Thinking structure and word order

I'm reading my Scovel textbook and there is an example cited where a student read the statement "I am eating lunch later" and said that eating here meant they were eating right now.

This leads to something interesting which ties into the idea that form relates directly to 'thinking patterns'.  (This may be what could be considered UG)

My hypothesis/theory/whatever is that by teaching certain langauges, you are teaching certain ways to think. And what you can see is that as words are introduced in a certain order (according to a language's grammar) you are also taking the listener down a 'cognitive path'

This example demonstrates it very well.

Considering that fact that 'eating' really is present continuous and thus does mean eating presently, listen to the words as they roll of someone's tongue and try to map what is going on in the listener's head.

"I... (the listener is now focused on the speaker - it is about him)
I am... (he is doing...what?)
I am eating (we envision him eating ..right now.. just as the student thought)
I am eating later" (now we take that whole "mental picture" and we 'move' it in our mind, to the future; in order to apply the "later")

There is a certain 'form' of handling the thought.

Another quick example:
In English you can say "I went shopping in China".  In Chinese, however, you must say "I, in China, went shopping" --> (Wo, zai Zhong Guo, mai dong xi). In English, you form the contruct in your mind of shopping, then you transport that whole mental experience into China. However in Chinese, you first, place yourself (in China), then you form the activity in your mind (shopping). For a Chinese learner, there is no possibility of doing it the English way. You cannot say "I went shopping... in China". It is forbidden. Thus, in the Chinese mind - that form of thinking pattern is not allowed.

What is the point of this? I believe that learning a new language is partly training the mind to think in a different order. A different way to 'configure' concepts. That is part of L2 acquisition.

It is also why it is NOT the same as L1. Because in L1, only one "pattern of thinking" is introduced. Thus in teaching a new language means you are also teaching a "new thinking pattern".

Likewise to train someone off the L1 is not easy. Contrary to our good friend Krashen, learning L2 will never be natural like an L1. Why? Because L1 (formation of thinking patterns) happens on fresh snow; a new mind. L2, happens when a structure is already in place. That makes a world of difference.

[Note: I am now reviewing Attention and memory and this will expose a flaw of the input hypothesis. What the child "pays attention" is completely different from the L2 learner - why? Because L1 is the child's lifeline. He *must* pay attention. The L2 learner? He doesn't have to. The motivation is completely different]

But...once l2 is acquired, and the student now is aware of how to 'rethink', l3, l4, l5 becomes easier as multilingual research shows.