How Language Shapes Perception: Thought, Memory and Suggestive Language

Language does more than help us communicate; it can influence how we categorise colours, describe events, remember experiences, and interpret the world around us. Research in psycholinguistics suggests that the language we use can guide attention and shape certain aspects of thought, although it does not determine everything we perceive or believe. Language can also influence conversations through hypnotic language, embedded commands, and presuppositions, making it important to understand both its constructive uses and its potential for persuasion and misinformation.

How Does Language Shape Our Perception of the World?

People use their native language every day, but how often do they consider the possibility that it influences how they perceive the world? Even when two people experience the same event, they may attend to different details, describe the event differently, or remember different aspects of it.

As Noam Chomsky (2006) writes, “There are very deep and restrictive principles that determine the nature of human language and are rooted in the specific character of the human mind” (p. 90). This highlights the relationship between language and the human mind, although it does not, by itself, establish that language determines thought.

Research into the relationship between language and perception explores how linguistic differences may influence the way people understand colours, events, gender, and time. These studies offer insights into the relationship between language, cognition, and everyday experience.

How Does Language Influence the Perception of Events?

Language can influence which aspects of an event people attend to and how they describe what they see. Hulbert and Trueswell (2008) investigated this relationship by examining the eye movements of English and Greek speakers. English and Greek differ in how they commonly describe motion. English speakers often use verbs that express the manner of movement, such as “walk,” “run,” and “slide.” Greek speakers, by contrast, often use verbs that express the path of movement, such as “enter” and “reach,” while expressing manner through other parts of the sentence.

For example, an English speaker might say, “The boy ran into the house,” emphasising how the boy moved. A Greek speaker might use a construction equivalent to “The boy entered the house quickly,” placing greater emphasis on the path and expressing the manner separately. Researchers used animation clips to investigate whether these differences affected how English and Greek speakers attended to motion events. Participants either prepared verbal descriptions or watched the scenes as part of a memory task.

The results were more nuanced than the idea that speakers of different languages always see events differently. When participants prepared to describe an event, their eye movements reflected the kinds of information their languages typically encode. However, when they watched the events without preparing a verbal description, their attention during the unfolding scenes was more similar across the two language groups. Differences also emerged after the motion stopped, when participants continued inspecting the scene.

These findings suggest that language can guide attention when people are preparing to describe or remember an event. They do not establish that a person’s native language permanently changes how the person sees every event (Papafragou, Hulbert, & Trueswell, 2008). Other studies have examined how speakers of different languages attend to motion endpoints and other event details (Athanasopoulos & Bylund, 2013; Bylund, Athanasopoulos, & Oostendorp, 2013; Flecken, Carroll, & von Stutterheim, 2014; von Stutterheim et al., 2012).

Bilingual speakers provide another perspective on this relationship. The languages a person knows may influence how that person expresses motion, depending on the similarities and differences between the languages. Lewandowski and Özçalışkan (2021), for example, examined how language type influences patterns of motion expression in bilingual speakers. Their work highlights the importance of considering the particular languages a person uses rather than assuming that all bilingual speakers process events in the same way.

Together, these findings suggest that language can influence the selection and organisation of information about events, particularly when people are preparing to communicate or recall what they have seen.

How Does Language Influence Our Perception of Time?

Language may also influence how people organise and remember time. Wang and Gennari (2019) investigated the relationship between language, event recall, and time perception. Participants watched animations and later recalled information about the events they had described or produced themselves. The findings suggested that the density of events could influence how much time participants remembered an event as occupying. When an event contained more information, participants could remember it as having lasted longer. This suggests that the way people encode and retrieve events linguistically may influence their remembered duration.

Language may also influence how people mentally organise time in space.

English speakers often represent time horizontally, arranging sequences from left to right. However, Boroditsky and Gaby (2010) studied the Pormpuraaw community in Australia and found that its members organised time using cardinal directions. Their representations followed an east-to-west orientation rather than a fixed left-to-right arrangement. This example illustrates how spatial conventions and cultural-linguistic practices can influence the ways people represent abstract concepts such as time.

Another frequently discussed example concerns grammatical tense. Some languages express future time differently from English, and some lack a grammatical future-tense distinction of the same kind. However, the absence of a grammatical future tense does not mean that speakers cannot understand the future. Languages can communicate future events through other grammatical constructions, vocabulary, and context. Claims that grammatical tense alone determines how people understand or plan for the future should therefore be treated cautiously. Albert Einstein’s famous reflections on time invite us to question how we understand this concept. From a psychological perspective, language is one of several influences on how people organise, describe, and remember temporal experiences. It gives us ways to communicate about time, but it is not the only factor shaping our understanding of it.

How Does Language Affect Colour Perception?

Language can influence how people categorise and distinguish colours. Different languages divide the colour spectrum into categories in different ways, and these categories may affect certain colour-discrimination tasks. Winawer et al. (2007) investigated this relationship by comparing Russian and English speakers. Russian uses two commonly distinguished terms for blue: goluboy, referring to lighter blue, and siniy, referring to darker blue. English generally uses the single basic colour term “blue” for both.

In the study, participants completed a speeded colour-discrimination task. Russian speakers were faster at distinguishing colours that fell on opposite sides of the Russian light-blue/dark-blue category boundary than colours within the same category. This advantage was reduced when participants performed a competing verbal task, suggesting that language-related processing contributed to the effect. The finding does not mean that English speakers cannot see the difference between light and dark blue. Rather, it suggests that linguistic categories can influence the speed and organisation of colour discrimination under particular conditions.

Research comparing Chinese and Mongolian speakers has also explored the relationship between linguistic categories and colour perception (He et al., 2019). Such studies contribute to a broader investigation of how language and perception interact.

Miller (2009) discusses the ways people interpret colour, but the quotation sometimes attributed to Miller, “Every perception of color is an illusion, we do not see colors as they really are”, should be checked against the original source before publication. More generally, colour perception depends on both the physical properties of light and the perceptual systems through which people experience it. Language can influence how colours are categorised without making colour perception entirely arbitrary.

How Do Deletion, Distortion and Generalisation Influence Thinking?

The way people describe their experiences can influence how they interpret those experiences. In Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP), three language patterns, deletion, distortion, and generalisation, are used to examine how people may leave out information, interpret events, or draw broad conclusions from limited evidence.

These concepts can be used as prompts for reflection. They should not, however, be treated as a complete or universally validated model of how all human thought works.

1. Deletion

Deletion occurs when information is left unspecified in a statement.

For example, a person might say, “This project is not going well.” The statement does not identify which part of the project is failing, what standard is being used to evaluate it, or what evidence supports the conclusion. Similarly, a person might say, “Obviously, she does not like me.” The word “obviously” presents the conclusion as self-evident, but the speaker has not explained what the other person did or said to support it.

Questions such as “What specifically is not going well?” or “What makes you think she does not like you?” can help uncover the missing information.

In NLP, this type of questioning is associated with the Meta Model, a framework for examining the structure of language and clarifying the meaning behind broad or incomplete statements (Wallace, 2020).

2. Distortion

Distortion occurs when a person interprets an event in a way that goes beyond the information available.

For example, someone receives a short message from a friend and concludes, “She is angry with me.” However, the friend may be busy, distracted, or dealing with an unrelated problem. The length of the message alone does not establish the reason for the response.

In this example, the person interprets an ambiguous event as evidence of another person’s emotional state. In psychology, this resembles mind reading, a term used in cognitive-behavioural approaches to describe the assumption that we know what another person is thinking without sufficient evidence. Asking “What else could explain the short message?” can help the person consider alternative interpretations rather than immediately treating one explanation as fact.

3. Generalisation

Generalisation occurs when a conclusion about one or a few experiences is applied more broadly.

For example, a person might say, “Nobody listens to me.” When asked who does not listen, the person identifies one individual, John.

The original statement extends a specific experience into a universal claim. It may reflect genuine frustration, but it does not establish that nobody listens to the person. Questions such as “Who specifically did not listen?” or “Are there situations in which people do listen?” can help clarify the scope of the statement.

