No. They say that music is an international language. At least music has the comparative advantage of making a sound.I think drawing and vision is everyone's language. Am I right?
How does sound connect with understanding?
Again, it is arbitrary. Even onomatopoeia, where the sounds are supposed to reflect the meaning, are cultural- there are many different ways of describing common sounds like dogs barking or cockerels. We need sounds to convey meaning, but the sounds we use vary from language to language, and most of the time have little connection to the meaning we convey. We absorb the sounds others use and follow the patterns.
Do some Google searches on animal sounds by language to see some incredibly interesting, as well as highly amusing, lists of how animal sounds vary by language. Most are fairly similar and/or logically different, with some exceptions - how the Japanese hear 'boon boon' as representative of a bee 'buzz' or 'boo boo' for a pig's 'oink' is beyond me.
These differences seem like a fun thesis paper for somebody in an Applied Linguistics program. Either that, or the title of a good children's book - "Old McDonald's World Vacation".
How could words not be created by someone who was alive? Do you think dead people created words?
As an aside, if I ever find out who created "kinda", I will hunt them down, dead or alive, and make them sorry.
The fact that a word is in the dictionaries does not mean that it is fine to use it in all contexts.