According to this hypothesis language imposes itself on our world-view, and affects one’s thought processes and interpretation of the world.
There are strong and weak versions of this hypothesis - strong, and weak. In the strong version, languages are said to put us into “mental straight jackets”, and they are said to determine our thought process. In the weak version, languages are said to simply influence our thought process.
These are lexical innovations, very new words in use.
English: smoke + fog = smog Bangla: net + (n)aagarik = netaagarik
Came from an Old English word that meant “swift”. By the 15th century, it had started to mean “handsome” or “elegant”, and gave rise to expressions like “tall of tongue” meaning good at arguing.
The 16th century saw the emergence of uses relating to height; subsequent metaphorical extensions, like “large” as in “tall order” and eventually got to its current meaning.
In Old English it meant “happy” or “fortunate” and then later, “pious” or “holy”. Its meaning then shifted to “weak” or “helpless”, and then to “rustic” or “lacking sophistication” and finally to its current meaning”.
Such examples show that these languages are not constant and static but dynamic and every expanding and shifting. Languages often also taking in features and words from other languages, in the form of loan words and calques.
This theory rejects Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, if human beings are ‘programmed’ for language, then all languages share a basic conceptual framework.