Trait

Trait (pronounced treyt or trey (now rare))

(1) A distinguishing characteristic or quality distinguishing a particular person or thing, especially of one's personal nature.

(2) A pen or pencil stroke (emulated also in software).

(3) A stroke, touch, or strain, as of some quality (now rare).

(4) In biology (and later picked up in psychology), a genetically determined characteristic or condition which is some cases may be influenced by environmental factors.

(5) In programming, languages, those methods which can be used to instance or extend functionality to a class by using the class’s own interface.

1470–1480: From the French trait (line, stroke, feature, tract), from the Middle French trait (line, feature), from the Old French trait (a pulling (literally “something drawn”)), from the Latin tractus (drawing, drawing out, dragging, pulling (an later “line drawn; feature”), from trahō, from the past participle stem of trahere (to drag, pull, draw), ultimately from the primitive Indo-European treg- (to drag, pull) which may have been a variation of dreg (to pull, draw, drag”).  In the late fifteenth century the word was used in the sense of “shot, missiles; a projectile” while the meaning “a stroke in drawing, a short line” emerged in the 1580s, that form still in technical use in graphic art and some image editing software.  The earliest known record of trait being used in English to men “a particular feature or distinguishing quality” dates from 1752.  Like niche, the tradition pronunciation (trey) is now so rare that its use might be counter-productive because it likely only to mislead and the form treyt, once known only in North America, seems now universal.  Such an evolution should not be resisted because English has always worked this way although there will be snobs who cherish trey as a class-identifier however wrong-headed this may be.  Trait is a noun and trait-like is an adjective; the noun plural is traits.

In the biological sciences, a trait refers to any observable characteristic of an organism and that might be physical, physiological, or behavioral and can be something the result entirely of genetic inheritance or a combination of genetic and environmental factors.  Like niche (another word where the US pronunciation seems to have prevailed), trait was borrowed from biology by psychology where it describes enduring patterns of thought, feelings or behavior which tend to be relatively stable despite the influence of external factors but traits in psychology are acknowledged often to be affected by both genetic and environmental factors.  Crucially, the understanding in human psychology notes the significance of the relationship in trait development between external factors and an individual’s reaction to them.  For psychologists, the study of traits often focuses on individual differences and how they contribute to personality and behavior whereas in botany & zoology etc, it’s usually more about what can be generalized about species & sub-species.

The personality traits of some attract much attention.

So, while the essential concept of traits is common between biology and psychology, the focus and application differ. In biology, traits are studied to understand the characteristics of organisms and how they evolve while in psychology traits are studied to understand human personality and behavior.  In general use (and that includes pop-psychology), the word (often in the form “character trait”) is used as a synonym for characteristic, peculiarity, mark, attribute, property etc and is well-understood, nobody confusing a genetic trait (like hair color) with descriptions of behavioral proclivities.  The apparently strange use in computer programming does make sense even though it can be argued that in programming languages there’s really no such thing as genetics (except in the abstract although the simile is useful in things like the change-logs which document changes from version-to-version) and everything is environmental.  However, the idea does work because what it means is that aspects of the language which manifest as particular characteristics of the type will appear also in the function of the software produced, something most apparent when a functional change is obvious such as when object-oriented programming (OOP, which was an example of when the over-used term “paradigm change” was justified) began to become dominant in consumer-level application in the 1990s.

The Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) is a 220 item self-rated personality trait assessment scale for adults.  The domains appear in the middle column, with contributed facets (green, left) and non-contributed facets (blue, right).

The notion of personality traits of course underlie much of the content of the American Psychiatric Association's (APA) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) and the most notable codification of the approach to personality disorders appeared in the DSM-5 (2013).  Although there have been detail changes in the DSM-5-TR (2022), the structure has been maintained and the revisions were most concerned with ensuring the diagnostic criteria accommodated the not unusual situation of a patient meeting the criteria for a specific personality disorder frequently also satisfying those for other personality disorders.  The emphasis remains on personality disorders being characterized by impairments in personality functioning and pathological personality traits.  The specific personality disorder diagnoses that may be derived from this model include antisocial, avoidant, borderline, narcissistic, obsessive-compulsive, and schizotypal personality disorders but there’s also the diagnosis of “personality disorder—trait specified” (PD-TS) which can be made when a personality disorder is considered present but the criteria for a specific disorder cannot be met.

Borderline

Borderline (pronounced bawr-der-lahyn)

(1) On or near a border or boundary; a border; dividing line; line of demarcation.

(2) Uncertain; indeterminate; debatable; an indeterminate position between two conditions.

(3) Not quite meeting accepted, expected, or average standards.

(4) In psychiatry, as Borderline Personality Disorder, a descriptor of a personality disorder characterized by instability in many areas, as mood, identity, self-image and behavior and often manifested by impulsive actions, suicide attempts, inappropriate anger, or depression. The abbreviation is BPD.

1847: A compound word (also as border-line), created to describe a "strip of land along a frontier" as distinct from the actual line of a border, the construct being border + line.  Border was inherited from the Middle English bordure, from the Old French bordure & bordeure, from border (to border), from bort & bord (a border), of Germanic origin akin and to the Middle High German borte (border, trim) and the German Borte (ribbon, trimming); doublet of bordure.  Line, influenced in Middle English by the Middle French ligne (line), was from the Latin linea, from līneus (flaxen; a flaxen thing) from līnum (flax).  The Middle French ligne was from the Old Danish likna, derived with the inchoative suffix -ne from lig (similar) and was related to the Swedish likna, the English liken and the Middle Low German līkenen.  It replaced galīkōną, an older verb without -n, hence the Old English ġelīcian, the German gleichen and the Gothic galeikōn.  As an adjective meaning "verging on" it is attested from 1903, originally in medical jargon to describe various conditions but from the 1930s, it became most associated with metal health, the diagnosis of the condition BPD (Borderline Personality Disorder) apparently first mentioned in the medical literature in 1938 and evolving over several decades.  More correctly, that process can be called a "co-evolution" because while in academic and clinical use understanding of the condition was being refined, in the popular imagination BPD became one of the more popular terms used both for self-diagnosis and to apply to others (whether or not known personally).  Because BPD is inherently a spectrum condition, coinings like borderlinelike & borderlineish are superfluous although (of behavior) borderlinesque might be useful; all three remain non-standard.  The adjective nonborderline is used both in political geography (those lines of delineation on maps indicating something other than national or sub-national borders) and mental health (meaning “unaffected by BPD”).  Borderline is a noun, verb, adjective & adverb, borderliner & borderlineness are nouns and borderlined & borderlining are verbs; the noun plural is borderlines.  

