Communication/language depends on shared context. The more context you share the shorter the trigger for evoking that thing and that context. And if you share no context communication becomes very difficult.
And honestly, without a lot more communication even with a person that speaks your language you have no idea if you actually have a shared context. While an American from NYC and one from some backwater town in Kansas share a lot of context but there is a lot of context they don't, so as communication becomes more detailed between them it's very likely that 'translation' between each other will be somewhat incorrect.
This is also why lawyer speak is so particular. Language is fuzzy in most cases. Only language that relates to discrete physical objects gets closer to the binary state of exactness described in the article.
I wasn't aware that that idea was in dispute.