Steve Mould obviously
this post was submitted on 30 Oct 2024
87 points (95.8% liked)
Asklemmy
43958 readers
1066 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
I’ve always thought that mold is the fungus, and to mould is to shape.
I actually do this too. Not because I think it's correct as such, but because that way I am consistent and I know what I'm talking about when I read back previous text that I've written.
I remember it by Mold = simplified English = simple organism.
I use “mold” for both, and regard “mould” as the British spelling for both.
But the etymologies are interesting—the verb comes from French modle, while the fungus comes from late Middle English mould. So if anything, your assumed distinction is etymologically reversed.
That seems to be the consensus online. But thanks for that tidbit! It feels even more bizarre now knowing that.
I wonder why a handful of people think the way I presented in the post. Perhaps American/British influences in certain places? Reading books by british authors and books by american authors at the same time? Feels unlikely.
You know that there are two unrelated words, and you’ve seen two different spellings—it’s a natural assumption that the latter stems from the former.
Why so many people would pair them up the same (etymologically unsupported) way, I don’t know... maybe we’re used to correlating words relating to art with French, and assuming that words with “ou” come from French as well (and this case just happens to be an exception).
I use what you do
Moulding is the trim around walls and whatnot. Molding is when something is in the process of having mold growing on it.
Wouldn't that be mouldering?
Maybe. I honestly don't know. Not really my field of expertise.
Moldering: "to crumble into dust, to rot"
All the definitions of molding I can find, are about shaping something.
I say mould because I'm English and that's just how it's spelled here (we also pronounce it with a U, pronouncing it without the U as mold would be...strange).
Not an overly exciting response I know, but there you go :P
How do you pronounce the U? Do you pronounce mould like should, would, or could? Is your pronunciation of mould then closer to mud than old with an M in front?
It's pronounced 'moeoueieueld'. You really need to emphasise the 'a' sound to get it right.
I bit my tongue, thanks
Now I'm realizing, I don't pronounce the L in those words... Maybe they pronounce it liked mulled?
In honesty (my last comment was clearly not legit), you likely do pronounce the 'L'; most accents will include this in my experience.
Does the tip of your tongue touch the roof of your mouth just on or behind the ridge before your front teeth? If you release your tongue before pronouncing the 'D' is there a release of air? If you do position your tongue here and there is no release of air before pronouncing the 'D' (which does release air), then you are pronouncing the 'L'.
I could see some accents not pronouncing the L. It may colour the vowel, but not be a distinct sound on its own.
I always thought mould was the fungus and to mold was to manipulate a material
I'm Canadian, and we use a mix of British and American spellings, mostly depending on how we feel at the time of writing.
This is how I use it. So one could mold mould if they were so inclined.
I do this too, to keep them separate in my head. I get that they’re interchangeable.
In Australia, I used to use them the opposite way as you: "mould" for the fungus, and "mold" to shape. These days I live in the USA and use "mold" for both.
American here, I’ve never used “mould” for any definition, personally- always “mold”
"mould" should be pronounced the same as would or could
I thought the same for the longest time. I blame playing tons of runescape as a kid.
I am an American so mold spelling is definitely what I ran into when referring to the fungus. Runescape is British English, so you used moulds all the time in crafting.
I do the same as you. Although I usually default to the UK's use of u's. Just feels right.
I use mold for everything, but don't really bat an eye at using mould for the tool that is used to make parts which I see pretty often through my work.
If you browse Canadian tool shops in Southern Ontario, Canada you will see thrm named Tool and Mold, or Tool and Mould. Nobody agrees Lol
As someone who regularly uses both British and American English both at work and in my personal life, I sometimes mix them unintentionally.
I almost always use the same spelling for either word and use context to make sure it is always clear which mold I am talking about.
I do think there is value in distinguishing the words with different spelling, but without getting everyone to agree on which spelling would mean what, I think this won't be very productive.
On a related tangent, because I see that this is mostly discussed to death, I dont get why Americans decided to merge other unrelated words.
For example, being exhausted and the rubber circle that cars and bikes use to roll smoothly are the same word in American English whereas we (UK) use different spellings.
Tire - Being exhausted
Tyre - Round rubber wheel thing
Like many of the differences, I suspect that one came out of the attempts as English Spelling Reform, which took greater hold in the US. Ultimately, the process hasn't succeeded, but it has excised some of inconsistencies from the English. Though, it has also led to some confusion, as in the tire/tyre case.
Which oune wold yo souggest?
~~I suggest using two different spellings:~~
~~Mold is the fungus. To mould is to shape.~~
Nvm I'm an idiot. Lol
You have my vote for your interpretation, that had always been my understanding too.
This one bugs me too. I want to differentiate!
This:
...is not this:
Dont both mean shape but only mold refers to the fungus?
I use both, they are two separate words, not one word with multiple spellings.
Not sure why people are changing it. Yes, language evolves, but maybe we could all focus on evolving it in areas that actually need evolution?
I use "mold" for the fungus and the tool, "mould" for composted soil.
i see mold i use clorox
There's a fair number of people who insist that "geek" and "nerd" mean two different, specific things. I think this is the same phenomenon, that people seek nuance where there isn't because it makes the language seem more interesting or something.
The words have very different origins. While I think they converged for a time, they started out different.
Fox mulder
ain't nobody got time for extra u's
They're great. I always use them.
Colour would like a word with you.
Nope. Color is absolutely fine
It's not fine, but you're free to spell how you like.
I am also aware that they are spelled the same, but I consciously use a U only for the organism.
For what it's worth, I'm Canadian, so nobody would bat an eye here at using either the American or British spelling of things.
I've been confused about it in the past, but I eventually settled on mould if it grows and mold if it's taking shape. I'm willing to let the rest of the internet be wrong about it, though.