Sins the title of my blogs in based on the idea that languaj influenses thots and reversely, it seems apropriate to rite a bit about this. I did som reeding on the subjekt, perhaps u wil enjoy it as wel.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/29/magazine/29language-t.html?ref=general&src=me&pagewanted=all
An esay riten for the intelijent layperson wich sums up the history of the idea and mentions a few kases. Most of the spase is spent on elaborating on the usual but fasinating finding that many languajes do not hav words for the relational direktions, i.e., they lak equivalents of “left”, “right”, “in front of”, etc. However, they stil hav words for the kardinal direktions, i.e., they hav equivalents of “north”, “east”, “south”, “west”. Som things that we kan eesyly deskribe, ar very hard to diskribe in such a languaj.
The Wikipedia paj is also worth reeding.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_relativity
I hav, ofk, notised the problem with using reformed spelings and trying to rite klear, eesy understandable languaj. Reformed spelings make it harder to reed the text. But i stil strive to keep the text klear in other ways, i.e.: simple syntax, using simpler words wen posible. In short, jeneraly folowing Orwell’s advise.