factory settings
Every new year’s resolution of his: “reset to default settings”.
Why do I doubt that “neurotypical” label
Nah, if this is built through the social process of “Ha dude, this would be so cool, tell me, what should I add?” I think it’s perfectly plausible.
The order he put it in certainly seems to hint at that process in action
found the factory settings guy
Assuming all of his traits listed are “default” is part of the problem
(I’m sorry, I know it’s a joke and I do think it’s quite funny but I feel like I have to bring this up as a disclaimer)
In the context of miiis, No chance in hell Nintendo makes miis queer by default, THAT’S the real problem here =P
How do I mass factory reboot the entire planet? Asking for an alien friend from outer space
Seeing it like this does make the whole thing seem weirder
1
Believe what is real? The interaction in the screen shot or the profile of the person in the screenshot?
I don’t have a reason to doubt the interaction being genuine, and the profile screenshot also seems like a genuine profile from someone being funny.
And tbh, this seems like the nicest possible way to make fun of Tumblr culture
It feels like they are just having fun.
deleted by creator
I literally have no fucking clue. But I don’t like the tone of your syntax; you better watch how you type when commenting, my dude
Sure, all digital records are falsifiable. But everything here seems… normal. I’m not sure what you mean? It’s not like they’re claiming their school made them shit in a sandbox or anything. Not trying to be antagonistic, I just don’t see anything here that screams “this is an outright lie” or even “this is implausible”
deleted by creator
Ferngully Syndrome
Is that a real thing? What is Ferngully Syndrome?
You have clearly never been on Tumblr
deleted by creator
As a queer person, for me at least I find the ‘default’ language pretty funny. I think it could just as easily be seen as acknowledgement of privilege as the other way around
I was neurodivergent all this time. It’s just people expressed it as there’s something odd about that little boy.
The thing is, the more you explore all those microlabels, the more you find things that you’re into, which wouldn’t have been explored if you’re socially obligated to conform to a standard vanilla norm. Dark identity. (As in dark matter, not who the man is in the dark though there sometimes is that.)
For me, the gateway was major depression. I did a lot of deep diving to understand why I so readily despair even when outlooks appeared to be okay (though on national and global levels there are good justifications for dispair, but that’s a different rant) In finding out why I’m so conditioned to Tragic Vampire Romance Island, I find out all my microidentities and kinks along the way.
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.
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.
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.
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
Extrovert" was introduced BECAUSE uneducated people used the wrong word so much they had to.
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
That’s what I have been saying all along!
(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?
extrovert
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
And the feeling of love is “just a bunch of chemical interactions” too, right?
Edit: Oh, and by the way
Why is extrovert sometimes spelled extravert?
Carl Jung based the two terms on Latin, in which “extra” means outside and “intro” means inside. A psychologist named Phyllis Blanchard later changed the spelling of the term in a paper, which played a role in the extrovert spelling becoming the predominant form.
Today, the extravert spelling is still widely used in psychology, while the extrovert spelling remains more common in popular usage.
Kaufman S. The difference between extraversion and extroversion. Scientific American.
See, that’s not “lankuake cheinkcsh”, that’s degradation of language because Phyllis got it wrong, and now everyone is.
“degradation of language” oh boy you’d hate to see how different English was 1000 years ago. Is modern English just a degradation of Anglo-Saxon? Or do we go even further back and say that all Indo-European languages are just degradations of PIE? You know that a large portion of the words that you use on a regular basis come from the exact process you describe right now, right? When exactly does normal language change become “degradation of lamguage”, is it just when you don’t like it?
Do you think that you know more about linguistics than every modern accredited linguist, to say that a certain type of language change in certain scenarios is “incorrect”? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analogical_change
Maybe you should solve this worksheet to get a feel lol. https://homepage.rub.de/silke.hoeche/Aspects of Language Change/Analogy and morphological change.htm
Linguistics is first and foremost a science, which means you don’t look at what occurs in reality and call it “wrong”. It’s descriptive, not prescriptive, and you look silly to a majority of linguists if you act like a word like “extrovert” is wrong, ESPECIALLY when it’s standard usage.