Borderline Personality Disorder

On the internet, BPD is one of the more popular of the conditions ascribed to celebrities, politicians and others in the public eye.  As a general principle, places on the web are not recommended as sources of medical advice and that includes mental health although it seems obvious that in many politicians, their personality disorders are well beyond being classified as "borderline", many thresholds long since crossed.

In clinical psychiatry, although the number of borderline conditions has increased, it’s only the concepts of Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) and the Schizotypal Personality which are claimed to have adequate diagnostic reliability, the parameters of both first codified in the third edition of the American Psychiatric Association's (APA) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM).  The fourth edition (DSM-IV-TR (2000)), established the most commonly followed criteria for BPD and in DSM-5 (2013), these were extended to a remarkable sixteen headings in seven (A-G) categories in what appeared to be a kind of clinical mopping-up of symptoms suffered by those not able, for whatever reason, to be diagnosed with something more specific.  Indeed, the all-encompassing taxonomy appears rendered superfluous by Criterion E which seems just about to sum it up.

Criterion A: Moderate or greater impairment in personality functioning; two or more of the following criteria: (1) Identity: Markedly impoverished, poorly developed, or unstable self-image, often associated with excessive self-criticism; chronic feelings of emptiness; dissociative states under stress. (2) Self-direction: Instability in goals, aspirations, values, or career plans. (3) Empathy: Compromised ability to recognize the feelings and needs of others associated with interpersonal hypersensitivity (i.e., prone to feel slighted or insulted); perceptions of others selectively biased toward negative attributes or vulnerabilities. (4) Intimacy: Intense, unstable, and conflicted close relationships, marked by mistrust, neediness, and anxious preoccupation with real or imagined abandonment; close relationships often viewed in extremes of idealization and devaluation and alternating between over-involvement and withdrawal.

Criterion B: Four or more of the following seven pathological personality traits must be present: (5) Emotional liability: Unstable emotional experiences and frequent mood changes; emotions that are easily aroused, intense, and/or out of proportion to events and circumstances. (6) Anxiousness: Intense feelings of nervousness, tenseness, or panic, often in reaction to interpersonal stresses; worry about the negative effects of past unpleasant experiences and future negative possibilities; feeling fearful, apprehensive, or threatened by uncertainty; fears of falling apart or losing control. (7) Separation insecurity: Fears of rejection by and/or separation from significant others, associated with fears of excessive dependency and complete loss of autonomy. (8) Depressivity: Frequent feelings of being down, miserable, and/or hopeless; difficulty recovering from such moods; pessimism about the future; pervasive shame; feelings of inferior self-worth; thoughts of suicide and suicidal behavior. (9) Impulsivity: Acting on the spur of the moment in response to immediate stimuli; acting on a momentary basis without a plan or consideration of outcomes; difficulty establishing or following plans; a sense of urgency and self-harming behavior under emotional distress. (10) Risk-taking: Engagement in dangerous, risky, and potentially self-damaging activities, unnecessarily and without regard to consequences; lack of concern for one’s limitations and denial of the reality of the personal danger. (11) Hostility: Persistent or frequent angry feelings; anger or irritability in response to minor slights and insults.

Criterion C: (12) The impairments in personality functioning and the individual’s personality trait expression are relatively inflexible and pervasive across a broad range of personal and social situations.

Criterion D: (13) The impairments in personality functioning and the individual’s personality trait expression are relatively stable across time with onsets that can be traced back at least to adolescence or early adulthood.

Criterion E: (14) The impairments in personality functioning and the individual’s personality trait expression are not better explained by another mental disorder.

Criterion F: (15) The impairments in personality functioning and the individual’s personality trait expression are not attributable to a substance (eg, a drug of abuse, medication, exposure to a toxin) or a general medical condition (eg, severe head trauma).

Criterion G: (16) The impairments in personality functioning and the individual’s personality trait expression are not better understood as normal for the individual’s developmental stage or the socio-cultural environment.

The wide BPD net cast in DSM-5 pleased the psychiatrists but in recent years, there’s been interest in changing the name of BPD, a movement led not the profession but by those diagnosed with the condition, the creation of pressure-groups now greatly assisted by social media.  The objections seem to be that BPD (1) somehow marginalizes the sufferers in the hierarchy of mental illness, (2) fails to capture the underlying issues and mechanisms involved in producing its symptoms and (3), denigrates and even invalidates the very existence of their condition, the word “borderline” suggesting their symptoms aren’t sufficiently severe to be a “real” condition.  In that sense, the word does have loaded connotations, “borderline” used first by 1930s psychoanalysts to describe patients whose symptoms lay between psychosis and neurosis but to modern lay-persons, a common interpretation is that the condition “borders” on being a “real” illness.  Some even object to “disorder” but most accept it; they’d just prefer to be diagnosed with a more significant, and fashionable, depressive disorder.

