There are many different kinds of languages that I have learned over the course of my existence, these ranged from research a number of ancient or classical languages, to programming languages, mathematics, to bioinformatic languages, to experiencing what I would call a light language.
Light languages have their own capacity to deliver understanding. Further, there is a correlations between consciousness, epi-gentic switching and genomic makeup (c.f. Bruce Lipton, et. al.,)
Along the way I developed a meta-language in symbols and effects that convey the archetypical processes found in the human transformation process. There is a whole volume dedicated to this topic in the BlueBook Series as it provides a new non-linear way to convey information and do so more efficiently than written languages.
The idea that consciousness is effecting our genetic make up is coming into common understanding. When we take this a step further to the experiences that mystics of the ages have reported of inner light and the physiological effects it has it greatly expands our understanding of ourselves and the multi-dimensional universe within which we live.
"Many people, programmed with the concept of genetic determinism, believe that genes in the fertilized egg at conception determine character and fate. Unable to pick our DNA genes, we are powerless to control our life, so that the only option is seeking help from someone in the biomedical community to fix our genes. ... Here, we can realize control by regulating the environment in which we live and our perception of it, making us the master of our own genetics rather than a victim of heredity." (Source Natural Awakenings Magazine - Interview with Bruce Lipton Ph.D )
The idea here is that, drawing on archetypical elements found in consciousness (c.f., Jung, Campbell et.al.), we can develop a process language that takes us through consciousness and gives us powerful tools for working with thought form, information structures, and data. These tools are used in conjunction with visual maps and knowledge representation (KR) environments in platform and on the network
The principle of linguistic relativity holds that the structure of a language affects its speakers' world view or cognition. Popularly known as the Sapir–Whorf hypothesis, or Whorfianism, the principle is often defined to include two versions. The strong version says that language determines thought, and that linguistic categories limit and determine cognitive categories, whereas the weak version says that linguistic categories and usage only influence thought and decisions.
The term "Sapir–Whorf hypothesis" is considered a misnomer by linguists for several reasons: Edward Sapir and Benjamin Lee Whorf never co-authored any works, and never stated their ideas in terms of a hypothesis. The distinction between a weak and a strong version of this hypothesis is also a later invention; Sapir and Whorf never set up such a dichotomy, although often in their writings their views of this relativity principle are phrased in stronger or weaker terms
From the late 1980s, a new school of linguistic relativity scholars has examined the effects of differences in linguistic categorization on cognition, finding broad support for non-deterministic versions of the hypothesis in experimental contexts. Some effects of linguistic relativity have been shown in several semantic domains, although they are generally weak. Currently, a balanced view of linguistic relativity is espoused by most linguists holding that language influences certain kinds of cognitive processes in non-trivial ways, but that other processes are better seen as arising from connectionist factors. Research is focused on exploring the ways and extent to which language influences thought. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_relativity)