Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/02/18

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Lense?
From: "Timothy R. Kuntz" <covbldrs@usit.net>
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2000 22:38:03 -0500

Concise Oxford - eh?

My Funk and Wagnals NEW College Standard Dictionary (1947) lists only "lens" as well.

Tim K

- ----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Paul Chefurka" <Paul_Chefurka@pmc-sierra.com>
To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Friday, February 18, 2000 7:30 PM
Subject: [Leica] Lense?


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard J. Wyble [mailto:rwyble@erols.com]
> Sent: Friday, February 18, 2000 4:39 PM
> To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Subject: Re: [Leica] FS: 35 1.4 aspherical (1st ver)
> 
> 
> Excerpts from leica: 18-Feb-100 RE: [Leica] FS: 35 1.4 asp.. Paul
> Chefurka@pmc-sierra (656*)
> 
> > And BTW, I don't mean to get too usenettish on you or 
> anything, but it's
> > spelled "lens".
> 
> "Lens" is American useage outside of which "lense" is proper.
> -- 
>   rwyble@erols.com
>   Richard J. Wyble
> 

American usage?  We Canadians would never stoop so low.  We insist that all
our colours have the correct flavour.

I just checked my Concise Oxford, and it doesn't list "lense" at all.  Can
you supply a reference?  I believe that lense is a nettish spelling,
fostered and supported solely by the denizens of rec.photo.equipment.35mm...

Paul