Сulture as an environment for language typology formation

The chapter continues the discussion around the question of the essence of the hypothesis of linguistic relativity, which is also called the Sepir-Wharf hypothesis. An updated interpretation of it is presented from the standpoint of cognitive-discursive approach, which examines the processes of human cognition and perception of fragments of life and their reflection in language pictures of different ethnic groups-representatives of other types of writing (including hieroglyphic) to the right hemisphere (spatial-image) type of thinking. It is assumed that culture with its artifacts became a determining factor for the final stage of formation of the grammatical structure of languages, according to which most languages of the world are classified structurally by 4 types. The key position of Humboldt's theoretical concept that languages fix the peculiarities of the national worldview, which was interpreted differently by followers of the scholar, is given. The direction of new research in this area was called neo-Humboldtianism, which was developed by European scholars and American ethnolinguists. The focus is on the critique of the linguistic relativity hypothesis (Sepir-Wharf hypothesis), which was both constructive and destructive. The following conclusion is given: the cognitive-discursive vector in linguistics has forced scholars to return to the hypothesis of linguistic relativity, which is becoming even more popular than it was during the life of Wharf, B. Linguists continue to accumulate facts, especially experimental ones, to confirm it. And, despite the different attitude of scholars to it, still a promising aspect in neo-Wharfism, as well as in the theory of Wharf, B., himself, is taking into account the factor of the subject of knowledge of the surrounding world, who is a representative of a certain type of culture. It is culture that has become the environment for the formation of language typology, where at the current stage of its study, not only formal indicators should be taken into account, but also the plan of content as a fixer of the cognitive style of thinking of speakers of a specific language type.