Deletion, distortion, and generalisation are useful concepts for examining how language can make thoughts seem more certain, complete, or universal than the available evidence supports. They can encourage people to ask more precise questions about their experiences rather than automatically accepting their first interpretation.

How Does Language Structure Influence Gender Perception, Counting and Memory?

Language structures can influence how people describe objects, organise quantities, and remember events. However, the strength and consistency of these effects vary across tasks and languages.

Grammatical gender and descriptions of objects

Have you ever considered how you would describe a bridge? Would you describe it as strong, sturdy, beautiful, or elegant? Could the grammatical gender of the word for “bridge” influence the adjectives you choose?

Spanish uses the masculine noun el puente for “the bridge,” whereas German uses the feminine noun die Brücke. Research discussed by Gentner and Goldin-Meadow (2003) explores how grammatical gender may influence the associations speakers make with objects.

Some studies have found that speakers may choose adjectives that correspond to the grammatical gender of an object’s noun in their language. For example, a Spanish speaker might be more likely to use masculine-associated descriptions, while a German speaker might be more likely to use feminine-associated descriptions. These findings suggest that grammatical categories can influence associations and descriptions. They do not mean that all Spanish speakers perceive bridges as masculine or that all German speakers perceive them as feminine. Cultural associations, task design, and the particular words used may also influence the results.

Language and numerical thinking

Language can also influence how people represent numbers and perform certain numerical tasks. Pica et al. (2004) examined numerical cognition among an Amazonian Indigenous group whose language had a limited number vocabulary. The study investigated the relationship between language and exact versus approximate arithmetic. Research of this kind suggests that numerical language can support the representation and manipulation of exact quantities. It does not mean that people without an extensive number vocabulary are incapable of comparing quantities or reasoning mathematically.

For example, someone who wants twelve apples and has twelve ducks might communicate the desired quantity by saying that they want as many apples as they have ducks. This illustrates how quantity can be expressed through comparison, even when a person does not use the same numerical vocabulary as an English speaker.

Does language make some people more logical or orderly?

Languages differ in grammar, vocabulary, and the ways they organise information. However, broad claims that a language is inherently more romantic, logical, or orderly than another, and that its speakers therefore think in the same way, require much stronger evidence. A language’s grammatical structure may influence how a particular thought is expressed, but it does not establish that speakers of that language are universally more logical or better able to understand complex ideas.

A more cautious conclusion is that language can encourage certain habits of description and attention. These habits interact with education, culture, individual experience, and the demands of a particular task.

Language and eyewitness memory

Language can also influence how people describe and remember events, an issue with important implications for eyewitness testimony. Fausey and Boroditsky (2011) investigated cross-linguistic differences in memory for events involving accidents. English commonly allows speakers to describe an event by explicitly naming the person who caused it, as in “Mark broke the glass.” Other languages, including Spanish, may more readily use constructions that emphasise the event or its accidental nature when the agent is not central to the description.

The way an event is described can influence which details become prominent in memory. For example, attention to the person who performed an action may affect how readily a witness later identifies that person. However, it would be too broad to conclude that English speakers always remember the agent while Spanish speakers remember only the intention or circumstances. The findings depend on the language construction, event, and experimental task.

Shaw, Garcia, and Robles (1997) also investigated cross-language post-event misinformation among Spanish-English bilingual witnesses. Their work highlights how information presented after an event can affect subsequent reports, even when witnesses feel confident about their memories. These findings matter because confidence does not guarantee accuracy. In eyewitness contexts, the wording of questions and the information presented after an event should be considered carefully.

Does Language Create Our Reality?

Language is not the experience itself; it is one way of representing and communicating experience. The words we use influence how we organise events, explain our emotions, and tell stories about ourselves and others. It is tempting to conclude that there is no objective reality independent of language. However, research showing that language influences aspects of perception does not establish that reality itself depends entirely on language, or that we can never know anything beyond the words we use.

A more measured conclusion is that language provides a powerful framework through which we interpret experience. It can shape our thoughts, narratives, fears, limitations, and beliefs, while also allowing us to question and revise them. Each person develops a distinctive relationship with language through culture, relationships, learning, and experience. Language development is a dynamic process, and the ways we use words can influence us in ways we do not always recognise.

