which is correct: "this room is well-lit" or "this room is
well-lighted" also, is it:  "pre-lit" or "pre-lighted"

Hello!
Grammar is SO idiosynchratic--I agree!

However, in this case, according to
http://www.tiscali.co.uk/reference/dictionaries/english/data/d0082354.html

EITHER LIT or LIGHTED is acceptable and completely grammatically correct:

"Either may be used as the past tense and past participle of the verb
to light. Lit is more common."

I also corroborated this on Bartleby.com (my source for grammatical
issues--I'm a journalist), where they state:

"You can use either lighted or lit as past tense and past participle
of light. Both forms are also well established as adjectives: a lit
(or lighted) pipe."
(source: http://www.bartleby.com/64/C003/0197.html)

Lastly, http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/light.html tells you:
"Don?t fret over the difference between these two words; they?re interchangeable."

It would therefore naturally follow, that the utilization of
"pre-lighted" or "pre-lit" is ALSO merely a matter of preference.  In
my grammarian opinion, however, "pre-lighted" sounds archaic when
compared to the sleeker, more concisely stated, "pre-lit."

Thanks for choosing Google Answers!
aliciadenney-ga

One must be careful of the hyphen.  It is correct to say--I entered a
well-lit room.  In this case there is a combination of the participle
and a modifier.  However, the hyphen would be dropped--The room was
well lit.

Thank you! I had hyphens-on-the-brain it seems.

Lit and lighted are both acceptable.  However, there is a prominent
difference.  Lighted is historically used in prose and poetry, the
rhetorical sense.  Lit is what is commonly used in spoken English and
commonplace journalism.

Hmm, although Aliciadenney and Cecilrode both feel that "lighted" is
the older form, the tendency in usage is away from irregular verb
forms.
I would use them both, but not entirely interchangeably.  As a
participle, "lighted", for me, is more active, suggesting the event of
the thing's being lighted, whereas "lit" just describes it.
And then there is the subtle rhythm of a sentence when speaking and writing:
"a lit candle"  vs  "a lighted candle".  Some persons  - in some
contexts -  would choose the latter to allow the unaccented syllable
between "light'ed" and "cand'le.  This would override my previous
explanation - for me - in such a context (maybe, I think :).

>>Grammar is SO idiosynchratic [sic]...

Please, folks, if you can't spell the big words, don't use them.

TSK, TSK--my goodness, a mere addition of an 'h'...resulted in such
holier-than-thou animosity?!?!

"Please, folks," if you can't politely correct sans the bitter bite,
eschew the extraneous commentary!  This is a professional service, not
an amateur intelligence-contest messageboard.