Although it seems hardly more respectable, Emotional Intensity Disorder emerged from a survey as the popular choice of patients, beating out Emotional Regulation Disorder, Emotional Dysregulation Disorder, Emotionally Unstable Personality Disorder, Impulsive Personality Disorder & Impulsive-Emotional Dysregulation Disorder.  The clinicians liked Emotional Regulation Disorder but were out-voted.  Unimpressed by either, the committee working on the revision of DSM-5 proposed Borderline Type (which sounds like a sceptical psychiatrist’s casual dismissal of emos), but noted “no decision has yet been made.”  When in 2022 the text-revision (DSM-5-TR) was released, although there were textual and contextual updates, the diagnostic criteria for BPD did not change so the distinction between the two can be thought terminological rather than structural, the language used reflected the editors’ decades-long attempts at once to be more precise and less stigmatizing.  In DSM-5-TR there was also an obvious focus on editing “now suspect” references to gender but none of this altered the construct of BPD.  As had long been the practice, DSM-5-TR included updated epidemiology data (if newer research or analysis was thought to have provided some refinement) but it was very much a project focused on cultural considerations, terminology and “modernization” of language.

Checkpoint Charlie and the Berlin borderline, 1961-1990

Konrad Adenauer (1876–1967; FRG Chancellor 1949-1963) at Checkpoint Charlie in 1962; car is a Mercedes-Benz 300d (W189).

The 300 was produced in four generations (W186: 300, 300b & 300c, 1951-1957 & W189: 300d, 1957-1962) and became known informally as the “300 Adenauer”, the association prompted by the chancellor using six (cabriolets, sedans and a landaulet) 300s during his long term in office.  The 300d is also associated with John XXIII (1881–1963; pope 1958-1963) who was presented with one in 1960 and it served as the official papal vehicle until 1965 when Paul VI (1897-1978; pope 1963-1978) took delivery of a Mercedes-Benz 600; both cars were high-roofed landaulets.  Used only until the mid-1960s, the lower case characters in the model designation appeared only in documents and were never added to the badgework but they are another layer in the intricacy of the factory's model nomenclature which, when first conceived (sort of) made sense but a combination of new technology and range-proliferation (with the same engines appearing in different classes conspired to make the system unmanageable and in the early 1990s there was a structural revision which, as amended (with its own inconsistencies), endures to this day.

Although the most famous, the crossing point in the Berlin Wall (1961-1989) on the borderline between East and West Berlin and named Checkpoint Charlie (Checkpoint C to the military) was one of three, all known by their designation drawn from the NATO phonetic alphabet, the now forgotten pair being Checkpoint Alpha at Helmstedt and Checkpoint Bravo at Wannsee.  The Soviets (officially) didn't use the NATO designation, instead calling Checkpoint Charlie the КПП Фридрихштрассе (KPP Fridrikhshtrasse (Friedrichstraße Crossing Point)) while the government of the GDR (Deutsche Demokratische Republik (German Democratic Republic; the old East Germany, 1949-1990) listed it as the Grenzübergangsstelle (Border Crossing Point) Friedrich-Zimmerstraße.

Checkpoint Charlie, 1963.

In one of the charming coincidences of the Cold War, Checkpoint Charlie was located at the intersection of Friedrichstraße, Zimmerstraße & Mauerstraße (Wall Street).  It became the only well-know crossing point because, for reasons of security and administrative convenience, it was the sole designated crossing point (whether for foot or vehicular traffic) for foreigners and members of the three Allied (previously occupying) forces (France, the UK & the US) stationed in the FRG (Bundesrepublik Deutschland (Federal Republic of Germany; the old West Germany, 1949-1990).  The manned structures associated with Checkpoint Charlie were also in a location which lent itself to photography from a number of angles and replicas were built by film studios for the many productions shot in Berlin during the Cold War.  Often dark, gloomy pieces, the "Cold War spy film" was a genre which over the decades as geopolitical tensions waxed & waned but the divided Berlin of the 1960s was its high-point and what was done then "defined the look".  The Cafe Adler (Eagle Café), adjacent to Checkpoint Charlie was for decades one of West Berlin's tourist hotspots.

Checkpoint Charlie in 1982, showing the larger aluminum building which that year replaced the original wooden hut.

To those accustomed to seeing the gargantuan structures the US military tend to erect wherever they take root, Checkpoint Charlie must have been a surprise, a modest (though enlarged in 1962) and obviously temporary wooden hut was for more than twenty years all that stood on the western side, the little building replaced in 1982 only because it had become so dilapidated it was literally falling down around the guards stationed within and even then, the metal structure which replaced it, while larger, was no more permanent.  That obvious impermanence was part of the political messaging, the Western powers never wishing to hint at an acceptance the division of Germany would forever endure.  However, if people were surprised, it’s doubtful many were disappointed, the compact architecture providing a single point of focus and even in the pre-selfie era, at one glance, what tourists could take in was evocative of the Cold War cinema with which so many were familiar.

Checkpoint Charlie, 1970.

The attitude of the allied powers reflected their political position that while obviously a line of control, the Berlin Wall was not a legitimate international borderline and thus only small, temporary buildings were required.  To the authorities in the Kremlin and the GDR, whatever some might suggest was the position in international law, the Berlin Wall was a borderline and thus on their side the infrastructure quickly grew to include watchtowers, a military barracks and a multi-lane, enclosed clearing zone in which those wishing to cross could be interrogated and searched.

Checkpoint Charlie in 2020, now a replica “1961” hut with new sandbags.

The Berlin Wall “fell” in November 1989 and the checkpoint booth was removed some six months later although, because East and West Germany remained legally separate countries, the checkpoint at the point of the borderline was retained as the designated official crossing-point for foreigners and diplomats, an arrangement which ended in October 1990 when German reunification was formalized in law.  Checkpoint Charlie has since remained one of Berlin's tourist attractions and, just as some parts of the once demolished wall have been re-created because supply of the real thing wasn’t enough to meet demand, the municipal government soon erected an almost exact replica of the checkpoint as it stood in 1961 although the quality of the construction is said to be rather more robust than the original and it’s expected to enjoy a longer life.  Better to capture the flavor, even the sandbags which gradually were removed during the 1970s are back in place, carefully stacked.  During every week of the tourist season, selfies are taken by the thousand.

Alexithymia

Alexithymia (pronounced ey-lek-suh-thahy-mee-uh)

In psychiatry, a range of behaviors associated with certain conditions which manifests as a difficulty in experiencing, processing, expressing and describing emotional responses.

1973: The construct was the Ancient Greek a- (not) + λέξις (léxis) (speaking) + θυμός (thumós) (heart (in the sense of “soul”)) which deconstructs as a- +‎ lexi +‎ -thymia (in a medical context a suffix meaning “one’s state of mind”), alexithymia thus understood as “without words for emotions”.  Alexithymia is a noun and alexithymic & alexithymiac are nouns & adjectives; the noun plural of alexithymia is also alexithymia but alexithymics, the plural of alexithymic is the more common form.

The word alexithymia was in 1973 coined by US based psychiatrists John Nemiah (1918–2009) and Peter Sifneos (1920-2008) to describe a psychological state as well known to the general population as the profession, the former preferring terms “emotionless”, “taciturn”, “feelingless” or “impassive” although alexithymia has meanings which are more specific.  Translated literally as “no words for emotions”, in practice it’s a spectrum condition which references individual degrees of difficulty in recognizing, processing or expressing emotional states or experiences.  Although it appears in both the American Psychiatric Association's (APA) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) and the World Health Organization’s (WHO) International Classification of Diseases (ICD), neither class it as either a diagnosable mental disorder or a symptom.  Instead, it should be regarded as a dimensional construct and one distributed normally in the general population.  In other words it’s a personality trait and like all spectrum conditions, it varies in frequency and intensity between individuals.

Alexithymia was first described as a psychological construct characterized by difficulties in identifying, describing, and interpreting one's emotions but it was soon realized individuals less able to recognize and express their own feelings would often have a diminished ability to understand the emotional experiences of others.  Clinically, alexithymia is classified in two sub-groups: (1) Primary (or Trait) Alexithymia is considered more stable and enduring and the evidence suggests there is often a genetic or developmental basis, those with primary alexithymia displaying indications from an early age.  (2) Secondary (or State) Alexithymia is something usually temporary and often associated with specific psychological or medical conditions, noted especially in patients suffering post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and depressive illnesses.

Available for both Android and iOS, there are Alexithymia apps and it's possible there are those who wish to increase the extent of at least some aspects of the condition in their own lives, the apps presumably a helpful tool in monitoring progress in either direction.  There must be emos who would like to be more alexithymic. 

The characteristics common to alexithymia include (1) a limited imaginative capacity and “fantasy life”, (2) a difficulty in identifying and describing emotions, (3) thought processes which focus predominately on external events rather than internal emotional experience, (3) a difficulty in distinguishing between emotions and bodily sensations and (4) challenges in understanding (or even recognizing) the emotions of others.  As a spectrum condition, alexithymia greatly can vary in severity, and not all with alexithymia will experience the same symptoms with there being a high instance reported among patients with psychiatric and psychosomatic disorders.  Additionally, it does seem a common feature of neurological disease with most evidence available for patients with traumatic brain injury, stroke, and epilepsy although the numbers may be slanted because of the greater volume of study of those affected and it remains unclear how independent it is from affective disorders such as depression and anxiety, both common in neurological conditions.

A sample from the validation study of the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-26) (in the Croatian population).

Clinicians have available a number of questionnaires which can be use to assess a patient’s state of alexithymia and these can do more than provide a metric; the limitation of drawing a conclusion from observation alone is that with such an approach it can genuinely be impossible to distinguish between the truly alexithymic and those who have no difficulties in experiencing, processing, expressing and describing emotional responses but for some reason choose not to.  Such behavior can of course induce problems in inter-personal relationships but it’s something distinct from alexithymia and importantly too, it is clinically distinct from psychiatric personality disorders, such as antisocial personality disorder.  However, as a structural view of the DSM over the seventy-odd years would indicate, within psychiatry, mission creep has been a growing phenomenon and the definitional nets tend to be cast wide and wider and it’s not impossible that alexithymia may in some future edition be re-classified as a diagnostic criterion or at least recognized formally as a symptom.  It has for some time been acknowledged the DSM has over those decades documented the reassessment of some aspects of the human condition as mental disorders but what is less discussed is the relationship between cause and effect and there will be examples of both: it would be interesting to try to work out if there’s a pattern in the nature of (1) the changes the DSM has driven compare with (2) those which retrospectively have been codified.

Lindsay Lohan and her lawyer in court, Los Angeles, December 2011,

There may be movement because alexithymia has many of the qualities and attributes which appeal to both academia and the pharmaceutical industry.  The orthodoxy is that it occurs in some 10% of the general population but is disproportionately seen in patients suffering certain mental conditions, notably neuro-developmental disorders; the prevalence among those with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) estimated at anything up to 90%.  What will probably surprise few is that within any sub-group, it is males who are by far the most represented population and there is even the condition normative male alexithymia (NMA) although that describes the behavior and not the catchment, NMA identified also in females.

Otrovert

Otrovert (pronounced ott-roh-vert)

A person unable to feel a connection to social groups or collectives; despite being welcomed and included in social settings, they feel like outsiders.

2025: A coining by US psychiatrist Dr Rami Kaminski (b 1954), who first used the word in his book his book The Gift of Not Belonging (2025), the construct being the Spanish otro (other; another) + -vert.  Otro was from the Latin alter, altera & alterum (the other), ultimately from the primitive Indo-European hélteros (the other of two); it may be compared with the Portuguese outro (from the Old Galician-Portuguese outro, from the Latin alterum (the other)) and the French autre (from Old French autre (another), from the Latin alterum).  The –vert suffix was from the Latin vertere (to turn) and was used to refer to a person with a particular personality which manifests when in the presence of others.

