For an example see attached, read on actual anthropology, developmental and evolutionary psychology, linguistics and evolutionary theory on linguistic development etc. It's not pedantry, rather the existentialist stubbornness of the goat from Grendel
still clinbing the mountain anyway, a futile effort against entropy. Yet we can still decide to let a painting be destroyed in 500 years or 5, or allow a statue to get destroyed in two thousand years or three. It's a distinct reason why it's necessary to maintain meanings of words, which are independent of concepts as you now are bizarrely arguing what seems the opposite.
By making words in one language as meaningless as in 1984
you ultimately would render meaning meaningless throughout all languages and as equally pointless as all things in a room equalize their thermal gradients to near null. That's how language can bridge the gap, that's why words have dictionary definitions, and that's why any half aware person quickly realizes "the words elude me" in explaining a truly extraordinary experience, and which is one higher form reason to learn another language because odds are yours are failing to capture it, if any language can be found at all. God and religion are excellent examples of this, and partway why religious scholars tend to be polyglots, not just out of the pragmatism of reading source texts themselves, but to truly try and understand what on Earth they were truly talking about.
As such you can't quite try to grasp what esoteric concepts a person is trying to convey through the invention of words in another language when your approach to language ultimately becomes "yeah, well, those meanings are just like, your opinion man."