The study of the problem of sociocultural determination of thinking aims to elucidate the mechanisms through which the surrounding material and spiritual environment influences the formation of cognitive processes. Establised theoretical approaches to researching sociocultural impact reveal an antinomy between the autonomous cognitive activity of the individual and their embeddedness in social structures, which is clearly conceptualized in the distinction between individual and collective mind. Language, as an institutionalized practice, acts as a key mediator of sociocultural interactions, influencing the functioning of thought. The article reinterprets the traditional opposition between linguistic relativism and Noam Chomsky's universal grammar, demonstrating their complementarity in studying the problem of sociocultural determination of thinking. It is established that universal grammar and linguistic relativism focus on different aspects of this issue: universal grammar, grounded in the principles of universalism and internalism, examines the impact of the environment on individual ontogenetic development, whereas linguistic relativism analyzes the emergence of culturally conditioned differences.The analysis revealed a divergence in the research foci of the two concepts: universal grammar concentrates on the sociocultural determination of individual cognitive processes, while linguistic relativism specializes in studying collective forms of thinking. Recognizing the complementarity of these concepts deepens the understanding of the relationship between language and thought but simultaneously poses a new methodological challenge: defining strict boundaries between individual and collective thinking within the context of linguistic influence.

The study of the problem of sociocultural determination of thinking aims to elucidate the mechanisms through which the surrounding material and spiritual environment influences the formation of cognitive processes. Establised theoretical approaches to researching sociocultural impact reveal an antinomy between the autonomous cognitive activity of the individual and their embeddedness in social structures, which is clearly conceptualized in the distinction between individual and collective mind. Language, as an institutionalized practice, acts as a key mediator of sociocultural interactions, influencing the functioning of thought. The article reinterprets the traditional opposition between linguistic relativism and Noam Chomsky's universal grammar, demonstrating their complementarity in studying the problem of sociocultural determination of thinking. It is established that universal grammar and linguistic relativism focus on different aspects of this issue: universal grammar, grounded in the principles of universalism and internalism, examines the impact of the environment on individual ontogenetic development, whereas linguistic relativism analyzes the emergence of culturally conditioned differences.The analysis revealed a divergence in the research foci of the two concepts: universal grammar concentrates on the sociocultural determination of individual cognitive processes, while linguistic relativism specializes in studying collective forms of thinking. Recognizing the complementarity of these concepts deepens the understanding of the relationship between language and thought but simultaneously poses a new methodological challenge: defining strict boundaries between individual and collective thinking within the context of linguistic influence.