I suppose that one way to make Gödel's constructible hierarchy as "concrete" as possible is to define it by saying that the sets of $L_{\alpha+1}$ for any ordinal $\alpha$ in $ON$ (the class of all ordinals) are exactly those that can be written on the form $\{x\in L_\alpha|\phi(x)\}$ where $\phi(x)$ is build up from variables ranging over $L_\alpha$, terms of the form $\{x\in L_\beta|\phi(x)\}$ with a $\beta<\alpha$, connectives, and quantifiers; and letting $L_0$ be $\emptyset$ and taking unions at limit ordinals. That means that my title question reduces to "Can every ordinal in $ON$ be described in language?". Now, if $ON$ is understood in a naive way, the answer is clearly "no". But is it consistent with ZF that $ON$ is so small that the answer is "yes"?
I would like to elaborate a little on why I asked that last question, but I will not be able to formulate myself with perfect precision - hopefully, I will be able to get across what it is I'm trying to get information about anyway.
The constructible hierarchy is defined using an already given $ON$. Could $ON$ not itself be determined somehow by the constructive hierarchy? In particular, might there not just be countable many (as seen from the outside) countable ordinals (as seen from the inside)? And could that not contribute to keeping $ON$ small?
If the answer to my (overall) question is negative, I'm also interested in whether at least all the real numbers of this model of ZF can be described in language.