As Ludwig Wittgenstein famously wrote, “The limits of my language mean the limits of my world.” The quotation invites reflection on the relationship between language and experience: the concepts available to us can influence what we notice, how we communicate, and which possibilities we can readily imagine.

What Is Suggestive Language?

Language can do more than describe an experience. Depending on its context, wording, and delivery, it can also guide attention, frame choices, and encourage a listener to interpret information in a particular way.

Suggestive language is used in everyday conversation, advertising, education, and therapeutic settings. Its influence depends on factors such as context, the relationship between speakers, the listener’s expectations, and the information available. In discussions of NLP and hypnosis, three commonly discussed approaches are hypnotic language, embedded commands, and presuppositions. These techniques are sometimes described as ways of making language directive. Their effects should be understood in context rather than assumed to work automatically on every listener.

How Does Hypnotic Language Work?

Hypnotic language is used in some therapeutic approaches to direct attention, invite imagery, and encourage people to explore experiences from different perspectives. Burton (2007) discusses several forms of suggestive language used in hypnosis, including language that reframes an experience, invites a person to consider it differently, or opens up possibilities for change.

Erickson and Rossi (1981) describe the use of ambiguity, pauses, and context in hypnotic communication. A word can carry different meanings depending on how it is used. For example, “fast” can describe rapid movement, but in other contexts it can refer to abstaining from food. The same word can therefore evoke different interpretations depending on the sentence and situation.

Pauses and emphasis can also affect how a listener interprets a statement. A therapist might say, “You don’t know…” and pause before continuing. Depending on the surrounding conversation, the listener may interpret the pause as an invitation to consider something that has not yet been expressed. Such examples illustrate how context and delivery can contribute to meaning. They do not demonstrate that a particular pause or phrase will reliably produce hypnosis or make a person accept a suggestion. Hypnotic responses vary across individuals and depend on the broader interaction.

What are embedded commands?

An embedded command is a phrase presented within a larger sentence that is intended to communicate a suggestion indirectly.

For example, someone might ask a friend, “You won’t mind walking with me, will you?” The wording presupposes that walking together is an acceptable possibility and frames the request in a way that may make agreement seem natural. However, the friend remains free to disagree. The sentence does not guarantee a positive answer, and its effect depends on the relationship, the circumstances, and the listener’s preferences.

Embedded commands are discussed in NLP and hypnotic-language approaches as ways of framing suggestions. They should not be treated as a reliable method of bypassing another person’s awareness or controlling their response.

How Do Presuppositions Influence Conversations?

A presupposition is information that a speaker treats as already accepted or shared in the conversation. Presuppositions help people communicate efficiently because speakers do not need to explain every background detail each time they speak. Dilts (2017) discusses conversational reframing techniques that include exploring the intention behind a statement and redefining how a problem is described. These approaches can be used to guide a conversation towards alternative interpretations.

The intention pattern

Suppose a friend says, “I want to do well in the exam, but I am afraid it will be too difficult.”

One possible response is, “I can see that you want to succeed and receive a fair reward for all the studying you have done.”

This response draws attention to the friend’s goal and effort rather than focusing exclusively on the fear of failure. It may help the friend consider the situation from a more constructive perspective. However, the speaker should not assume that the friend’s intention is necessarily positive in every respect. It is more useful to check whether the interpretation fits the friend’s actual experience.

The redefining pattern

Another response might be, “Are you worried that the questions will be too difficult for your current level, or that you have not had enough time to prepare?”

This reframes a general concern into two more specific possibilities. The friend’s answer can help identify the problem and guide the next part of the conversation. The purpose is not to impose an interpretation but to clarify what the person is experiencing. Used respectfully, reframing can help people explore their concerns and consider possible solutions.

Presuppositions in therapy

Presuppositions and carefully framed questions are also discussed in therapeutic and hypnotic contexts. Bandler, Grinder, and DeLozier (1996), for example, describe language patterns associated with Milton H. Erickson’s hypnotic techniques. Consider the question, “Would you like to tell me what is bothering you now, or would you rather wait a while?” The wording offers two options, both of which assume that the person may eventually choose to discuss the concern.

