In the 30's. The last century, Edward Sepir and Benjamin Whorf put forward an exciting hypothesis of linguistic relativity, according to which language and its ways of expressing different categories (gender, time, space) affect how we think about the world.

![seoulhyun-angry-700x368.png](https://steemitimages.com/DQmRY7ie71Cby45YVhCLie2dMVBUBo9M4yNwjkDHXqfvspy/seoulhyun-angry-700x368.png)

For example, if there are no words in the language for time, the person speaking on it can not understand the idea of time, or, if there are no words in the language for a yellow color, then the bearer of such a language will hardly differentiate this color among others.

The scientific community was then skeptical about the hypothesis of Sapir and Whorf. Comparison of the language picture of the world of American Indians (Hopi, as well as Pajute, Shawnee, Navajo, etc.) with the language picture of the world of speakers of European languages that Worth undertook seemed to scientists unconvincing, and to examples from the category "in Eskimo languages there are dozens of different words for signs of snow, while in English there is only one thing - snow "and did react with irony.

A language in which you are not the center of the universe
 
![Jeonghan-1-630x420.jpg](https://steemitimages.com/DQmZiaP7NKFqaKkj7wGdSzfMV3ZZ1hLsfMic1w4EwLZSDma/Jeonghan-1-630x420.jpg)

Studies have shown that in the languages of the world there are different types of orientation in space: egocentric, landscape and geographical. Our orientation, of course, is egocentric: here all objects exist and move relative to the speaker. This is evidenced by the characteristic coordinates: "to my right," "to my left," "behind," "ahead" - the whole world revolves around us.