If you watch people on the edge of a field-of-knowledge the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis starts to seem obvious: otherwise why would the they need to keep inventing language?

The only problem is externality pricing.

Building https://negationgame.com

I think there are two hidden effects of a dearth of language:
1. interestingness is lower, because there’s fewer legos to play with, interesting sentences require redundancy 
2. exploration is lonelier because it’s only your head terminology, no one else can wield your ontology

I think a soft Sapir-Whorf is probably true. Limits of your language aren’t exactly the limits of your world because you grok that you don’t have words for something and push the language frontier but thinking those thoughts are harder unless your primary mode of thinking isn’t language based

Most specialized bodies of knowledge have developed their own descriptive language to talk about their subject. And that language allows them to think within that domain more concretely. But none of those specialized fields have developed their own grammar which influences their perception, as SWH articulates