I'm not sure I follow this entirely, but if the assertion is that "everything is math" then yeah, I totally agree. Where I think language operates here is as the medium best situated to assign objects to locations in vector space. We get to borrow hundreds of millions of encodings/relationships. How can you plot MAN against FATHER against GRAPEFRUIT using math without circumnavigating the human experience?
When I write to an unknown audience, unable to know in advance what terms they rely on, I tend to circumlocute to build emotional subtext. They might only get some percent but it may be familiar enough terms to act as middleware to the rest.
The words Man, father, and grapefruit aren't essential to existence of man, father, grapefruit. All existed before language.
What you mean by "human experience" is "bird song my culture uses to describe shared space". Leave meaning to be debated in meat space and include the current geometry of the language in the model. Just make it mutable.
The machine can just focus on rendering geometry to the pixel limit of the machine using electrical theory; it doesn't need to care internally if it's text with meaning. It's only represented like that on the screen anyway. Compress the information required to just geometric representation and don't anthropomorphize machine state manipulation.