You probably think that AAVE is just “bastardized English” or that Scottish people speak wrong English.
I actually read Old English without much effort, as well as the languages it originated from, particularly Old Norse, French, and Germanic.
Degradation of language: misuse of language due to lack of education, erudition, or inclination. I can forgive some misinterpretation and adaptation, but that’s my issue. “Extro” does not make sense, unless someone got it wrong that one time and then spread it around until everyone was saying it wrong. That pisses me off, not to mention it makes me question Phyllis’s judgment on Jung’s corpus of work as a whole, she clearly didn’t read much of it.
There is a difference between a language evolving in response to changes in the environment or the human condition, and a language degrading into “barbar” because nobody bothered to learn how to speak, and thereby write, correctly. I believe that there are no 1:1 transmutations of words in such a manner which wouldn’t remove some amount of information, and the degradation of information is kind of a massive deal to humanity right now.
Let me ask, what does “begging the question” mean to you?
I actually read Old English without much effort, as well as the languages it originated from, particularly Old Norse, French, and Germanic.
Christ man you’re such a liar lmao. GERMANIC ISN’T A LANGUAGE. And certainly not a WRITTEN one. And English didn’t “originate” from French. Old English is unintelligible to Modern English speakers because it’s a completely different language, you are straight up lying through your teeth when you say you can read it fine, much less understand it. 85% of vocabulary in Old English isn’t even present in Modern English. Even more so with Old Norse lmao. French is very clearly unintelligible with English as well. French is literally my second language, so I can very easily tell you that. Why do you feel the need to blatantly lie about being able to understand other languages, including ficticious ones?
Degradation of language: misuse of language due to lack of education, erudition, or inclination. I can forgive some misinterpretation and adaptation, but that’s my issue. “Extro” does not make sense, unless someone got it wrong that one time and then spread it around until everyone was saying it wrong. That pisses me off, not to mention it makes me question Phyllis’s judgment on Jung’s corpus of work as a whole, she clearly didn’t read much of it.
That entire take is just silly. “Language degratation” is a lie sold to you by shitty middle school English Language Arts teachers.
“All living languages are continually undergoing change. Some commentators use derogatory labels such as “corruption” to suggest that language change constitutes a degradation in the quality of a language, especially when the change originates from human error or is a prescriptively discouraged usage. Modern linguistics rejects this concept, since from a scientific point of view such innovations cannot be judged in terms of good or bad. John Lyons notes that “any standard of evaluation applied to language-change must be based upon a recognition of the various functions a language ‘is called upon’ to fulfil in the society which uses it”.”
Again, your stance is seen as completely stupid in the realm of actual linguistics science.
There is a difference between a language evolving in response to changes in the environment or the human condition, and a language degrading into “barbar” because nobody bothered to learn how to speak, and thereby write, correctly. I believe that there are no 1:1 transmutations of words in such a manner which wouldn’t remove some amount of information, and the degradation of information is kind of a massive deal to humanity right now.
There isn’t a difference. How do you think sound change and many other forms of language change occur without this ““degradation””? Do you think that the transitions between languages just happen because God willed it and everyone just accepted it? No, people back then complained about language change in the same exact way that you are now. You are speaking a “bastardized” form of language by your own logic. Every word you speak is completely different from the “educated” proscribed speak of before. Almost none of the words you’re saying are being used in their ““original”” sense.
Let me ask, what does “begging the question” mean to you?
According to your anti-scientific logic, it should mean to approach a question and start begging to it.
I want to ask you again, do you think AAVE, Scottish English, and all other large dialect groups of English are incorrect? Do you think you’re better at linguistics than a majority of professional linguists?
You ever hear of the lone Japanese soldiers scattered across islands that never got the news WW2 was over?
That’s my uncle!
Here, I’ll brew you a nice expresso and you can tell me about it.
Now you’re really rustling my jimjims.
Deus Vult.
What others have already said, but just know that I forgive you for thinking that extroverts are extra 😝
Removed by mod
