On Sun, Dec 09, 2001 at 11:43:05PM -0500, John R. Daily wrote: > As largely irrelevant data points, my 1955 edition of the Oxford > Universal, the 2nd edition of the Random House unabridged, > Webster's 3rd New International, and the 1952 New Century > dictionaries concur that "dependancy" is legitimate. > > Webster's 2nd edition New International does not recognize it. What's the date on the latter dictionary? I'm willing to bet most modern lexicographers have adopted the quite sensible rule-of-thumb that no spelling based on a French etymology should be accepted when a Latin one is available instead. (/me casts his line and waits for a bite) -- G. Branden Robinson | When I die I want to go peacefully Debian GNU/Linux | in my sleep like my ol' Grand branden@debian.org | Dad...not screaming in terror like http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | his passengers.
Attachment:
pgpnK2wza_oS8.pgp
Description: PGP signature