This was annotated using CLAS.

Post @ 13:13 This was intriguing to connect gestures not only with alternate meanings but the idea that cultures have varying philosophies on concepts and assigned gestures to align accordingly.  I found the idea of a gesture for the past to be in front of us because it is known and experienced, whereas our future is behind us as we are unsure/unaware of what is to come, was different than how my mind approaches the future and the past.  It makes me think of when Lera discusses further in the video how we are more privy to intentionality in our language, and is highly prevalent in our culture. I feel I have the power to influence my future, thus I am in control, and I envision it in front of me. Thus, if I were to gesture the future to someone, I would point forward, and I would perform that same gesture if I had the word ‘future’ in a game of charades, assuming others would understand what I mean.

Post @ 30:59 When I initially watched this video, I wondered what the implications of the response to this question would be, in terms of witnesses in court proceedings. Does language perhaps impose bias that negates a testimony?

Post @ 33:39 At this point, Boroditsky (2017) emphasizes that the “grammatical forms” around us will influence our reception of language. Verbs, in particular, are identified by Boroditsky (2017) as influential in controlling details of an event, i.e. adding description versus generic expression. This encouraged me to pause the video, and consider examples to validate this idea. Has anyone else tried this?

Post @ 35:00 I wonder what prompted cultures to look outside the body to count, measure, or for number systems? Listening to the Word Guys (2020) podcast episode, most likely encouraged my curiosity about how the meaning of words or knowledge systems has transformed over time.