The name you're looking for is Proto-World. However, we have no way of knowing whether there actually ever was only a single proto-language (monogenesis) or whether language developed independently multiple times (polygenesis). Some arguments may be more plausible in this regard than others, but it remains speculation. You can find more about this debate in Monogenesis vs. Polygenesis and Do the Khoisan languages resemble the world's first language?

Even if we could assume there was one proto-language to all the world's languages, the comparative method - the only proven methodology in historical linguistics - would not be able to tell us what that language looked like, since it has a limit of some six to ten thousand years time depth. Proto-World would have to have existed at least fifty thousand years ago.

The name you're looking for is Proto-World. However, we have no way of knowing whether there actually ever was only a single proto-language (monogenesis) or whether language developed independently multiple times (polygenesis). Some arguments may be more plausible in this regard than others, but it remains speculation. You can find more about this debate in Monogenesis vs. Polygenesis and Do the Khoisan languages resemble the world's first language?

Even if we could assume there was one proto-language to all the world's languages, the comparative method - the only proven methodology in historical linguistics - would not be able to tell us what that language looked like, since it has a limit of some six to ten thousand years time depth. Proto-World would have to have existed at least fifty thousand years ago.

The name you're looking for is Proto-World. However, we have no way of knowing whether there actually ever was only a single proto-language (monogenesis) or whether language developed independently multiple times (polygenesis). Some arguments may be more plausible in this regard than others, but it remains speculation. You can find more about this debate in Monogenesis vs. Polygenesis and Do the Khoisan languages resemble the world's first language?

Even if we could assume there was one proto-language to all the world's languages, the comparative method - the only proven methodology in historical linguistics - would not be able to tell us what that language looked like, since it has a limit of some six to ten thousand years time depth. Proto-World would have to have existed at least fifty thousand years ago.

The name you're looking for is Proto-World. However, we have no way of knowing whether there actually ever was only a single proto-language (monogenesis) or whether language developed independently multiple times (polygenesis). Some arguments may be more plausible in this regard than others, but it remains speculation. You can find more about this debate in Monogenesis vs. Polygenesis and Do the Khoisan languages resemble the world's first language?

Even if we could assume there was one proto-language to all the world's languages, the comparative method - the only proven methodology in historical linguistics - would not be able to tell us what that language looked like, since it has a limit of some six to ten thousand years time depth. Proto-World would have to have existed at least fifty thousand years ago.