Do you have a conception of 'thought' that is not based on language? All you have offered so far is "conception is another word for thought". This is equivocation.
You know when I said you are making the circle bigger? This is exactly it! Illusion.
So I am going to short-circuit your argument like this: You have no conception of conception.
Therefore you have no conception of thought. Therefore you have no conception of language that is not linguistic.
Yes. That is how language is USED! Not how language is CREATED.
You can't conceive how language is created until you can conceive conception.
This is awesome! Langage is circular (which is not news to me)
But the question of how do you 'conceptualise conception' leads to.... creation