Otrovert is a noun; the noun plural is otroverts.  Because otrovert is a “hot word” (newly coined or an adaptation of an existing word and one which has in a short time become popular), most lexicographers are tagging it as “provisional”, the majority of “hot words and phrases” (think “six-seven”) fading from use and never gaining critical mass.  Even the idea of “popular: had (in this context) shifted because whereas once it could take months or years for a word or phrase to spread into general use, on the various platform on the internet, proliferation can be close to instant.  However, the tools used to assess “use” are rather brute-force and often are counting appearances in “lists” rather than “general use”.  For those reasons, in the technical sense, derived forms really don’t (yet) exist but if constructed the list (based on the model of other “-verts”) might include the nouns otrovertist, otroverting & otrovertness, the verb & adjective otroverted, adjectives otrovertish & otrovertesque & otrovertive and the adverbs otrovertedly & otrovertly.

Google ngram (a quantitative and not qualitative measure): Because of the way Google harvests data for their ngrams, they’re not literally a tracking of the use of a word in society but can be usefully indicative of certain trends, (although one is never quite sure which trend(s)), especially over decades.  As a record of actual aggregate use, ngrams are not wholly reliable because: (1) the sub-set of texts Google uses is slanted towards the scientific & academic and (2) the technical limitations imposed by the use of OCR (optical character recognition) when handling older texts of sometime dubious legibility (a process AI should improve).  Where numbers bounce around, this may reflect either: (1) peaks and troughs in use for some reason or (2) some quirk in the data harvested.

An ambivert is a person neither clearly extroverted nor introverted, but has characteristics of each, the construct being ambi- +‎ -vert.  Ambi- was from the Latin ambo (both) and was a doublet of the New Latin amphi-, from the Ancient Greek ἀμφί (amphí) (on both sides).  The dexter element in the Medieval Latin meant “right” and ambidexter thus was understood as “both hands being like a right hand”.  In English, the ambi- prefix is most familiar in “ambidextrous” (possessing an equal or functionally comparable ability to handle objects with both hands (in writing, music, sport etc) although it has from time to time been used figuratively (not taking sides in conflicts or being equally adept in more than one medium, genre, style etc) and even as a humorous synonym for “bisexual”.  When used in psychology, historically, ambiversion described someone with characteristics of both extroversion and introversion and thus suggested a “balanced personality”, the subject choosing to manifest the different characteristics according to what the circumstances seemed to demand.  Ambivert thus does not imply some sort of split personality or the existence of a condition like bi-polar disorder (the old manic depression) but simply reflects an individual able to undertake their social interactions in an appropriate manner.

Because the “vert words” are not really part of academic or clinical physiology, the definitions can be “elastic” and while centovert (being in the middle between introvert and extrovert) may be a synonym of ambivert, it may also be nuanced in that it suggests someone unable (or at least unwilling) to engage in introverted or extroverted behaviour, regardless of the circumstances.  A variant of the ambivert is the omnivert (someone fits into both extremes of the extroversion-introversion personality spectrum), the construct being omni + -vert.  Omni- ultimately was from the Latin omnis (all).  Again, because the “verts” are pop-psychology words there’s little to be gained from attempting to “parse the overlaps” (ie where one ends and another begins) and seems likely omniversion is simply an “enabling pre-condition” for one to possess if one is to attain the desirable “balanced state” of ambiversion.  Nobody seems yet to have coined ultravert, hypervert or ubervert but one need not spend long on social media to see the why such labels might be handy.

A self-described introvert: Lindsay Lohan explains she's an introvert; 2019 interview by broadcaster Howard Stern (b 1954).

Like other “-verts” of this ilk, otrovert was built on the model of the familiar introvert & extravert, the construct being intro + -vert.  An introvert (pronounced in-truh-vurt) is an individual who prefers (sometimes actively seeks) tranquil environments, limits social engagement and tends to a greater than average preference for solitude.  In anatomy & zoology there’s a technical meaning “a part (typically a hollow, cylindrical structure) that is or can be introverted, or turned in on itself (ie invaginate)) but the most commonly used is the psychological sense: a person characterized by concern primarily with their own thoughts and feelings.  Introverts are noted often for having a disposition that finds social engagement at least tiresome (and sometimes threatening), thus the preference for quiet solitude.  Introvert seem first to have appeared in print in the 1660s and was from the New Latin intrōvertere, the construct being intrō (within) + vertere (to turn).  The prefix intro- was from the Latin intro- (inwards) & intrā (within) + -ō (used as a verbalizer).  Although it’s not infrequent for introvert to be used as a synonym for “shy” (and in terms of observed behaviour the two phenomena can appear indistinguishable), they are definitionallly distinct.  While shyness is associated with timidity and social anxiety, introverts have a lack of interest in interpersonal engagement and a limited endurance for social contact; what that means is while the behaviours can often be the same, the underlying motivations differ.

Slaughterhouse-Five (1969) by Kurt Vonnegut.

Introvert & extrovert are popular terms of self-description but they can also be aspirational and while the classic stereotype is of the introvert who “wishes they were more outgoing” there are other types.  The US pediatrician Dr Mark Vonnegut (b 1947) wrote short stories and in one he described his father’s (the author Kurt Vonnegut (1922-2007)) desire to be a cynical, grumpy old man who despaired of humanity but could never quite manage it because of his “inherent optimism”.  As Dr Vonnegut put it, he was “…like an extrovert who wanted to be an introvert, a very social guy who wanted to be a loner, a lucky person who would have preferred to be unlucky. An optimist posing as a pessimist, hoping people will take heed.”  Explaining the difference, he added: “Introverts almost never cause me trouble and are usually much better at what they do than extroverts.  Extroverts are too busy slapping one another on the back, team building, and making fun of introverts to get much done.  Extroverts are amazed and baffled by how much some introverts get done and assume that they, the extroverts, are somehow responsible.”  On the basis of his clinical experience, he observed: “I understand perfectly why some of my autistic patients scream and flap their arms--it's to frighten off extroverts.”

