# data[].attributes.body
Charlemagne, the Holy Roman emperor once said, "To have a second language is to have a second soul."

Cognitive scientist Lera Borodistky further supports this concept in her TED talk, explaining how language can shape the way we think.

During her research, she studied an Aboriginal community in Australia, the Kuuk Thaayoree people. They do not use words like 'left' and 'right' to indicate directions in their language. Instead, cardinal directions: north, south, east and west, are used in descriptions. So, for example, to describe the presence of an ant on your left leg, they would say, "There's an ant on your southwest leg." This allows them to stay oriented very well compared to other population groups whose language does not require regular directions.

Additionally, they have a different way of thinking about time. For English speakers, events in a timeline are usually placed from left to right (increasing with years). In contrast, for the Kuuk Thaayoree people, time is 'locked' on the landscape from east to west. Therefore, when asked to organize specific images according to time, they would change the order based on how their body was facing.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
There are about 7,000 languages spoken around the world -- and they all have different sounds, vocabularies and structures. But do they shape the way we think? Cognitive scientist Lera Boroditsky shares examples of language -- from an Aboriginal community in Australia that uses cardinal directions instead of left and right to the multiple words for blue in Russian -- that suggest the answer is a resounding yes. “The beauty of linguistic diversity is that it reveals to us just how ingenious and how flexible the human mind is,” Boroditsky says. “Human minds have invented not one cognitive universe, but 7,000.”

# data[].attributes.body
If the strong version of linguistic relativity turns out to be accurate, then all cultures with their various languages would have different cognitive capabilities, which would significantly impact the future of our species. We've always strived to push past our limits and innovate as humans. Knowing that certain people cannot break past linguistic barriers could create massive social divides.

Thankfully, most modern linguists consider the strong version to be false.

# data[].attributes.body
The Sapir–Whorf hypothesis is the linguistic theory that a speaker's language affects their worldview. This theory is based on the studies of Edward Sapir and Benjamin Lee Whorf, although the two never directly authored any studies together or presented this theory as a hypothesis.

There are two primary branches within this theory:

Strong version (linguistic determinism)

Weak version

# data[].attributes.body
The weak version of the theory is still significant since language is a factor in our cognitive capabilities. However, since this theory implies that language doesn't directly determine thought, no one can claim superiority because of language. Everyone can learn other languages and understand newer and different concepts unexplainable in their mother tongue.

We have yet to see any new cultural divides arise due to knowledge about this theory. However, due to cultural differences, social divides already exist in which differing languages can play a significant role. Therefore, we should all strive to put aside our biases and look at everyone as an equal - as individuals with the capability to innovate, create, learn, and help further society.

# data[].attributes.body
Linguistic determinism, or the strong version, claims that language determines thought and that any restrictions within a language impose similar restrictions on a speaker's thoughts. However, modern linguists generally do not subscribe to this theory.

The weak version, generally accepted by modern linguistics, claims that language influences thought and cognitive decisions. So, restrictions or limits may impact a person's thoughts or judgments, but they do not determine them.

# data[].attributes.body
In conclusion, linguists are still studying linguistic relativity.  While most modern linguists do not support the strong theory, the weaker theory, stating that language merely influences thought and cognition, is generally accepted.

The impact of linguistic relativity and the Sapir-Worf hypothesis is vast, even if only the weak theory is supported.  It has been demonstrated that language can affect how we, as humans, process and understand the world around us, an example being how the Kuuk Thaayoree people in Australia describe directions. These practices suggest a great diversity and uniqueness in the way people think based on their native language, which could challenge the universal infrastructure of human cognition.

We must consider how these differences in processing and comprehension affect different groups of people.  How should the findings of linguistic relativity influence policy design for multinational corporations, like the United Nations?  There must be no discrimination based on any group's native language.

# data[].attributes.body
Boroditsky, Lera. "How language shapes the way we think." (2018).

Cibelli, E., Xu, Y., Austerwelil, J.L., Griffiths, T.L., Regier, T.  "The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis and Probabilistic Inference:  Evidence from the Domain of Color.", PLoS ONE, vol. 11, no. 7, 2016.

Panko, Ben. “Does the Linguistic Theory at the Center of the Film 'Arrival' Have Any Merit?” Smithsonian, Smithsonian Institution, 2 Dec. 2016.

Tamek, Mounna. “Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis and Its Implications in the Movie ‘Arrival.’” Medium, 18 Dec. 2017.

(Introduction) “Linguistic Relativity - an Overview | ScienceDirect Topics.” www.sciencedirect.com, www.sciencedirect.com/topics/computer-science/linguistic-relativity.

‌

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Above: the aliens (the hand-like figures), their language (the circular, inky objects), and the linguist (the human figure near the middle).

# data[].attributes.body
(Spoilers for the movie "Arrival")

Another example of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis in popular media is "Arrival", a 2016 science fiction film that begins with alien spaceships coming to Earth. The government asks a linguist to decode the aliens' language and understand why they appeared.

Throughout the movie, we see "flashback" scenes showing the linguist's daughter. However, the linguist has no daughter at the beginning of the film. Eventually, we discover that these daughter scenes are actually "flash-forwards" into the future.

As the linguist begins to understand the alien language better, she perceives time differently. She can observe future events such as spending time with her future daughter, reflecting the claim that language determines thought. This is a comically hyperbolic example of one of the key ideas of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis.