First Language Ever Invented?

[Theodarzna]

This is wrong. He asked about language not just communication and yes it is known.

We cannot possibly know the first language.

[Doctor Amadeus]

We cannot possibly know the first language.

We can we do through evidence. Someone else mentioned cave drawings which was closer than your long incorrect answer.

[Zethras]

What is the first Language that was invented and used in the early stages of Human history, like the first one ever noted.

The first spoken language probably doesn't have a name, seeing as humans have been around in one form or another for nearly 2 million years. Some of the earliest written languages are the various forms of Cuneiform.

If you're interested in reading further: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuneiform_script

[Theodarzna]

We can we do through evidence. Someone else mentioned cave drawings which was closer than your long incorrect answer.

Lol I got my MA in linguistics but yeah fuck, what do I know about languages? Lol Cave drawings are art and perhaps at best symbolic representations but we cannot translate that into a language or know if those drawings are art or actual representations of linguistic information. As in it's not writing, but clearly you must be the expert. *eyeroll*

[Doctor Amadeus]

Lol I got my MA in linguistics but yeah fuck, what do I know about languages? Lol Cave drawings are art and perhaps at best symbolic representations but we cannot translate that into a language or know if those drawings are art or actual representations of linguistic information. As in it's not writing, but clearly you must be the expert. *eyeroll*

Glad you are the only one that studied that



I don't need to be an expert, and this woman is, and appears to believe cave drawings have a lot more significant and we can follow these drawings all the way back in human evolution.

So we can actually know what LANGUAGE was invented first

[Puupi]

The first language. True story.

[Theodarzna]

Glad you are the only one that studied that



I don't need to be an expert, and this woman is, and appears to believe cave drawings have a lot more significant and we can follow these drawings all the way back in human evolution.

So we can actually know what LANGUAGE was invented first

That isn't what language is but okay, dig that whole deeper my dude. ������

[zephid]

Glad you are the only one that studied that



I don't need to be an expert, and this woman is, and appears to believe cave drawings have a lot more significant and we can follow these drawings all the way back in human evolution.

So we can actually know what LANGUAGE was invented first

Actually we can't know what the first language was. We know what the first recorded language is, but we have no way of knowing if there were languages before that. We can only guess.

[Hisholyness]

What is the first Language that was invented and used in the early stages of Human history, like the first one ever noted.

I think it was Sanskrit in the middle east, at least they had the first forms of paper

[Zelk]

Whatever Jesus spoke. Hebrew I guess?

[Puupi]

Whatever Jesus spoke. Hebrew I guess?

Aramaic.

Why do you assume it was the first language?

[Zelk]

Aramaic.

Why do you assume it was the first language?

Because jesus made the universe and that's what he spoke

[Doctor Amadeus]

Actually we can't know what the first language was. We know what the first recorded language is, but we have no way of knowing if there were languages before that. We can only guess.

The question is asking about language and yes we can know that's what she does it's called evidence.

- - - Updated - - -

That isn't what language is but okay, dig that whole deeper my dude. ������

It is a language.

[Mormolyce]

Very long story short, whatever it was it's lost to time.

I believe some of the oldest languages we have direct evidence for are Sumerian, Archaic Egyptian and the reconstructed root of the PIE language family. From about 2500 BC or earlier. Languages are almost certainly much older than this, but records before this time are scant.

just report as spam and move on, if the OP wanted to know he would have searched for it.

If he had, he would've failed.

- - - Updated - - -

Aramaic.

Why do you assume it was the first language?

Yeah, Aramaic is only about ~1000BC. Several languages were already liturgical by that stage.

Because jesus made the universe and that's what he spoke

Not even true scripturally speaking.

[Zelk]

Not even true scripturally speaking.

How so? Who created the universe then?

[Doctor Amadeus]

Because jesus made the universe and that's what he spoke

Nowhere in the bible does it say this at all. Jesus is part of the Trinity meaning God, but that real fast and loose to make your statement. It also doesn't say all the languages he knew.

[Theodarzna]

The question is asking about language and yes we can know that's what she does it's called evidence.

- - - Updated - - -



It is a language.

No it's not. Art, while conveying cultural or symbol meaning perhaps to the creator the cave paintings posses no lexicon, syntax or grammar with which to call it a language. You either don't know what a language is or are too embarrassed to admit you are wrong.

- - - Updated - - -

Actually we can't know what the first language was. We know what the first recorded language is, but we have no way of knowing if there were languages before that. We can only guess.

We can reconstruct proto language families with great confidence but we cannot trace it back to a first original language from which all others sprung. We can't know which one was first.

[Doctor Amadeus]

No it's not. Art, while conveying cultural or symbol meaning perhaps to the creator the cave paintings posses no lexicon, syntax or grammar with which to call it a language. You either don't know what a language is or are too embarrassed to admit you are wrong.

Yeah you can copy paste your last response. Its a language so your wrong. Primitive none vocal is still a language. If you watched the video of an expert with evidence and proof you'd know.

- - - Updated - - -

No it's not. Art, while conveying cultural or symbol meaning perhaps to the creator the cave paintings posses no lexicon, syntax or grammar with which to call it a language. You either don't know what a language is or are too embarrassed to admit you are wrong.

- - - Updated - - -



We can reconstruct proto language families with great confidence but we cannot trace it back to a first original language from which all others sprung. We can't know which one was first.

We can know we can trace bones and follow the evidence of human evolution to exact detail we know based on evidence.

[Theodarzna]

Yeah you can copy paste your last response. Its a language so your wrong. Primitive none vocal is still a language. If you watched the video of an expert with evidence and proof you'd know.

No, to isn't a language. I get you are trying to save face and all but you are just plain wrong. A language is a form of communication, communication that does not require interpretation. Art has the problem being interpretive with no clear syntax or grammar. You would have better luck arguing the person who drew those cave paintings likely spoke a language. But those caving drawings are not a grammatical message with a clear and precise meaning, and we can even tell if they were even if we cannot decipher the meaning of the words.

- - - Updated - - -

Yeah you can copy paste your last response. Its a language so your wrong. Primitive none vocal is still a language. If you watched the video of an expert with evidence and proof you'd know.

- - - Updated - - -



We can know we can trace bones and follow the evidence of human evolution to exact detail we know based on evidence.

Dude you are just plain desperate. Linguistically we can only reconstruct language families so far back. We can only determine when humans had the likely ability to use labgage, I.e the vocal cord placement ect in the body or certain brain structures among other clues. We do not however have proof that man started talking, all we can do is guess.

[Doctor Amadeus]

No, to isn't a language. I get you are trying to save face and all but you are just plain wrong. A language is a form of communication, communication that does not require interpretation. Art has the problem being interpretive with no clear syntax or grammar. You would have better luck arguing the person who drew those cave paintings likely spoke a language. But those caving drawings are not a grammatical message with a clear and precise meaning, and we can even tell if they were even if we cannot decipher the meaning of the words.

- - - Updated - - -



Dude you are just plain desperate. Linguistically we can only reconstruct language families so far back. We can only determine when humans had the likely ability to use labgage, I.e the vocal cord placement ect in the body or certain brain structures among other clues. We do not however have proof that man started talking, all we can do is guess.

Its a language we can know and what you fail to grasp is irrelevant. Maybe next time answer the question or say you don't know.

Cave drawings not only have similar drawings this woman identified 32 of them. That is language. You are just rambling definition for kinds of language and saying we don't know cause you haven't figured it out.

Getting defensive and throwing credentials out there doesn't change anything.