Choose language
Afrikaans
Albanian
Amharic
Arabic
Armenian
Azerbaijani
Bangla
Basque
Belarusian
Bosnian
Bulgarian
Burmese
Catalan
Cebuano
Chinese (Simplified)
Chinese (Traditional)
Corsican
Croatian
Czech
Danish
Dutch
Esperanto
Estonian
Filipino
Finnish
French
Galician
Georgian
German
Greek
Gujarati
Haitian Creole
Hausa
Hawaiian
Hebrew
Hindi
Hmong
Hungarian
Icelandic
Igbo
Indonesian
Irish
Italian
Japanese
Javanese
Kannada
Kazakh
Khmer
Kinyarwanda
Korean
Kurdish
Kyrgyz
Lao
Latin
Latvian
Lithuanian
Luxembourgish
Macedonian
Malagasy
Malay
Malayalam
Maltese
Maori
Marathi
Mongolian
Nepali
Norwegian
Nyanja
Odia
Pashto
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Punjabi
Romanian
Russian
Samoan
Scottish Gaelic
Serbian
Shona
Sindhi
Sinhala
Slovak
Slovenian
Somali
Southern Sotho
Spanish
Sundanese
Swahili
Swedish
Tajik
Tamil
Tatar
Telugu
Thai
Turkish
Turkmen
Ukrainian
Urdu
Uyghur
Uzbek
Vietnamese
Welsh
Western Frisian
Xhosa
Yiddish
Yoruba
Zulu
Whoever installed that "Did you mean" thingy was one of the Internet's most annoying trolls. I've lost count of the times when Google has failed to recognise what I was looking for because of that ridiculous article. Besides, different spelling means different meaning, unrelated word, not interchangeable, etc.
"Maudling" would be the present participle of "maudle"; this verb is attested and is a back-formation of "maudlin".
This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at April 16, 2020 2:51 PM MDT
The verb "maudle" was created from "maudlin" by shortening; that's what makes it a back-formation. Intuitively one might think "maudle" came first because it is less phonologically marked. (In the same way that "burglar" may seem to be derived from "burgle", even though the opposite is true).
This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at April 16, 2020 6:40 PM MDT
No, the verb "maudle" was created from "maudling" by shortening. Please try to understand that the words "maudlin" and maudling" are two different words.