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.