Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site brl-tgr.ARPA Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!brl-tgr!ron From: ron@brl-tgr.ARPA (Ron Natalie) Newsgroups: net.rec.photo Subject: Re: Lens or Lense: Which is Correct? Message-ID: <8839@brl-tgr.ARPA> Date: Fri, 1-Mar-85 15:10:45 EST Article-I.D.: brl-tgr.8839 Posted: Fri Mar 1 15:10:45 1985 Date-Received: Mon, 4-Mar-85 06:38:20 EST References: <371@decwrl.UUCP> <112@peora.UUCP> Organization: Ballistic Research Lab Lines: 18 > > From: "...decvax!decwrl!rhea!Squirt!McCamy" > > Merrimack, New Hampshire > > > > Lens and lense are BOTH correct! > > In "American English" it is "lens" for singular and "lenses" for > plural. I don't think "lense" exists at all. Maybe in "British English"!! FINAL DEFINITIVE ANSWER. First, Random House doesn't list the alternate spelling at all. Second, Websters lists it with "also LENSE." This means it is a less common spelling. So technically it is correct, however any reasonable writer will use the primary spellings of words and not resort to the "it's in the dictionary" arguments to justify use of the alternates. Any more on the subject can be had in net.nlang.