sapir

This person appears to be going for a Sapir Whorf Hypothesis applied to media.

At risk of a Sapir Whorf debate, there is newer research that suggests your polemical statement isn't accurate[1], let alone a vast body of Postmodernist and Postcolonial theory[2].

In 1936 linguist Edward Sapir showed how the arrival of the Navajo people in the new arid climate among the corn agriculturalists of the Pueblo area was reflected in their language by tracing the changing meanings of words from proto-Athabaskan to Navaho.

Instead, I'll take the top hit off of google scholar, given the search term for "Sapir Whorf"[1].

Or maybe Sapir-Whorf: the language not only determines its own meaning, but your entire cognitive process.

There are some difficulties in education in China, but the communist period had far more to do with that than Sapir-Whorf.

That statement by Wittgenstein is far from being the same thing as the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis.

The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is the theory that an individual's thoughts and actions are determined by the language or languages that individual speaks.

Regards the controversy - as with many others unburdened by formal training in the area, much of Sapir-Worf 'makes sense to me'.

It's like a weak form of the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis, where language shapes your thinking.

I was immediately put off when the author trotted out Sapir-Whorf; and, not even apologetically: in its strong form!

For me, I learned some constructed languages because I wondered if they would provoke the Sapir-Whorf effect.

Instead, I'll take the top hit off of google scholar, given the search term for "Sapir Whorf"[1].

In any case, it's jumping to probably mistaken conclusion to interpret "limits" of language and "limits" of the world that Wittgenstein was talking about as being about same thing as Sapir-Whorf hypothesis concerns.

"As a linguistics major, you're no stranger to the idea that a person is only capable of having thoughts and ideas that can be expressed in their language" Also no stranger to the idea that the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is not at all supported by things like 'evidence'.

Sapir-Whorf (heh, Worf) notwithstanding, we know that the "choice" of native language does not affect the child's cognitive capabilities negatively in any way (basically, as all languages are generative, you can express everything in any language -- if you lack the words, you make them up).

Or maybe Sapir-Whorf: the language not only determines its own meaning, but your entire cognitive process.

There are some difficulties in education in China, but the communist period had far more to do with that than Sapir-Whorf.

That statement by Wittgenstein is far from being the same thing as the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis.