Language is nothing more, than mere sounds we create by forcing air, and muscles to work in a certain way with our larnyx/teeth/ and tongue in a particular pattern, or cycle, to put thoughts and images in other's minds. Different languages are comprised of different sounds and ways of "speaking" because of different settings, I beleive psychoactive plants. I don't know. I think each cultures had their own plants that helped them evolve in certain ways and beleive in certain aspects. Kinda like experimenting on a farm, certain animals get certain food and behave a certain way. Ohh wow, I don't even want to open these doors tonight.
I wouldn't go as far as saying psychoactive plants caused different languages but I will say that languages effect how cultures act and think. For example, English is a language that is obsessed with time. We have tenses of past, present, future, past perfect, present perfect, future perfect, etc. English speaking countries are run based on follow a time and a schedule. I believe Navajo has no words for "I". They only have "we" and "us". So to express that one person is hungry, the whole group must hunger. The language influences their communal way of thinking and harmony with one another. In Japanese, if a subject or object has already been stated once, it's dropped from the conversation until the subject is changed. They also have three sets of honorific language and verb endings to use depending on the social status of who ever they're talking to. Casual, polite, and exalted. Japan places a huge emphasis on efficiency and honor in their culture. I love looking at how language impacts ways of thinking. I can even see how different culture's music evolved from that ways of speaking. Listen to Gaelic then listen to Celtic music. The tones and rhythms of speaking are echoed in music. Different African tribal languages echoes the patterns of drums. I could go on and on
true that man, +rep its like in arabic when they always say "a man" instead of "someone" edit: i meant true that woman
Haha, yes, the Sapir-Worf hypothesis! Sometimes though it seems like a chicken-egg problem to me. For example, do the Navajo tend to be collective because they don't have the word "I," or do they not use the word "I" because they tend to be collective? Either way, it's a cool relationship. It reminds me of that constructed language, E-Prime, where you weren't supposed to use being verbs. Like, you weren't supposed to say "The sky is blue," you were supposed to say "The sky looks blue to me." That way, you were supposed to remember that things are subjective. I don't know if anybody ever really tried it or not, but it's an interesting idea.