Can language completely capture experience?

As much as I hate to say what has already been said, as much as I love to play 'devil's advocate' or to point out alternative views, I must agree with everyone and affirm that words cannot fully capture experience.

As powerful as words are, allowing us to communicate and express ideas, they are only symbols, given their power by association with experience. That which we call a rose, as Juliet reminds us, is only represented by an arbitrary sound, which we mutually agree refers to that particular flower.

Simile, metaphor and analogy are effective and widely-used language tools which function by comparison to that which is familiar. When Douglas Adams wrote, "The ship hung in the air in exactly the same way that a brick doesn't", he expected us to recognize the word 'brick' as refering to the heavy, solid piece of something like clay or stone with the distinct characteristic of not floating above the ground.

The long and short of it is that language is a representation, a symbol, and a substitution when there is no alternative; experience is unique, so some means of sharing such a thing, however imperfect, is still infinitely useful.