I'd argue that it's not possible to do so.
Language, when describing the world, by very nature, is a tool that sacrifices elements of reality to fit very specific needs.
For example: "The sky is blue." If you're painting a very basic landscape, this is all you need to know. However, if you want to understand what the sky is, why it's normally, from where the color originates, what the color is during a sunset, etc., this sentence will not suffice.
Maybe this isn't the greatest example, but the point I'm trying to make is that language is a poor tool for understanding the universal nature of something, because all language can do is provide specific information (related to the task at hand) on a topic at the cost of other information on that same topic.
As I stated before, language is a tool for a specific purpose. The extent to which this is true becomes more apparent as you compare the grammatical structure and vocabulary of various world languages; being a specific culture's tool for expressing ideas, you can start to see major differences in how cultures think just by analyzing their language. For example, in Western culture, we emphasize individuality and personal identity. Japanese culture, by contrast, views people more as a collective community -- in the Japanese language, it is considered rude (or, at best, impolite) to use the words for "I" or "you", instead using expressions which translate roughly to "in this direction" or "in that direction."
As you can see, language is very fitted to the culture that uses it, with different languages having very different abilities and limitations. The important thing to take away here is that there will always be great limitations in any language.
Buddhism (and perhaps other Eastern philosophies with which I'm not as familiar) takes this idea very seriously, using it to condemn Western philosophy as being impractical because of its dependency on language when describing reality. Buddhism stresses meditation, not dogma, as a means of understanding the universe and reaching enlightenment, because it realizes that language is too limited a tool to fully express an all-encompassing model of the universe.