Yes if you expand the meaning of language to encompass patterns of thought then sure you're right. So then we end up with the question: How do you think without thinking? Its nonsensical. For example maths, to engage with maths and logic doesn't have to be used for anykind of comunication or useful purpose but sure if this was to be brought up in this debate it will merely be dismissed as "a language of numbers". When confronted with the fight or flight a different approach is taken and it dismissed as not thought or lowerly thought. Just as said before the valuation of another's strength and an assessment of the most positive outcome is more complicated than many of the language related examples of thought.
To manipulate the term language is diffucult and frankly it is what this whole argument is based on. Shall we call DNA language and discuss whether or not life would exist without language?