• Plopp@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    5 months ago

    I get so much satisfaction whenever I see extravert spelled correctly, which is very rare these days.

    • Got_Bent@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      31
      ·
      5 months ago

      First I wondered if the post had it spelled incorrectly.

      Then you had me wondering if I’ve been spelling it incorrectly this whole time.

      Turns out extravert and extrovert are both acceptable spellings but extravert did come first.

      • Plopp@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        Correct. But extrOvert makes no sense, etymologically (latin). The dictionaries accept it, but I (jokingly) don’t.

        • Balder@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          Curious, because in Portuguese it’s “extrOvertido.” But I just learned the Spanish spelling can be both “extravertido” and “extrovertido.”

      • 𝙲𝚑𝚊𝚒𝚛𝚖𝚊𝚗 𝙼𝚎𝚘𝚠@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        People seem to be downvoting you but you’re absolutely right. Languages are dynamic and evolve all the time. The language “rules” are merely descriptive; they explain how most people use the language, and if you want to make sure everyone can understand you it’s best to follow them.

        Even then there’s some wiggle-room. Take the gif/jif pronunciation debate, it was coined as “jif” but the majority of people switched to “gif”. So (depending on the dictionary you own) it will often either list just “gif” as correct, or list both as equally valid pronunciations (which given the sizeable minority for “jif” seems like the correct approach imo). All the gift/giraffe/creator-says-x is just fluff and not actually all that relevant.

        • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          5 months ago

          IMHO absolute descriptivism and absolute prescriptivism are both bullshit. Language evolves, but that doesn’t mean there should be no rules.

          • Rules definitely help keep a language more consistent! They’re not without use. It also helps to teach language to children and makes established parts of a language stay more consisteny over time. However, pretending there’s a rhyme or reason behind all of them is hard to justify, as well as claiming “x is correct because of rule y” if a majority decides z is correct instead.

            • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              It’s a bit hard to take in the present era, when the old rules were maintained by highly literate people like copy editors, and the new rules are made by anyone with a smartphone. I didn’t agree with all the traditional rules, but they have an elegance and consistency that Internet discourse usually lacks.