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.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 10 months ago (3 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 10 months ago (2 children)

No no, language as it existed at the time I learned it is the FOREVER AND ONLY CORRECT WAY. -OP, probably.

[–] Leafhouse 4 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

In the 90s there was an explosion of people desperate to "correct" every usage of the word 'irony.'

Nevermind that one of the definitions is just an "incongruity between what might be expected and what actually occurs."

Any outcome that's different from what you expected meets the definition of 'ironic.' That's all you need.

You probably shouldn't expect clear weather just because it's your wedding day. But if you do, and it rains, it's fuckin ironic.

But to this day, fools fall all over themselves to chirp up anytime Alanis Morisette comes on the radio.

The allure of the appearance of superiority is strong. We're all vulnerable to it, or most of us.

load more comments (1 replies)