Language imagination is, I think, or in my mind, is a fascinating topic/subject/process/practice to be involved with.
The article here attempts to report a current debate about language and mind – however it seems (or perhaps the studies as well, have not read them so clueless) to focuse on a sort of if – then of language.
If languages do stuff with imagination – then what does it mean and how can we prove it, etc..
In my mind there is an awful lot of prejudicial thinking here regarding effects and meanings, which personally am not very interested in..
What the studies – and readers comments – do seem to demonstrate, is that languages have a link to how we might imagine the world. Link though, is a part of a sequence, not necessary of cause and effect but meaningless timespace. if a + b | and that’s all.
Perhaps a person speaking a latin derivatives does not imagine objects as having genders. Perhaps they don’t imagine the moon as a female and sun as a male. However, they can do that very easily with their language, where as in english imagining objects as genderless is just another sequence.
Whether or not and How these might mean or have affect/s – I think might require a fair bit of serious critical research..
However aesthetically, perhaps a latin derivative object imagines themselves in: if a(x+||y) whereas the english aesthetics might be more like: if a(1,0~) Now..
How do these aesthetics might trans into one another?
Will a meeting create new objects?
How might object imagine their aesthetics independent of our languages?