Incidental Comment

[Scott Goodhue <goodhue -at- SMTPGATE -dot- DISCLOSURE -dot- COM>]

     I have yet to see a statement that flatly says, "Do not use the word
     -incidence- as anything other than a singular noun."  By the same
     token, I cannot recall having heard of the "negligences" of a
     defendant.  I did, however, look around and found the words incidence
     and incidents coupled together in a listing of examples of common
     misspellings in the book, "Spell It Right".  C'mon, one's plural, the
     other isn't, right?  Well... we don't see the words incidence and
     incident together as misspellings.

     Let's say you were talking about the crime rates for three cities. I'm
     assuming that incidence is synonymous with rate and incidences with
     rates:

     The rate of crime for the three cities was 2%.  (An aggregate rate).
     The rates of crime for the three cities were 2%, 3% and 1.5%.
     (Separate rates)

     Therefore:

     The incidence of crime for the three cities was 2%.
     The incidences of crime for the three cities were 2%, 3% and 1.5%.

     Now, you could argue that, in agreement with the substitution of rate
     with incidence as far as meaning, it does not necessarily reason that
     the plural rates automatically makes the plural incidences.  And you
     might be compelled to rework the last sentence in the examples to
     read; "The incidence of crime for the three cities was 2%, 3% and 1.5%
     respectively," especially because the word "incidences" simply sounds
     wrong, so why not avoid it?

     Now I've encountered the rule that it's okay to use effect as a noun
     but not affect, yet it is correct to say, "Bonds are inversely
     affected by changes in interest incidences"?