I was being loose with the words "everything" and "only".
GP comment was curious about why they've only heard about "linked lists" in a language, C, which like Modula-2 does not use them as the basic standard library collections type. When you have to implement linked lists yourself if you want to use them, you're always going to refer to them by implementation detail. In the vast majority of cases where they're used, though, it's as the fundamental standard library collection, and in that case they're usually just called Lists without telling the caller about their implementation.
(This idiom is true to the point that the Python implementers feel the need to point out that CPython uses arrays to implement the list type, as they feel that this would be unexpected to users of other languages that call their basic collections type a "list".)
C is the only language where they're called "linked lists"; everything else just calls them "lists".
Nope, plenty of literature refers to them as linked lists.
Here is an article about them in Modula-2, to use a language of similar age as C.
https://www.modula2.org/tutor/chapter11.php
I was being loose with the words "everything" and "only".
GP comment was curious about why they've only heard about "linked lists" in a language, C, which like Modula-2 does not use them as the basic standard library collections type. When you have to implement linked lists yourself if you want to use them, you're always going to refer to them by implementation detail. In the vast majority of cases where they're used, though, it's as the fundamental standard library collection, and in that case they're usually just called Lists without telling the caller about their implementation.
(This idiom is true to the point that the Python implementers feel the need to point out that CPython uses arrays to implement the list type, as they feel that this would be unexpected to users of other languages that call their basic collections type a "list".)