[03:40] Dr. Boroditsky mentions “in a lot of languages, you have to change the verb depending on how you came to know about this information”
After hearing this line, I paused the video for a moment. A powerful thought came to mind: in languages with “evidential information,” is there less misinformation? Misinformation seems to be one of our largest societal struggles today, especially as the use of technology continues to expand worldwide. Postman (2011) reminds us that “once a technology is admitted, it plays out its hand; it does what it is supposed to do. Our task is to understand what that design is—that is to say, when we admit a new technology to a culture, we must do so with our eyes wide open.” Technology can be a powerful force for good, especially when it helps crucial information reach people quickly during dangerous situations. At the same time, if all languages encouraged speakers to provide the source of their knowledge, we might be better equipped to sort reliable information from misinformation. Combining the possibilities of technology with the clarity of evidential language could help us promote more responsible, trustworthy communication.
[08:20] Dr. Boroditsky asks “to what extent do language and culture guide what we see in the world?”
This question makes me think about how language and culture connect people. People who can speak several languages are able to relate and engage with more people in the world. Language shapes how we talk about and understand our experiences. Sometimes, certain ideas or feelings just come across better in one language than another. Culture also plays a role in what we notice and what we think is important. For example, some cultures focus more on nature and community, while others highlight independence and achievement. In the end, both language and culture shape how we see the world and how we see ourselves in it.
[12:23] Dr. Boroditsky states “what we know is that the future is in front and the past is behind”.
She follows up this statement with an example of how some cultures see the past and the future the opposite way. This idea seems so optimistic and logical to me. The future is unknown, which is why it’s behind you. The past is something we already know and can see which is why it’s placed in front of us. The future, on the other hand, is uncertain, so it makes sense that it’s seen as being behind us. I find this really interesting because it shows how much language and culture influence the way we imagine time. It makes me wonder how these perspectives affect the way people make decisions. If you see the past as visible and right in front of you, maybe you rely on it more to guide your choices. On the other hand, if you see the future as in front, it might push you to focus more on what lies ahead and what’s possible.
[20:15] Dr. Boroditsky mentions “all nouns are of a particular gender”.
I’m a fluent French speaker, and I remember learning French as a child and thinking it was so strange that objects were either “girls” or “boys.” It wasn’t like this in English, so I wondered why it was in French. Boroditsky (2011) writes that bilingual people see the world differently depending on which language they’re using. Assigning gender to objects might actually influence the way we describe or even feel about them. It also shows that learning another language doesn’t just give us new words, it can change the way we think and expand the way we understand things.
[34:10] Dr. Boroditsky states that “Mathematics is a universal language”
This sentence made me think of the power of number words in language. Numbers hold incredible meaning. As a mathematics educator, I’ve spent many years making sure students not only understand the concepts they are learning but also why those concepts matter. So many of the math skills we teach connect directly to everyday life, measuring and building, paying for items and budgeting, or cooking and baking. Beyond these practical tasks, numbers also help us in other ways. They allow us to describe patterns, compare quantities, and make decisions based on evidence. So, math really is its own kind of language, giving us tools to communicate ideas and solve problems.
[45:18] Dr. Boroditsky has the following sentence written on the screen “Linguistic diversity is a testament to the incredible flexibility and ingenuity of the human mind”.
As I read this statement I thought, why is there so much conflict in the world if our brains are capable of such flexibility? But then I began to remember, though our minds are capable of adapting they can’t always overcome big emotions which means we often revert to more rigid thinking. I guess my hope is if our minds are actually this capable maybe understanding and embracing linguistic and cultural diversity could help us focus our energy toward resolving conflict instead of creating it.
References:
Boroditsky, L. (2011). How language shapes thought. Scientific American, 304(2), 62-65.
Postman, N. (2011). Technopoly: The surrender of culture to technology. Knopf Doubleday Publishing. (Original work published 1992).
SAR School for Advanced Research. (2017, June 7). Lera Boroditsky, how the languages we speak shape the way we think [Video]. YouTube.