Language is not invented but is the originary recognition of the Other.

Evidence

Language is not a phenomenon added on to being-for-others. It is originally being-for-others; that is, it is the fact that a subjectivity experiences itself as an object for the Other. In a universe of pure objects language could under no circumstances have been “invented” since it presupposes an original relation to another subject. In the intersubjectivity of the for-others, it is not necessary to invent language because it is already given in the recognition of the Other. I am language. … It forms part of the human condition; it is originally the proof which a for-itself can make of its being-for-others, and finally it is the surpassing of this proof and the utilization of it toward possibilities which are my possibilities; that is, toward my possibilities of being this or that for the Other. Language is therefore not distinct from the recognition of the Other’s existence. The Other’s upsurge confronting me as a look makes language arise as the condition of my being. — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness, 952

Categorization

• DEFINE: Sartre redefines language ontologically: not a tool added to being-for-others but its very structure, coincident with recognizing the Other’s look.
• XREF: Connects to Beauvoir’s working through of the for-others relation, and to Heidegger’s ‘I am what I say’ which Sartre adopts with a twist. — connects to: Philosophical language must interweave expression and communication, neither reducible to the other — Dirk Braunstein, Adorno’s Critique of Political Economy, 1014; Linguistic identity is built from repeated micro-style choices rather than any essence. — Mary Bucholtz and Kira Hall, Identity and Interaction: A…, 64

Broader Connections

• Philosophical language must interweave expression and communication, neither reducible to the other #expands (0.75) — Dirk Braunstein, Adorno’s Critique of Political Economy, 1014