There's a problem: All languages fail in re the purpose languages are assigned (thinking, communicating, etc.) — Agent Smith

Sometimes, but it doesn't mean you shouldn't keep trying, Agent Smith.

Edited the OP. Danke!

I'm beginning to see your point.

:lol: Merry (belated) Xmas Jamal

You too, AS.

What about languages such as binary?

Language has no definite purpose.

It solves what it solves and it fails where it fails.

I've memories of perusing my university's philosophy section, which lead me to conclude that philosophy is that free domain of language transformation which can approach gibberish. Linguistic catastrophe is definitely most relevant to philosophers.

:up:

What's the argument for saying language has a "purpose"? One is pre-supposing that there is such a "purpose".

We have it now, so in retrospect we put assign it such a thing. But I think one of the ways to frame your main point is to argue that we don't have full definitions - outside mathematics.

Sure, no single word is exhausted by our trying to explain it. But if we attempt to be clear in what we are arguing for - then in need to dissolve into gibberish. We just have to face the fact that there are things we have that we cannot explain to our satisfaction, such as us having full definitions.

What sayest thou? — Agent Smith

Fuck off, frankly.

Numbering claims does not make them more tenable, and giving a random hypothesis a fancy name does not add to its credibility. Start speaking more responsibly and with more care, and language will magically heal itself.