This may make it easier to begin a conversation, but it can also make the question feel as though disclosure is expected. In therapeutic practice, it is important to respect a client’s autonomy and allow them to decline or choose another option. Presuppositions can therefore guide the direction of a conversation, but their use should be evaluated in light of the listener’s needs and freedom to respond.

What Is the Difference Between Semantic and Pragmatic Presuppositions?

Linguists distinguish between different ways in which presuppositions arise. Karttunen (1973) examined presuppositions in complex sentences, while later work has explored how speakers and listeners manage assumptions in conversation. A semantic analysis focuses on the relationship between linguistic expressions and the conditions under which a sentence is meaningful or true. A pragmatic analysis considers how speakers use context and shared assumptions, and how listeners interpret what is said.

Consider the sentence, “All of Mary’s friends have blue eyes.” The sentence normally assumes that Mary has friends. If a listener accepts the sentence in its ordinary context, the listener may also accept that background assumption.

Another example is, “Has Anna stopped running every day?” The question generally presupposes that Anna used to run every day. The listener may accept that assumption even if it has not been independently established.

Lewis (1979) discusses how conversational participants accommodate information so that a conversation can proceed. When new information is presented as though it belongs to the shared background, listeners may accept it provisionally to understand the utterance. This does not mean that listeners must believe every presupposition. They can reject it, question it, or ask for clarification. The likelihood of acceptance depends on the context, the listener’s knowledge, and how plausible the assumption appears.

Sbisà (2021) discusses how presuppositions can function persuasively in communication. When an assumption goes unnoticed, it can influence how a statement is interpreted. This is one reason it is important to recognise the difference between information that has been established and information that a speaker merely treats as given.

Can Listeners Create Meaning Beyond What Speakers Intend?

Conversation is not controlled entirely by the speaker. Listeners actively interpret what they hear, drawing on their knowledge, expectations, and assumptions about the situation. Schwenter and Waltereit (2010) examine how presupposition accommodation can operate in language use and change. Consider the statement, “I should take my brother to the shopping mall.” A listener will ordinarily treat the speaker’s having a brother as background information.

The speaker could instead say, “I have a brother, and I should take him to the shopping mall.” Both sentences communicate the same basic fact, but the first is more economical because it presents the existence of the brother as information that can be taken for granted in the conversation. Presuppositions can also place information in the background while foregrounding another point. Consider the sentence, “Dad, I forgot to tell you that my fiancée and I are moving to Seattle next week.” The main announcement concerns the move, but the sentence also presents the speaker’s engagement as an assumed fact. That detail may prompt a separate conversation.

This can be a natural and efficient feature of communication. It can also be used strategically when a speaker wants a listener to focus on one point rather than another. Whether such use is appropriate depends on the context and the speaker’s intentions.

Why Can Presuppositions Be Misleading?

Presuppositions can make conversations smoother, but they can also cause people to overlook errors or accept unsupported assumptions.

This tendency is sometimes discussed in relation to the Moses illusion, examined by Erickson and Mattson (1981). Participants were asked, “How many animals of each kind did Moses take on the Ark?” Many answered “two,” even though Noah, not Moses, is the biblical figure associated with the Ark.

The question is structured so that the incorrect name can go unnoticed while the listener focuses on the question about animals. The effect demonstrates that people may fail to detect an error embedded in an otherwise familiar question. It does not prove that people always accept presuppositions without questioning them.

Advertising provides another example of how wording can encourage a particular interpretation. An advertisement using a phrase such as “the signature of Italian high speed” may imply that a brand represents a distinctive or definitive form of high-speed rail. Whether the implication is justified depends on the actual product and the evidence supporting the claim.

Lombardi Vallauri (2021) discusses how presuppositions and topic structure can encourage shallow processing in some contexts. Loftus (1975) also demonstrated that leading questions can influence eyewitness reports. Together, these lines of research highlight the importance of examining how information is framed and whether an assumption has been established. Presuppositions can be useful, but they should not replace critical evaluation. When an important decision depends on a claim, listeners should ask whether the background assumption is accurate, relevant, and supported by evidence.

