It may not be due to language. Language may be influenced by morals. It also may be that different societies have different levels of morals.
From Wikipedia.
Morality (from Latin: mōrālis, lit. 'manner, character, proper behavior') is the differentiation of intentions, decisions and actions between those that are distinguished as proper and those that are improper.[1] Morality can be a body of standards or principles derived from a code of conduct from a particular philosophy, religion or culture, or it can derive from a standard that a person believes should be universal.[2] Morality may also be specifically synonymous with "goodness" or "rightness".
Moral philosophy includes moral ontology, which is the origin of morals; and moral epistemology, which is the knowledge of morals. Different systems of expressing morality have been proposed, including deontological ethical systems which adhere to a set of established rules, and normative ethical systems which consider the merits of actions themselves. An example of normative ethical philosophy is the Golden Rule, which states that: "One should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself."[3]
This I think is were we get into troubles. Who decides what rightness is. Would it not be then that a population's morals are set in the characters of the person(s) who decide what's right or wrong behavior. That means then, that a population is made according to the mandates of the operators. The problem with this is--- are the deciders moral and who keeps them in check. They can skew morals to benefit their preferred members in their constructed society. It would seem then that wrongness is what would be harmful to others and rightness would be what is helpful or harmless. That would mean that a society isn't more or less right or wrong then what leaders dictate.