Editing Linguistic relativity (section)

==== Numbers and classifiers ====
[[Daniel Everett|Everett]]'s work on the [[Pirahã language]] of the [[Brazil]]ian [[Amazon Basin|Amazon]]<ref name=":8">{{Citation|last1=Everett|first1=Daniel L.|title=Cultural constraints on grammar and cognition in Pirahã|url=http://www1.icsi.berkeley.edu/~kay/Everett.CA.Piraha.pdf|journal=Current Anthropology|volume=46|issue=4|pages=621–646|year=2005|doi=10.1086/431525|access-date=1 October 2012|hdl=2066/41103|s2cid=2223235|hdl-access=free}}</ref> found several peculiarities that he interpreted as corresponding to linguistically rare features, such as a lack of numbers and color terms in the way those are otherwise defined and the absence of certain types of clauses. Everett's conclusions were met with skepticism from universalists<ref name=":9">{{citation|last1=Frank|first1=Michael C.|title=Number as a cognitive technology: Evidence from Pirahã language and cognition|url=http://tedlab.mit.edu/tedlab_website/researchpapers/Frank%20et%20al.%20InPress%20Cog.pdf|periodical=Cognition|volume=108|issue=3|pages=819–24|year=2008|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100215125604/http://tedlab.mit.edu/tedlab_website/researchpapers/Frank%20et%20al.%20InPress%20Cog.pdf|doi=10.1016/j.cognition.2008.04.007|pmid=18547557|access-date=14 May 2009|archive-date=15 February 2010|last2=Everett|first2=Daniel L.|last3=Fedorenko|first3=Evelina|last4=Gibson|first4=Edward|s2cid=14863459|url-status=dead}}</ref> who claimed that the linguistic deficit is explained by the lack of need for such concepts.<ref name=":10">{{cite journal|last1=Ira Nevins|first1=Andrew|last2=Pesetsky|first2=David|last3=Rodrigues|first3=Cilene|year=2009|title=Piraha Exceptionality: a Reassessment|url=http://web.mit.edu/linguistics/people/faculty/pesetsky/Nevins_Pesetsky_Rodrigues_Piraha_Exceptionality_a_Reassessment.pdf|journal=Language|volume=85|issue=2|pages=355–404|citeseerx=10.1.1.404.9474|doi=10.1353/lan.0.0107|hdl=1721.1/94631|s2cid=15798043}}</ref>

Recent research with non-linguistic experiments in languages with different grammatical properties (e.g., languages with and without [[chinese classifier|numeral classifiers]] or with different gender grammar systems) showed that language differences in human categorization are due to such differences.<ref name=":11">{{cite journal|last1=Kou|first1=J. Y.|last2=Sera|first2=M. D.|year=2007|title=Classifier effect on human categorization: the role of shape classifiers in Chinese Chinese. In|journal=Journal of East Asian Linguistics|volume=18|pages=1–19|doi=10.1007/s10831-008-9036-6|s2cid=120382476}}</ref> Experimental research suggests that this linguistic influence on thought diminishes over time, as when speakers of one language are exposed to another.<ref name=":12">{{cite journal|last1=Bross|first1=Fabian|last2=Pfaller|first2=Philip|year=2012|title=The decreasing Whorf-effect: a study in the classifier systems of Mandarin and Thai|url=http://junq.info/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2012/06/Whorf-effects.pdf|journal=[[Journal of Unsolved Questions]]|volume=2|issue=2|pages=S19–S24}}</ref>