What Are the Applications of Suggestive Language?

Suggestive language appears in many settings, including advertising, education, therapy, and newspaper editorials. Its effects can be constructive when it helps people understand information, but problematic when it conceals unsupported assumptions or pressures people into accepting a particular conclusion.

How do advertisements use presuppositions?

Advertisements often communicate more than their literal wording states. Ge (2011) discusses pragmatic functions of presupposition in advertising English. One well-known example associated with Rolls-Royce states that, while driving the car, “the loudest sound you will hear will be the electric clock.” The line draws attention to the quietness of the car. It also invites the reader to infer that the vehicle is exceptionally refined.

The advertisement communicates these ideas indirectly rather than presenting a list of technical claims. Its effectiveness depends on the audience understanding the implication and finding it credible.

Another example is the question, “Why suffer another summer?” used to promote an air conditioner. The wording assumes that the reader has experienced discomfort during previous summers and suggests that purchasing the product could prevent similar discomfort in the future.

Similarly, a cosmetics advertisement using the phrase “Change your destiny” presents a product as a possible route to personal transformation. The implied promise may go well beyond what the product can realistically deliver. Yuelin and Jianguo (2018) examined pragmatic presuppositions in commercial advertisements and how such wording contributes to persuasive messages. These examples show how advertising can use language to frame a problem, imply a benefit, and encourage a consumer to imagine a desirable outcome. Consumers should distinguish the emotional appeal of a message from evidence about what a product can actually do.

How is suggestive language used in education?

Presuppositions can also affect learning by influencing how students interpret information through their existing beliefs and cultural frameworks. Fakudze (2021) investigated the influence of local worldview presuppositions on learners’ conceptions of selected mechanics topics. The study used achievement tests before and after a learning strategy involving presuppositions.

The findings suggest that learners’ existing worldviews can influence how they approach educational content. This highlights the value of recognising prior knowledge and assumptions when teaching complex topics. However, teachers should not use presuppositions to encourage students to accept unsupported claims. Effective teaching invites learners to examine evidence, ask questions, and revise their understanding when necessary.

How are presuppositions used in therapy?

Therapists use language to help clients explore experiences, consider alternative perspectives, and work towards their goals. The way a question is framed can influence which aspects of an experience receive attention. Ryan, Conti, and Simon (2012) developed the Therapy Presupposition Inventory to examine presuppositions associated with therapeutic approaches. Simon (2003) discusses the importance of a therapist’s own framework for understanding and responding to clients. Saferstein (2007) also explored relationships between therapists’ epistemological assumptions, therapeutic style, working alliance, and interventions.

This work highlights the importance of examining how a therapist’s assumptions influence the therapeutic process. However, it does not establish that presuppositions alone determine the effectiveness of therapy. Outcomes depend on multiple factors, including the client’s needs, the therapeutic relationship, the approach used, and the evidence supporting the intervention.

In practice, language should support a client’s autonomy rather than pressure them to adopt the therapist’s interpretation.

How do newspaper editorials use presuppositions?

Newspaper editorials can use presuppositions to present an interpretation as though it were already accepted. Bonyadi (2011) examined presupposition in American and Persian newspaper editorials, including the use of relative clauses and parenthetical information. For example, an editor may insert a short evaluative phrase in parentheses after presenting an event. Because the phrase appears as background information, readers may pay less attention to the assumption it contains.

Such language can make writing concise and cohesive, but it can also influence readers’ interpretation of events. Readers should consider whether an editorial distinguishes verified facts from the author’s interpretation and whether the assumptions embedded in its wording are justified. Across advertising, education, therapy, and journalism, suggestive language can help organise information and guide attention. The ethical question is whether it supports understanding or encourages people to accept claims without sufficient scrutiny.

Conclusion: Can Language Change the Way We Think?

Language influences how people describe events, categorise colours, represent time, and remember experiences. Research in psycholinguistics suggests that the words and grammatical structures people use can guide attention and influence particular cognitive tasks. These effects are meaningful, but they do not establish that language determines every aspect of thought or creates reality entirely on its own.

