The "evolution" of language is the subject of this thread, but it is confusing because it is "evolution" of a different kind. In the scientific sense, "evolution" happens by chance, without any intelligent input. That is not so with language. Individual languages grow and are enriched by intelligent input and adoption of words from other languages. They may very well develop more precise meanings because of this intelligent input.

Now the structure of languages is quite another thing. I've tried to get my husband to post regarding his conversation with a well-educated Jesuit some years back. I don't remember how they happened to be traveling together for hours, but they had a lengthy conversation on religious topics. The Jesuit man believed in evolution, and they debated the relative merits of evolution vs. creation for some time. Discovering that the man was a linguist my husband asked him regarding the evidence in the field of linguistics – did he observe languages developing patterns of greater complexity or the converse? (My husband had no background in the subject.) The man was silent for a moment, then replied that that question was the best argument in favor of creation that he had ever heard.

That's because languages have lost complexity, rather than gained it. Some evidence below:

"A universally observed phenomenon of all language families is that inflexional morphology has simplified over time. The history of the IE (Indo-European) family overwhelmingly illustrates this. Theoretical reconstruction suggests that PIE (Proto-Indo-European, a theoretical source language) had three genders, eight noun cases and three verbal aspects. The evolutionary model is at a complete loss to explain why or how the complicated case system of PIE came into being. " (http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v14/i2/languages.asp Parenthetical explanations added.)

"Synthetic languages are those in which several grammatical units tend to be composed into one word, and inflexions (word endings) are used to indicate the grammatical relationships between the words. For example, Classical Greek, Classical Latin and the ancient Indian language Sanskrit are all synthetic. ... Over time, synthetic languages have become more analytic, with the effect that inflexional morphology has repeatedly been simplified." (Ibid.)

God created language complex and perfect, and He even built something into our brain that allows very young children to assimilate rules of grammar before they know the correct words. (Many years ago I did a little field research on language acquisition as a course project. I found that some of the most common "mistakes" children made in speaking English was to form what should be grammatically-correct inflexions of words, which were, in fact, no longer used. Anyone who speaks English as a second language will know very well that English is not a very "regular" language, having more exceptions to rules than its European cognate languages, such as German, in my case. Young children, not knowing these exceptions, naturally follow the rules, with some comical results. Most parents can attest to this if they'll take the trouble to pay attention to toddlers' use of language.)

Rightly interpreted, all the evidence in the natural world points back to an all-wise Creator.

By the word of the Lord the heavens were made, and all the host of them by the breath of His mouth. For He spoke, and it was done; He commanded, and it stood fast. Psalm 33: 6, 9