|
![]() |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
![]() |
#11 | |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 53
|
![]()
95Probite wrote:
Quote:
"He even spelled his own client's name wrongly/wrong." http://dictionary.cambridge.org/defi...1770&dict=CALD As for "lens", the derivation is the Latin word "lens", meaning lentil. The plural has to be "lenses", because "lenss" would be silly. My guess is that "lense" appeared as a back-formation from "lenses". None of which helps me take better photographs! ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#12 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 324
|
![]()
Going the other way, I've seen people refer to only one of them as a "len."
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#13 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 484
|
![]()
Kinda like "dice" and "die" plural and singular.
Brits = grey Yanks - gray Brits = centre Yanks = center Maybe we should go back to Latin ! |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#14 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 378
|
![]()
My favorite reference book, the Oxford Dictionary of American Usage and Style, by Bryan Garner, describes "Lens" like this:
Lens. so spelled--not lense. But the misspelling occurs fairly often, as something like a back-formation from the plural--e.g. "Raunchy Lisa 'Left Eye' Lopez--who got her nickname after wearing a condom over one lense [read lens] of her glasses--makes no apologies for her behaviour" (Daily Record). For anyone "wordly" inclined the book is a great resources for usage, style, and grammar. Even though it is a book of American usage, it often compares the British and American usage and spelling for many entries. There are also tons of little "mini-rants" that Garner (who is most famous for being the current editor of Black's Law Dictionary) goes on. One of my favorites: [After going on for almost a full page about the word "hopefully" and tracing its correct usage ("John hopefully waited for the love letter") and comparing its now-improper usage ("Hopefully, I will win the game") Garner finishes the entry with a seemingly despairing sigh:] [T]hough the controversy swirling around this word has subsided, it is now a skunked term. Avoid it in all senses if you're concerned with your credibility: if you use it in the traditional way, many readers will think it odd; if you use it in the newish way, a few readers will tacitly tut-tut you. What a great book (okay, maybe I'm too much of a grammar geek)! |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#15 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
![]()
Man...this is hurting my head & that is incorrect!
|
![]() |
![]() |
#16 |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 73
|
![]()
color <-> colour :?
style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #000000"theater <-> theatre Oh, and common words spelled wrong: definitely -> definately :evil: (I could have)/(I could've) -> I could of :?(YUCK!) You're -> your They're -> their et cetera et cetera et cetera ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#17 | ||
Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 56
|
![]()
Setiprime wrote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#18 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 4,154
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#19 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 382
|
![]()
Tom LaPrise wrote:
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#20 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 4,154
|
![]()
UrbanPhotos wrote:
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|