The NLP concepts of deletion, distortion, and generalisation offer one way to examine how statements can omit information, introduce interpretations, or extend limited experiences into broad conclusions. Hypnotic language, embedded commands, and presuppositions provide further examples of how wording can guide the direction of a conversation.

Presuppositions are a normal and often useful part of communication. They allow speakers and listeners to build on shared information. However, when an assumption is inaccurate or deliberately misleading, the same feature can encourage misunderstanding, persuasion without adequate evidence, or the acceptance of misinformation. Language can be used to encourage reflection, make communication clearer, and help people consider new perspectives. It can also be used to influence others in ways that are difficult to notice. Understanding this dual role makes it important to listen carefully, question unsupported assumptions, and distinguish what has been established from what has merely been implied.

Ultimately, language is both a tool for communicating experience and a framework through which we interpret it. Recognising its influence helps us use it more thoughtfully, and become more aware of the assumptions that shape our understanding of the world.

References

Athanasopoulos, P., & Bylund, E. (2013). Does grammatical aspect affect motion event cognition? A cross-linguistic comparison of English and Swedish speakers. Cognitive Science, 37, 286-309.

Bandler, R., Grinder, J., & DeLozier, J. (1996). Patterns of the hypnotic techniques of Milton H. Erickson, m.d. Grinder & Associates.

Bonyadi, A. (2011). Linguistic nature of presupposition in American and Persian newspaper editorials. International Journal of Linguistics, 3(1), 4. https://doi.org/10.5296/ijl.v3i1.554

Boroditsky, L., Gaby, A. (2010). Remembrances of times east: Absolute spatial representations of time in an Australian aboriginal community. Psychological Science, 21(11), 1635–1639

Burton, J. J. (2007). Understanding advanced hypnotic language patterns: A comprehensive guide. Crown House Pub.

Bylund, E., Athanasopoulos, P., & Oostendorp, M. (2013). Motion event cognition and grammatical aspect: Evidence from Afrikaans. Linguistics, 51, 929-955.

Chomsky, N. (2006). Language and Mind. (p.90). Cambridge University Press.

Deutscher, G. Dr. (2010). Through the language glass : why the world looks different in other languages (1st ed.). Metropolitan Books/Henry Holt and Co.

Dilts, R. (2017). Sleight of mouth: The magic of conversational belief change. DILTS STRATEGY Group.

Erickson, T. D., & Mattson, M. E. (1981). From words to meanings: a semantic illusion. J. Verbal Learn. Verbal Behav. 205, 540–551. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5371(81)90165-1

Erickson, M. H., & Rossi, E. L. (1981). Experiencing hypnosis: Therapeutic approaches to altered states. Irvington Publishers, Inc.

Fakudze, C. (2021). The influence of local worldview presuppositions on learners’ conceptions of Selected Mechanics topics. South African Journal of Education, 41(2), 1–111. https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.v41n2a1885

Fausey, C. M., & Boroditsky, L. (2011). Who dunnit? Cross-linguistic differences in eye-witness memory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18(1), 150. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-010-0021-5

Flecken, M., Carroll, M., & v. Stutterheim, C. (2014). Grammatical aspect influences motion event perception: Findings from a cross-linguistic nonverbal recognition task. Language and Cognition, 6, 45-78.

Gabriel Sean Wallace. (2020, July 12). Distortion, Deletion, and Generalization: How to Use the NLP Meta Model for Self Awareness. [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q5kFJ5E6OdI

Ge, L. (2011). Pragmatic functions of presupposition in advertising English. Asian Culture and History, 3(1), 153.

Gentner, D., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2003). Language in Mind : Advances in the Study of Language and Thought. A Bradford Book.

Givón, T. (1982). Evidentiality and epistemic space. Stud. Lang. 61, 23–49. doi: 10.1075/sl.6.1.03giv

He, H., Li, J., Xiao, Q., Jiang, S., Yang, Y., & Zhi, S. (2019). Language and color perception: Evidence from Mongolian and Chinese speakers. Frontiers in psychology, 10, 551. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00551

Hulbert, J., & Trueswell, J. (2008). Does language guide event perception? Evidence from eye movements. Cognition, 108(1), 155–184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2008.02.007

Karttunen, L. (1973). Presuppositions of compound sentences. Linguistic Inquiry, 4(2), 169-193. Retrieved September 11, 2021, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/4177763

Lewandowski, W., & Özçaliskan, S. (2021). How language type influences patterns of motion expression in bilingual speakers. Second Language Research, 37(1), 27–49.

