ah that's interesting. i didn't know about this hypothesis, according to Wikipedia (and possibly very simplified) historically it seems like they are looking to measure the degree in which language affects cognition, and the views are that the impact could be either strong (linguistic determinism), or weak (linguistic influence) -- these two views contending each other, though after research in the 1980's there's a more widely accepted view of cognition having a linguistic influence, a weaker form of impact. then the most recent research centres around contexts of empirical study, which is quite interesting and worth having a look in here.
from my point of view though, i see it as two kinds of cognition per individual instead of one: a verbal and a non verbal one. upon which the language cultivated/linguistic culture could have an absolute influence on the verbal cognition, but it would happen differently for the non verbal cognition. but which of the two, to what extent and in what circumstances, has more impact on the outcome -- our thoughts, beliefs, world views and memories? what habits do we make with these cognitions that structure what we know as true? my personal view is based on the idea that our brains process the same piece of information in two different ways, one per brain hemisphere or hemisphere specialisation, and these two hemispheres are in constant communication. (what's the flow of this communication, how does it work in terms of outcome...?)