Does the Language We Speak Influence How We Think About the Future? A Reflection for Political Communication

Does the language we speak influence how we think? According to the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, it might. This theory suggests that the structure and vocabulary of our language shape how we perceive reality. When applied to political communication, it raises a compelling question: if a language rarely talks about the future, does it also struggle to imagine one?

In Italy, the past is not simply something to remember — it’s something we live with daily. The Colosseum, Renaissance palazzi, war memorials, and medieval towns are part of the everyday landscape. History is in the stones Italians walk on and the stories they grow up with. In this context, it’s no surprise that Italian political discourse — and the language itself — tends to lean more on the past and present, with far less focus on the future.

But what happens when politics becomes too rooted in what has been, rather than what could be?

An Abundance of Past, a Scarcity of Future

Let’s start with grammar. Italian has a rich and nuanced range of past tenses:

Passato prossimo: Ho mangiato – “I have eaten”
Imperfetto: Mangiavo – “I used to eat / I was eating”
Passato remoto: Mangiai – “I ate” (mostly in literature or southern regions)
Trapassato prossimo: Avevo mangiato – “I had eaten”
Trapassato remoto: Ebbi mangiato – extremely formal or literary

This complexity allows for depth in storytelling, context, and emotional resonance — all of which are powerful tools in political narratives. Italian political speeches often evoke memory, heritage, and legacy. They honour tradition, mourn collective loss, or reflect on a shared journey.

But where is the future?

Talking About the Future: English Foregrounds, Italian Downplays

English uses a wide range of grammatical forms to express the future, each offering different shades of meaning:

“I will go” – simple future, often for spontaneous decisions or certainty
“I’m going to go” – a plan or intention
“I’m meeting them tomorrow” – present continuous for scheduled arrangements which ties the present to the future.
“I will have finished by Monday” – future perfect, showing a completed action before a point in the future (Italian has this tense but it is not often used).

While English divides time more precisely, switching tenses even for minor shifts into future or past, Italian allows a wider temporal stretch within the same tense. The Italian present tense covers both present and near-future situations, whereas English must move grammatically into the future.

This reflects a deeper cultural orientation: in English, there’s often a focus on what comes next: goals, deadlines, outcomes. In Italian, what matters is what is unfolding or what has shaped the moment, not always what’s coming.

These forms are commonly used in both speech and writing. English speakers are trained to mark the future explicitly, and often to plan or imagine what’s ahead:

“We will reduce emissions by 2030.”
“I’m going to invest in public transport.”
“By next year, this government will have delivered change.”

Italian, by contrast, tends to downplay the future, especially in everyday speech. Though the future tense exists (andrò, farò, sarà), it’s often replaced by the present tense to express future meaning:

Domani vado dal dottore.

(Literally: “Tomorrow I go to the doctor” – instead of andrò)

In everyday conversation, this is perfectly normal. But in political communication, relying too heavily on the present tense can make a message sound short-sighted or routine — like just ticking off the next appointment.

Now compare:

Domani inizio un percorso per riformare il sistema sanitario.

I begin the path to reform the healthcare system tomorrow

Versus:

Domani inizierò un percorso che cambierà il nostro sistema sanitario nei prossimi dieci anni.

Tomorrow I will begin a path that will change our healthcare system over the next ten years – Future tense: introduces vision, scale, and commitment.

Using the future tense creates narrative depth — not just what I’m doing tomorrow, but where we’re going, what we’re building, what’s at stake. It moves the message from action to ambition.

In political terms, this downplaying of the future can have consequences. If the grammar we habitually use doesn’t prompt us to think forward, then political communication may risk sounding reactive, rooted in legacy, and short on vision.

The Historical Present: Making the Past Immediate

Italian often uses the presente storico — the “historical present” — to talk about the past as if it’s happening now:

Nel 1948, l’Italia sceglie la Repubblica.
E lui mi guarda e mi dice… (“And he looks at me and says…”)

This makes speeches and stories vivid and compelling. It also means the past is never really past — it’s active, emotionally alive. Politically, this can be stirring: invoking historical memory can galvanise identity and solidarity. But it can also trap public discourse in a cycle of nostalgia or grievance, leaving little room for shaping new realities.