Lewis, D. (1979). Scorekeeping in a language game. Semantics from different points of view (pp. 172-187). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.

Loftus, E. F. (1975). Leading questions and the eyewitness report. Cogn. Psychol. 7, 550–572. doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(75)90023-7

Lombardi Vallauri, E. (2021). Manipulative shallow processing induced by presuppositions and topics: Theoretical perspectives and experimental evidence. Frontiers in Communication, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2021.610807

Miller, B. A. (2009). Raising thinking children and teens: Guiding mental and moral development. Praeger/ABC-CLIO.

Pica, P. Lemer, C., Izard, V., Dehaene, S. (2004). Exact and approximate arithmetic in an Amazonian indigene group. Science, 306(5695), 499–503.

Ryan, W. J., Conti, R. P., & Simon, G. M. (2012). The development of the therapy presupposition inventory (TPI). North American Journal of Psychology, 14(3), 497-516. https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/development-therapy-presupposition-inventory-tpi/docview/1287407092/se-2?accountid=8623

Saferstein, J. A. (2007). The relationship between therapists' epistemology and their therapy style, working alliance, and use of specific interventions. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B. The Sciences and Engineering, 68(1-B), 634.

Sbisà, M. (2021). Presupposition and implicature: Varieties of implicit meaning in explicitation practices. Journal of Pragmatics, 182, 176–188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2021.05.027

Schwenter, S. A., & Waltereit, R. (2010). Presupposition accommodation and language change. Subjectification, Intersubjectification and Grammaticalization, 75–102. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110226102.2.75

Scribbr. (2020, August 20). Develop a theoretical framework in 3 steps [Video]. YouTube. https://youtu.be/4y1BAqOnhMM

Shaw, J. S. III, Garcia, L. A., & Robles, B. E. (1997). Cross-language postevent misinformation effects in Spanish–English bilingual witnesses. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(6), 889–899. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.82.6.889

Simon, G. M. ( 2003). Beyond technique in family therapy: Finding your therapeutic voice. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Von Fintel, K. (2000). What is presupposition accommodation. Ms., MIT.

von Stutterheim, C., Andermann, M., Carroll, M., Flecken, M., & Schmiedtová, B. (2012). How grammaticized concepts shape event conceptualization in language production: Insights from linguistic analysis, eye tracking data, and memory performance. Linguistics, 50, 833- 867.

Wang, Y., & Gennari, S. P. (2019). How language and event recall can shape memory for time. Cognitive Psychology, 108, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2018.10.003

Winawer, J., Witthoft, N., Frank, M. C., Wu, L., Wade, A. R., & Boroditsky, L. (2007). Russian blues reveal effects of language on color discrimination. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104(19), 7780–7785.

Yuelin, G., & Jianguo, T. (2018). An analysis of pragmatic presupposition in commercial advertisements of the Single’s Day. Annual International Conference on Language, Literature & Linguistics, January, 282–88. doi:10.5176/2251-3566_L318.87.

This article on ' Language shapes Perception ' has been contributed by Saadet Belin Atabey who is graduated in Psychology from Bilkent University. and peer reviewed by Saumya Joshi who is a psychology student from Vivekananda College, Delhi University.

Saadet and Saumya are both part of the Global Internship Research Program (GIRP), which is mentored by Anil Thomas.

Saadet is interested in clinical, industrial and consumer psychology.

Saumya is a psychology enthusiast.

GIRP is an initiative by (International Journal of Neurolinguistics & Gestalt Psychology) IJNGP and Umang Foundation Trust to encourage young adults across our globe to showcase their research skills in psychology and to present it in creative content expression.

Anil is an internationally certified NLP Master Practitioner and Gestalt Therapist. He has conducted NLP Training in Mumbai, and across 6 other countries.