No, extravert is the correct psychological nomenclature. Extraversion. Extroversion was not a thing until everyone got it wrong and it had to be shoved into dictionaries. Doesn’t change a thing, “extro” is not a word. “Intro” on the other hand, is. As in “introvert”.
What, do mutants have extro-sensory perception now, too? Is there extroneous information? Extrovehicular? Extrovagance? Extrovaganza?
Sorry bud, it’s a word exactly because “everyone got it wrong and it had to be shoved into dictionaries”. Languages and the words they contain aren’t static, they evolve over time based on how people use them.
Theyre like the linguistic version of religious nutjobs. Semantics dont matter, they just want you to live your life according to a stern set of rules with no flexibility. Submit or burn in hell.
Oof, shove a bat up your ass! Do governments perform extrojudicial killings? Do we extrodite prisoners, and extropolate data, too?
Extra means “without” or “outside”. Extro has no definition, because it’s not a word. It is in opposition to “intro” which is also, GASP, a latin word, meaning “within”, or “inside”. How is this hard to understand? God I hate throngs of people being wrong at the same time.
“Extrovert” was introduced BECAUSE uneducated people used the wrong word so much they had to.
Or English comes from a broad range of roots, not just Latin, and you have a hard time admitting when you were wrong!
Not to mention you already conceded that it’s the current correct form of the word, and if you think language doesn’t change over time due to usage then you’re doubly ignorant.
Jung used “extra” and “intro”, case closed. Latin for “turning outside” and “turning inside”.
…though Jung also didn’t mean extraversion as synonymous with “sociable” or introversion with “needs to refill their tank” or whatnot, but “cognition primarily concerned with the object as opposed to the subject or the other way around”.
It’s “extra”, not “extro”. They’re “extra-terrestrials”, not “extro-terrestrials”. Extro is not a latin word, extra is.
If you’re talking of extrovert then you’re wrong, extrovert is a correct spelling of the word.
No, extravert is the correct psychological nomenclature. Extraversion. Extroversion was not a thing until everyone got it wrong and it had to be shoved into dictionaries. Doesn’t change a thing, “extro” is not a word. “Intro” on the other hand, is. As in “introvert”.
What, do mutants have extro-sensory perception now, too? Is there extroneous information? Extrovehicular? Extrovagance? Extrovaganza?
“Extraversion” is correct.
Sorry bud, it’s a word exactly because “everyone got it wrong and it had to be shoved into dictionaries”. Languages and the words they contain aren’t static, they evolve over time based on how people use them.
No no, language as it existed at the time I learned it is the FOREVER AND ONLY CORRECT WAY. -OP, probably.
Theyre like the linguistic version of religious nutjobs. Semantics dont matter, they just want you to live your life according to a stern set of rules with no flexibility. Submit or burn in hell.
A quick search on Google scholar for “extravert” and “extrovert” both yield results with hundreds of citations so I think both are clearly acceptable.
Oof, swing and a miss.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/extrovert
Oof, shove a bat up your ass! Do governments perform extrojudicial killings? Do we extrodite prisoners, and extropolate data, too?
Extra means “without” or “outside”. Extro has no definition, because it’s not a word. It is in opposition to “intro” which is also, GASP, a latin word, meaning “within”, or “inside”. How is this hard to understand? God I hate throngs of people being wrong at the same time.
“Extrovert” was introduced BECAUSE uneducated people used the wrong word so much they had to.
Or English comes from a broad range of roots, not just Latin, and you have a hard time admitting when you were wrong!
Not to mention you already conceded that it’s the current correct form of the word, and if you think language doesn’t change over time due to usage then you’re doubly ignorant.
It gives me so much joy seeing a Lemmy thread collectively shit on a completely bad take on linguistics
Boy, wait til you learn about literally every word in the English language (another example of a word changing due to use)
Jung used “extra” and “intro”, case closed. Latin for “turning outside” and “turning inside”.
…though Jung also didn’t mean extraversion as synonymous with “sociable” or introversion with “needs to refill their tank” or whatnot, but “cognition primarily concerned with the object as opposed to the subject or the other way around”.
It’s a Germanic word, not a Latin word. It’s based on the German word extravert but it is absolutely spelled extrovert in English since about 1918.
Jung was Swiss that doesn’t make extravert any less Latin. German would be “auswärts gerichtet” vs. “einwärts gerichtet”.
i will pee your pants
alright then buddy
I’M GOING TO SHIT YOURSELF
extravert is reserved for Tony Hawk and the likes, like the guy who did a 1440 on the super ramp.
It’s an Albany expression.
Well Seymour, you are an odd fellow. Although I must say, you extro a good vert
(Excepting extra-verted people) There isn’t anywhere that I see an “extro” that should be an “extra”. Any chance you could point it out?
I am on a crusade since about twenty years about this, and the war, well, it’s not going well…
because you’re wrong, lol, prescriptivism is just anti-linguistics. linguistics is desctiptive and based on usage
Good luck storming the Grammary!
Here, I’ll brew you a nice expresso and you can tell me about it.
What others have already said, but just know that I forgive you for thinking that extroverts are extra 😝