSPA website I noticed that they use both road crash and road accident. Looking at the ngram graph for the two phrases, it seems that road crash is making very modest inroads but road accident is still far more common. Have you thought about the distinction? How do you feel about the two phrases? Is there an equivalent distinction in your own language if it isn't English?

"Road accident" and "road crash sound odd to me. I think "traffic accident" is more common in the US, at least. It is in this ngram (I changed the start form 1800 to 1900.) If you toggle between British and American English, you see something interesting--until around 2000, "road accident" was more common in BE, but then it suddenly nosedives and "traffic accident" is on top.

"Crash" or "car crash" is commonly used, but it's more informal. In fact, "car crash" is the most common phrase overall, more so in AE than BE.

"RTCs" is the favoured acronym in Ireland these days - "road traffic collisions". "Accident" is no longer viewed with favour in official circles because it's seen as suggesting that crashes are inevitable or aren't anyone's fault, so to speak. "Collision" rather than "crash" is the term used instead, though.

I'm English and would probably expect to hear something like 'road traffic accident' in an official context. I haven't checked the frequency of this usage though.

My sense of these terms in the US is a little different from what nutrax said. I hear adults normally talking about a car accident, or just an accident. I had one a couple of years ago, and that is the only term I remember hearing used.

Traffic accident sounds official to me, like something in a government report.

Car crash sounds to me like something children say, especially when playing with toy cars and making them crash on purpose.

"Car crash" turned up a lot in news stories--especially headlines.

Car crash backs up Interstate 10 traffic‎

Knoxville attempted robbery, car crash injures two‎

An 18-year-old woman was killed and two other people were hurt overnight in a single car crash in San Jose.

A Norwich firefighter has died in a four-car crash and another man was seriously injured.

Traffic accident sounds official to me, like something in a government report.

That's why I think it's the most analogous to the links in the OP--official stuff.

Wikipedia gives this:
A traffic collision, also known as a traffic accident, motor vehicle collision, motor vehicle accident, car accident, automobile accident, Road Traffic Collision (RTC) or car crash...

Many different terms are commonly used to describe vehicle collisions. The World Health Organization use the term road traffic injury,[while the U.S. Census Bureau uses the term motor vehicle accidents (MVA) and Transport Canada uses the term "motor vehicle traffic collision" (MVTC). Other terms that are commonly used include auto accident, car accident, car crash, car smash, car wreck, motor vehicle collision (MVC), personal injury collision (PIC), road accident, road traffic accident (RTA), road traffic collision (RTC), road traffic incident (RTI), road traffic accident and later road traffic collision, as well as more unofficial terms including smash-up and fender bender.

Some organizations have begun to avoid the term "accident". Although auto collisions are rare in terms of the number of vehicles on the road and the distance they travel, addressing the contributing factors can reduce their likelihood. For example, proper signage can decrease driver error and thereby reduce crash frequency by a third or more. That is why these organizations prefer the term "collision" rather than "accident".

I think headlines are a special case, though. They're written with specific constraints and can use words that aren't typical in normal English (like "nab" "slay" "top cop" and so on.) They can differ from regular sentences by not including verbs and/or articles too.

Both are unsatisfactory.

accident implies that there is no blame
crash implies a collision.

Incident is better.

crash implies a collision.

But that is exactly what is being talked about, not just an "incident" that disrupts traffic.

An incident is an event - it does not imply that there is no blame.

A collision would imply more than one car.

#9 - I don't think so, a car can collide with a wall, with an eletricity pole, or whatever.

The California Highway Patrol has a CHP Traffic Incident Information Page which is real time information on things that might affect traffic on a highway. Not that the CHP is full of linguistic experts, but for them, "incident" comprises all sorts of stuff.

"Traffic collision" can be vehicles colliding or a single car that hits something. Right now, they've got a "WHI COMPACT OFF RDWY INTO BLACKBERRY BUSHES," as well as an overturned truck and a "BLK MERZ VS WHI SUV."

There are also categories for animal on the road, people on the road, disabled vehicles, fires, would-be suicides, traffic hazards, unexpected road closures & more. Hazards are usually something that fell onto the middle of a road, such as downed power lines, cargo from a truck,

CHP? I thought it was CHIPS...

CHP? I thought it was CHIPS...

It was never CHIPS, except in the minds of some TV producers. Some CHP officers call themselves "Chippies" and some people use that as a joke to refer to the officers. It's more of a Southern California thing than here in Northern California.

The agency itself is always CHP. See-atich-pee. The person in the black & white car with the flashing red lights is a "CHP officer" (most formal) or a "CHP guy/gal" or just "(a) CHP," as in "CHP pulled me over for speeding."

#13 - I sort of guessed that, it was more of a joke... though twenty years ago, it did greatly increase my desire for a Kawasaki motorbike at some point in the undefined future!

It "implies" is what I wrote.....I'd say that the word collision is usually used with more or one vehicle

"A car was in collision with a tree" doesn't ring true
"A two car collision " does.

"A car left the road and collided with a tree" does sound OK.......

the word "collision" has a sub-text and usage that is used primarily when vehicles collide. The verb may have a broader use.
"Incident" is a more general word with less overtones so this helps to prevent people from jumping to conclusions about what happened or apportioning blame.

In Australia there are many single file accidents - rollovers usually, they are not referred to as collisions but "Single Vehicle Rollovers"

In the UK, road traffic accident reporting often uses convoluted language in order to avoid implying blame.

For example papers won't write "Fred's car collided with Sheila's car". Instead, the reports state "Fred's car was in collision with Sheila's car". The intention is to avoid opining on whether Fred, or Sheila (or both) caused the collision.

Amusingly, this language has now become standard even when the fault is clear. See how many internet hits you get for "in collission with a lamppost" or "in collision with a tree".

Fault in an accident is NEVER 100% one party or another....it is usually the accumulation of a series of human errors by both parties. The balance may in the end swing towards one side but the "victim" is seldom if ever blameless.