I think the more appropriate analogy is there's more to a drill than the drill. When you buy a Milwaukee drill, because it shares a battery with other Milwaukee parts, it's easier to buy more Milwaukee tools.

So it helps to choose a drill brand with the ecosystem you like, not just one that's a serviceable drill.

(Or you could argue that a language's ecosystem is part of the dang language. Which I agree with).

Comparing a languages syntax to a saw blade is a bad analogy. A saw is a complete tool. Syntax is more like the teeth on the saw blade. The quality of the saw is not just about the teeth. It's also about the size and spacing of those teeth, the strength of the blade those teeth are on, the shape of the saw blade itself, the hardness of the metal, as well as the shape of the handle.

If you are just building a table then hopefully you are not trying to do the whole thing with a keyhole saw.

So 2 languages are the same if they have the same syntax but 1 is interpreted, and not safe, whereas the other is compiled and safe?

Where one has a large library and runs on many platforms, and the other doesn't?

Where one behaves like PHP with respect to equality, and the other doesn't?

The closer metaphor is the handle. A saw handle may be ergonomic, that doesn't mean the quality of the blade is good, or even suitable for what you're trying to cut.