An extrovert (pronounced ek-struh-vurt) is described typically as an outgoing, gregarious person who thrives in dynamic environments and seeks to maximize social engagement; in the jargon of psychology, it refers to someone characterized by extroversion; a person concerned primarily with the physical and social environment, thus the usual presentation as a person with a disposition energized through social engagement who tends to languish or chafe in solitude.  The word extrovert (the alternative spelling extravert (an example of the influence of German on psychology) is now rare) also emerged in the 1660s, the construct being extro- + vert.  In this case, extro- was a pseudo-Latinism prefix based upon the Latin extra- (outside, beyond), under the influence of the distinction between the Latin intro- (inwards) & intra- (inside; within).  In English, formations using the prefix tend to be restricted to words formed as antonyms of terms formed with intro-.

Introvert & extrovert (in their literal senses) were since the late seventeenth century used in science and medicine but both in the twentieth century entered general use when certain works by the Swiss psychiatrist, Carl Jung (1875–1961) were translated from German into English.  What seems to have given the words their greatest impetus was the appearance of commentaries on Jung written for a general audience and for these purposes binary concepts like “introvert” and “extrovert” were useful devices to encapsulate layers of meaning although the trigger may have been the 1918 paper Psycho-Analytic Study of August Comte [1798-1857; a seminal figure in sociology] by psychologist Dr Phyllis Blanchard (1895-1986).  Being a woman, Dr Blanchard has been neglected by history but, like the Austrian psychiatrist Sigmund Freud (1856-1939), Jung became what would now be called a “celebrity” psychoanalyst and that happened because advances in their field (and neurology) had made the public fascinated with the human mind and its processes (especially dreams).  Reflecting what may possibly be a professional distaste at their jargon ending up in pop-psychology texts, technical papers often use the spelling “extravert”, following Jung and his contemporaries.

The Gift of Not Belonging (2025) by Dr Rami Kaminski (b 1954).  Psychiatrist Dr Kaminski is the founder and director of the Institute for Integrative Psychiatry in New York City.

Dr Kaminski describes The Gift of Not Belonging as “…the first book to explore the distinct personality style of the otrovert - someone who lacks the communal impulse and does not fit in with any social group, regardless of its members - and to reveal all the advantages of being an otrovert and how otroverts contribute to the world.”  He explained that while otroverts enjoy deep and fulfilling one-on-one relationships, within groups they feel alienated, uncomfortable, and alone.  Unlike introverts, who crave solitude and are easily drained by social interactions, otroverts can be quite gregarious and rarely tire from one-on-one socialising; unlike loners, or people who have been marginalised based on their identity, otroverts are socially embraced and often popular - yet are unable to conform with what the group collectively thinks or cares about.  Dr Kaminski positions all this as “the great gifts of being an otrovert” by which he means someone with no affinity for a particular group is not constrained by their sense of self-worth being conditioned on the group's approval.  A champion of the otrovert, Dr Kaminski suggests they “must not be harassed to take part, but allowed to revel in their glorious difference.”

Despite vying with “psychopath” for the title of “most popular” words from psychology, neither introvert and extrovert have ever been used as diagnostic terms in the American Psychiatric Association's (APA) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM); that doesn’t mean they’re not used by clinicians, just that they’re not part of the formal jargon.  That might seem curious given their not infrequent appearances in the published history of personality psychology including Jung’s original typology (codified in their most refined form in the 1920s), the ubiquitous MBTI (Myers–Briggs Type Indicator) and the Big Five model, where Extraversion is one of the five major personality traits.  These frameworks are however psychological, not psychiatric.  The DSM does of course have an extensive section on personality disorders and many of the traits related to introversion & extraversion appear including in (1) Avoidant Personality Disorder (social inhibition—links superficially to introversion but is not the same thing) and Histrionic or Narcissistic Personality Disorders (social boldness—superficially “extraverted” traits).

However, what the DSM’s editors have in recent decades done is to avoid the use of potentially ambiguous labels and focus instead on behavioural criteria that may indicate impairment or pathology.  Especially since the 1970s, the DSM has acknowledged (even championed) the idea that many “things” once classified as deviant are really part of the “normal” human condition; reflecting that paradigm, introversion & extraversion came to be understood as “normal-range” personality traits, not indicators of disorder.  As a general principle, the DSM appears to restrict the use of terms to instances where they relate to clinically significant impairment (the emphasis on the effect on the patient rather than the mechanics of process).  This approach was institutionalized with the release of DSM-5 (2013) in which the model clearly had become one of trait-based personality assessment.

To make the point, there exists in DSM-5 & DSM-5-TR (2022) the “Alternative DSM-5 Model for Personality Disorders, Section III” which describes personality traits that (more or less) correspond to what popular culture calls extraversion and introversion.  The editors however avoid the two popular words and instead breaks personality into trait domains with pathological versions of ordinary traits.  What general readers think of a “introversion” now appears in the DSM as “Detachment” although this is not pathologized unless it manifests in maladaptive extremes (chronic or persistent withdrawal; avoidance of social interaction; intimacy avoidance; a reluctance to form close relationships; anhedonia (inability to experience pleasure); mistrust of others; restricted affectivity (limited emotional expression)).  So, introverts can to some degree be “happy” with their state and just prefer frequent solitude and what the DSM calls “detachment” is invoked only when the trait is causing significant impairment or distress.

