The language shapes the mind. There is a theory that suggests we don’t truly comprehend any idea until we articulate it with words (or with other lexemas). Therefore, the constructs of language format our ways of thinking, ultimately influencing our decision-making process.
Being proficient in different languages allows thinking in diverse, often unexpectedly creative ways.
It’s fascinating to observe how the subtle nuances of meaning render completely different high-level semantics across various languages.
One of my favorite examples is the meaning of modal verbs in 🇺🇦 Ukrainian and in 🇬🇧 English.
English differentiates the words “can” and “may” by their modal meaning (ability vs. permission):
— Can I do …?
— You can but you may not.
Formal Ukrainian has different forms for each meaning, distinguishing between ability and permission. However colloquial Ukrainian uses the one word 🇺🇦 “могти” for both modalities. Native speaker grasp the difference quite well:
— Can I do …?
— Well, technically you can. But you better not.
The confusion grows when this practice penetrates the areas where the context is often blurred or highly subjective, such as written communication or informal discussion about formalities.
Think of the coffee machine talk over the traffic rules. Instead of formal “may/must/must not” the trivial “can” is used. If done often enough, this affects one’s thinking:
— Why can’t I turn left at this crossroad?
I physically can, what hinders me?
…
…
…
— Ah, the ⛔️ indicates that I must not!
With this in mind, I find explaining the ideas extremely important. Leaving no ambiguities and ensuring the message is clearly understood by all parties the joke about TCP vs. UDP.
👉Tip
A good practice is to kick off the development of a big feature with the “Vocabulary” Wiki article.
It’s beneficial for all parties to adhere to this vocabulary:
- in the code,
- in the meeting rooms (during the project discussions, in the presentations for the stakeholders),
- in the documents (dev ↔ PMO ↔ marketing ↔ …).
Why? — Because it would be a pity if the Commercial dept allocated resources based on 30% of the required work, simply because they used incorrect term 🤬
My colleague refers to this shared vocabulary as “mythology”. At first glance, the term sounds provocative but I appreciate its deeper connotations:
❗Important
First we invent the mythology.
Then we bring it to life
…grokking the dilemma of whether ideas precede matter or vice versa 😄