A Different Way of Telling a Story

In everyday Italian, and often in politics too, stories begin with context. The speaker lays out background, offers detailed descriptions, and gradually leads to the point. Here’s what that sounds like:

“First, let us remember the sacrifices of our grandparents, who rebuilt this country from the ashes. Then came the years of growth, followed by crisis… And now, once again, we are called to respond.”

By contrast, English tends to get straight to the point:

“Our economy is under pressure. We need urgent action, and this government will deliver it.”

This isn’t about one style being better than the other. It’s about different temporal orientations: one moves from past to present, the other from present to future. And in politics, that matters.

Political Messaging: Story of the Street or Map of the Road Ahead?

Italian politicians often explain a problem by tracing its roots. For example:

“Se guardiamo indietro, il nostro sistema infrastrutturale nasce nel dopoguerra. Per decenni ha sostenuto lo sviluppo regionale. Poi sono arrivati gli anni della crisi… Oggi, dobbiamo ripensare la mobilità.”

If we look back, our infrastructure system was born in the post-war period. For decades, it supported regional development. Then came the years of crisis… Today, we need to rethink mobility.”

Compare this to a typical English approach:

“Our transport system is outdated. It no longer meets modern needs. Here’s our three-step plan to fix it.”

Il nostro sistema di trasporti è obsoleto. Non risponde più alle esigenze moderne. Ecco il nostro piano in tre punti per rimetterlo in sesto.

One builds towards the present. The other starts with where we are and outlines what’s next.

In campaigning, particularly when hope and change are on the agenda, the ability to speak the future into being is a core skill.

Shifting the Frame: Speaking About the Future in Political Contexts

1. Use the Future Tense to Embrace Forward Thinking

In Italian campaigning, actively choosing to use the future tense — even when the present is grammatically acceptable — can shift the tone of the entire message.

“Entro la fine dell’anno, costruiremo 10 nuove scuole.”

“By the end of the year, we will build 10 new schools.”

It’s a subtle but powerful way to train both speaker and listener to imagine outcomes, not just observe problems. Future-oriented grammar supports a mindset of agency and ambition.

💡 Reflection: Are you expressing political plans as intentions and commitments, or simply narrating ongoing or past situations?

2. Flip the Narrative: Lead With Goals, Not Problems

Instead of framing messages with historical or procedural build-up, start with the destination:

❌ “Nel 2020, abbiamo perso molti posti di lavoro a causa della pandemia…”

✅ “Creeremo 50.000 nuovi posti di lavoro nei prossimi due anni.”

❌ “In 2020, we lost many jobs due to the pandemic…”

✅ “We will create 50,000 new jobs over the next two years.”

Then, if necessary, explain how you’ll get there — or what you’ve learned from past challenges.

In campaigns, this signals strength, clarity, and leadership. Voters don’t just want history lessons — they want to know what comes next.

3. Use the Past to Put It in the Past

Sometimes, politicians speak about difficult events using the historical present:

“E poi lui arriva e dice che non c’è budget, come sempre…”

And then he shows up and says there’s no budget, as always…

This keeps the emotion alive — which can be useful rhetorically — but it also keeps the event psychologically present. If you’re trying to close a chapter, then frame it clearly as past:

“Ha detto che non c’era budget. Era una situazione difficile, ma l’abbiamo superata.”

“He said there was no budget. It was a difficult situation, but we overcame it.”

Language helps us process and move on. Politically, this is crucial when shifting from crisis to recovery or from opposition to leadership.

From the Language of Memory to the Language of Possibility

Language doesn’t just reflect culture — it shapes it. In political communication, especially in a culture so steeped in history like Italy, consciously choosing how we speak about time can shape how we govern it.

Using more future tense, foregrounding solutions over stories of struggle, and structuring speech around what can be done — not just what has happened — can subtly reshape expectations of leadership, campaign messaging, and even national mood.

So next time you’re drafting a speech, a slogan, or a political proposal — ask yourself:

Does this message tell people where we’ve been, or where we’re going?

Because ultimately, language isn’t just how we describe the world.

It’s how we imagine a new one.