In the popular imagination, “extraversion” is associated with sociability, talkativeness, outgoing behaviour, enthusiasm (ie someone who is the “life of the party”).  That’s also obviously a “spectrum condition” and the DSM has never listed a single domain which could be classed as “high extraversion” which is good because high sociability isn’t intrinsically pathological.  Rather, should extraversion becomes maladaptive or extreme, the DSM classifies it across several domains:

(1) Attention-seeking (a facet of Antagonism) which manifests especially in Histrionic Personality Disorder.  Symptoms include an excessive need for approval, dramatic or provocative behaviour and an Intense desire to be the centre of attention.

(2) Grandiosity (a facet of Antagonism) which is characteristic of Narcissistic Personality Disorder, the symptoms including social boldness (masking fragile self-esteem) and entitlement and arrogance (which, in many cases, doesn’t manifest)

(3) Impulsivity & Risk Taking (a facet of disinhibition).  This is outgoing, sensation-seeking behaviour in its pathological form and is associated with thrill-seeking, poor impulse control and a tendency to act without considering the consequences

(4) Low Detachment: This is acknowledged as the “adaptive end of Detachment” but the editors seem to list it only to “close the circle”; it’s there because logically it has to be but is certainly not treated as a disorder.

So the DSM intentionally avoids the introvert/extrovert dichotomy which is how starkly it’s understood in popular use.  This “either-or” approach obviously doesn’t map onto the way the DSM treats personality traits as spectrums with only the margins (ie the dysfunctional extremes) described.  What that does is acknowledge there is introversion & extraversion which part of the “normal” human condition and not pathological.  Additionally it’s acknowledged the behavior which in one subject may indicate “significant impairment or distress” might in another not be of concern.

Variation

Variation (pronounced vair-ee-ey-shuhn)

(1) The act, process, or accident of varying in condition, character, or degree; The act of varying; a partial change in the form, position, state, or qualities of a thing.

(2) Amount, rate, extent, or degree of change.

(3) A different form of something; a variant; a related but distinct thing.

(4) In music, the transformation of a melody or theme with changes or elaborations in harmony, rhythm, and melody (the technique often using repetition of material with alterations to melody, harmony, rhythm, timbre, texture, counterpoint or orchestration (though often with some invariant characteristic).

(5) In ballet, a solo dance, especially one a section of a pas de deux.

(6) In astronomy, any deviation from the mean orbit of a heavenly body, especially of a planetary or satellite orbit.

(7) In admiralty use as applied to nautical navigation, the angular difference at the vessel between the direction of true north and magnetic north; also called magnetic declination.

(8) In biology, a difference or deviation in structure or character from others of the same species or group (specifically in genetics the modification of a hereditary trait.

(9) In linguistics, any form of morphophonemic change, such as one involved in inflection, conjugation, or vowel mutation.

(10) In linguistics, when two or more linguistic forms appear in the same environment without a change in meaning, the choice of form being determined by factors of dialect, sociolect, register or simply the speaker's preference.

(11) In board and other games, a a line of play that differs from the original.

(12) In mathematics (variational calculus), an infinitesimal perturbation applied to a function, typically denoted , used to probe how a functional changes.

1350-1400: From the Middle English variation (difference, divergence), from the Middle French variation, from the Old French variacion (variety, diversity) and directly from the Latin variationem & variātiōn (stem of variātiō) (a difference, variation, change), from the past participle stem of variare (to change) (the source of the modern English vary).  The use in the context of musical composition wasn't common until the early nineteenth century.  The available synonyms themselves show an impressive variation: deviation, abnormality, diversity, variety, fluctuation, innovation, divergence, alteration, discrepancy, disparity, mutation, shift, modification, change, swerve, digression, contradistinction, aberration, novelty, diversification, mutation, alteration, difference.  Apart from the English variation, European descendants include the French variation, the Italian variazione, the Portuguese variação, the Russian вариация (variacija), the Spanish variación and Swedish variation.  Variation & variationism are nouns, variationist is a noun & adjective and variational is an adjective; the noun plural is variations.

In jurisdictions of the common law tradition, the word “variation” must be used with caution because while in documents it can be innocuous, it possesses also a number of well-established legal meanings, these varying according to the field of law where applied.  In the broadest (and simplest) sense, a “variation” is a change to an existing legal instrument, obligation, agreement etc that in some way changes something while leaving the arrangement’s whole substantially in existence.  The most familiar use is in contract law, a variation to a contract an agreement between parties to the contract to alter one or more of the terms.  In practice, despite the evolved rules, with the agreement of all parties, a variation to a contract can be so fundamental that it really become a “new contact”.  Provided there is certainty in the wording of the “variation” and all parties are content, this can be uncontroversial but in disputes, a variation can be found to be so fundamental a court will declare it a “new contract”.  Contract variations are so common (and often oral transactions if minor) that most pass unnoticed though disputed variations are among some of the famous entries in contract law text books.  In the jargon, a variation is conceptually distinct from a rescission (terminating an existing contract) or a novation (substituting a new contract or party for an existing one).

The interesting technical aspect of course is the point at which a “variation” becomes a contract, the terminology of significance because just because those writing something call it a “variation”, that doesn’t mean a court will accept it is one; depending on this and that, it may be held what the parties call a “variation” has, in effect, rescinded and replaced the original contract.  Borrowing from the traditions of equity the maxim “equity looks at substance rather than form” and what contract law judges do is look at consequence rather than the label.  One who would have understood that what matters is substance rather than form was comrade Stalin.  He eventually would find the Yugoslavian communists just to troublesome but while they could still be controlled, he was inclined to despair, complaining they were “more Marxist than Marx” and became annoyed with one delegation to which he'd just explained the importance of assuming control of the organs of state without it appearing a communist takeover.  All they wanted to talk about was the design of the red stars for the caps of the police and military personnel, prompting him angrily to exclaim: “What do you want with red stars on your caps?  The form is not important but what is gained, and you—red stars!  By God, there’s no need for stars!”     

