Currently, most, if not, all human languages use sound to communicate. What if, language A, a language much like English in terms of its global dominance and widespread use, on a planet much like ours, used silence instead of sound to communicate. If you don't understand, speak the following sentence:
I am a human and I have a mischievous brother who is in my treehouse.
Instead of listening for sounds, listen for the lack of sounds, rather the silence or gap between words (and sometimes these gaps are within words, like the word high-ranking). But you say, "well, don't all words have the same lengths of silence between them when we say them? Wrong. We actually use different types of inflections and different lengths between words to subconsciously express our emotions." Imagine if language A had the same exact grammar and vocabulary as American English. Instead of listening for sounds, speakers of language A listen for silence and thus understand the same ideas in a completely different way. If the length of these gaps were translated into a 60 letter alphabet, and the speakers of language A were a native tribe (about 2500 members) that lived in relative isolation from other humans, how would language A affect their culture?
Agreed, human evolution hardwires us to listen for sounds, because when you heard what may have been a hungry lion growling, you'll get away from that place as fast as possible or be eaten. If you listened to silence, you wouldn't really understand anything meaningful and you would probably be eaten. But how would language A affect their culture if they had used language A for over 1500 years (written and spoken)?