Our finite arsenal of words attempts to convey a sensory experience, unique to the individual.
This collision of two abstract worlds magnifies communication error.
Despite the flexibility of language, it’s not robust enough to adapt to this personal and intimate envelopment of the senses.
Language is beautifully metamorphic and powerfully applicable but still bounded.
There are an incredible number of factors involved to effectively communicate flavour: idea conception, protocol knowledge (each party’s understanding of the chosen communication language), breadth and depth of flavour experience (and recall of such) and synthesis of protocol and recall to correctly articulate what the participant wants to — the choice of language matters.
How someone identifies themselves, could potentially influence their perception of the experience; their mood, the season, day and general temperament are all justifiably contributors to the retrospective experience.
Generally accepted terminology may reign supreme but it is in itself, another language — a subset of its parent, with altered linguistic relationships.
Understand language to — by definition — better articulate experience.
Language is paramount.
Without selecting words appropriately, reality may disappoint or fall short of its capacity to deliver — this differential is the ‘dead weight loss’ of language.
The story of flavour may be better than the flavour itself.