>i'm definitely not eloquent in russian and i would do extremely poorly in this sort of a test in russian but despite that, in my mother tongue i would perform very well
does that mean the first mean i'm bad at abstract thinking or bad at the language?
First of al, abstract thinking defines an entire field. This includes some linguistics, verbal, and grammar, as well as language use in a more artistic sense, and of course math, CS, logic, etc.
Now am saying if you fail in one of these fields, you are bad at abstract thought? Nope, I don't see how you could derive such an implication from my statements. But you notice how the nature of the beast of discussing such topics is us talking about POPULATIONS of people. And there, different rules apply. If you have a population A of people and one of B, and both groups have identical aptitudes at abstract thought but the people in B are shit at linguistics and especially creative writing (the latter is not usually regarded as an abstract endeavour, but as I tried to explain, abstractism strongly maps onto creative writing ability. The reverse isn't necessarily true), then yes, I will say their abstract thinking strength is less, because I deem mentioned verbal/linguistics to be part of its total domain.
>i'm pretty sure you've got to be retarded to not recognize this pattern even as a kid
Yes. I used that as an example because it (a simple consonant shift, which between every Euro language exists) is literally the easiest and most relatable, so my point about the mechanism is clearer.
I hope you don't enjoy being treated like a special-ed case, and having have to be talked to very slowly without difficult leaps. I don't, so I thought my simple example is a good illustration.