Ginger, copper, auburn & chestnut are variations on the theme of red-headedness: Lindsay Lohan demonstrates the possibilities. 

Courts can also impose variations on their own orders (in which a term or terms might be altered but the order remains operative).  A judge of their own volition may issue a variation or it can be a response to a request from one of the parties (or both) to the proceedings.  Variations in orders are very common in family matters (quantum of maintenance payments, shared parenting arrangements etc) and criminal law (a sentence, bail or parole arrangements etc).  As a piece of judicial administration, variations are a vital aspect because, analogous with the use in contract law, they are a “modification”, meaning the force of the original remains afoot with no need for a re-hearing or the making of a new order.  Of course, a court may choose to set aside an order and make a new one; it’s on an order-by-order basis.  In specialized matters such will or trusts, variations can highly be regulated the laws of trusts especially specific and, as Rupert Murdoch (b 1931) found out, sometimes legally bulletproof.  Beneficiaries and trustees are of course subject to restrictions on variations but courts are also governed by the rules.  

Glenn Gould and the Goldberg Variations: 1955 & 1981

Published in 1741, J.S. Bach’s (1685-1750) Goldberg Variations consists of an aria and thirty variations.  Written for the harpsichord, it was named after German harpsichordist & organist Johann Gottlieb Goldberg (1727-1756), thought to have undertaken the first performance.  The work is now part of the canon of Baroque music but, before 1955, was an obscure piece of the Bach repertoire, a technically difficult composition for the hardly fashionable harpsichord and known mostly as a device for teachers to develop students’ keyboard skills.  Even for aficionados of the Baroque, it was rarely performed.

Glenn Gould (1932-1982) was a Canadian classical pianist, his debut album on the then novel twelve-inch vinyl LP an interpretation of The Goldberg Variations, played not on a harpsichord but a piano.  It was at once acknowledged to be an extraordinary performance and although critics don't always embrace radical approaches to older pieces, the praise was almost universal although there was one reviewer wo expressed "shock" ate Gould's fingers moving at a tempo the composer would never have envisioned, resulting in a piece of electrifying intensity; it really was something beyond mere interpretation. As well as introducing him to a wider audience, The Goldberg Variations proved also Gould's swansong, uniquely for him, re-recorded in 1981 and issued days before his death.  Eschewing the stunningly fast pace that had made the earlier recording famous and clearly the work of a mellower, more reflective artist, for those familiar with the original, it’s a masterpiece of controlled tension.  In 2002, Sony re-released both, the earlier essentially untouched, the later benefiting from a re-mastering correcting some of the technical deficiencies that tended to plague many early digital releases.  Although critics and professional musicians doubtlessly understood why Gould believed there were aspects of the 1955 performance that detracted from the whole and why he felt his second attempt the better piece of art, for those who listen to music for pleasure, it’s still the original that thrills.

Rarely can a single recording have so successfully revived a long-neglected work but that’s what Gould’s 1955 release did for Bach’s Goldberg Variations, his audacious interpretation unlocking fascinations that have since drawn audiences although not until the next century were many other pianists tempted into the studio.  The (alleged) early history also is intriguing: When first published, the piece was titled: “Aria with diverse variations for a harpsichord with two manuals.  Composed for Music Lovers to Refresh their Spirits.”  While we can be grateful for the adoption of the punchier “Goldberg Variations”, the origins of the wordy original may lie in the household of an insomniac Russian count then serving as ambassador to the electoral court of Saxony (part of the Holy Roman Empire).  To sooth him to sleep, the ambassador would have the court musician (Johann Gottlieb Goldberg) spend evenings in an antechamber, playing the harpsichord.  It was the count who requested Bach to compose works of a “gentle yet lively character” so that, even if not lulled to sleep, he might be cheered up.  That tale appeared in a very early biography of Bach and few historians think it likely (his pupil Goldberg was the aged 14) but it’s attractive enough not to be forgotten and while the inclusion of “lively” might seem a strange request from an insomniac, as a chronic condition it has been linked to depression.

Simone Dinnerstein, Goldberg Variations by J.S. Bach (Telarc CD-80692).

Additionally, the count may have had scripture in mind:  “And it came to pass, when the evil spirit from God was upon Saul, that David took an harp, and played with his hand: so Saul was refreshed, and was well, and the evil spirit departed from him.” (1 Samuel 16:23; King James Version of the Bible (KJV, 1611).  Not for nothing is Bach known as perhaps the greatest composer of “Church Music”, his works often including what was in his lifetime called gemüths-ergetzende (soul-enhancing).  Certainly, the work retains its capacity to stun, US pianist Simone Dinnerstein’s acclaimed recording in 2007 one of that year’s big hits on the classical charts: Released by Telarc, it was her self-financed project to mark a return to performance after pausing to give birth to her first child and definitely it was not a Gould 1.1 or 2.1.  Preformed on a 1903 Hamburg Steinway model D concert grand, the sound was sumptuous without the contrived lushness many studios once were compelled to concoct in the day before digital techniques were refined to the point where individual notes could be captured almost in the space’s “specific cubic millimetres”.  What’s often forgotten about the Goldberg Variations is that although reviewers have often focused on the “difficult passages”, some of it is simple indeed and it’s this “light & dark” that can be exploited; Gould in 1955 had his approach, Dinnerstein in 2007 had her own and the contrast in obvious from the opening aria, played at a tempo that will seem startling to those who have only heard Gould’s first take on the meditation.  What she seems to have decided is it could be a romantic piece (not the most fashionable view in 2007), not from beginning to end, but with the character of those passages gaining emphasis from the more rapid sections.  It was an accomplished work and while the virtuosity might have been expected, it’s the inventiveness that will intrigue although there will be some who expected more, some of the repeats not included, presumably a technical limitation of the single-CD release.  Hopefully, like Gould, she’ll re-record, now technology no longer imposes such constraints.