I am a relavitist (everything in one form or other is related even words and language).
I think you would be better described as believing in
semantic holism. Quine was really the man for this (although he's not very readable).
Since everyone has their personal belief of what they think the word means and what the writer wrote, why dissect the word or sentence? Where is the logic to that? I have the ability to write a sentence without understanding the syntax (nouns and verbs).
On the one hand, there are several practical applications to studying linguistics.
The major application is for teaching English as a foreign language. As a native speaker, you are indeed able to form sentences without thinking about how you are doing it. However, people who learn English as second language (like how you probably learned language at school), evidently lack this ability. Whether second language learners actually need this meta-linguistic knowledge themselves is a matter of great contention; it is clear, though, that teachers of English as a foreign language are generally more effective if they know how the language they are teaching works.
Another practical application of linguistics is in the continuing efforts to teach computers how to understand spoken language or speak. Siri, the clever new voice recognition system on the iPhone, was written with help from many of the world's top linguists.
However, people might also say that studying linguistics has value in itself. After all, we use language all the time; it's inevitable that people will want to know
how language works. Why, for example, does "I have
any apples" sound wrong, but "there are
any number of reasons"... sound o.k? In this respect, linguistics is just like most of philosophy: people are interested in knowing
why something is the case.
Any language is not perfect not even the writer
The aim of linguistics is not 'linguistic perfection', indeed, no such thing exists anyway. The aim of linguistics, put simply, is to formulate a description of how language works.
Life is infinitely stranger than anything which the mind of man could invent. We would not dare to conceive the things which are really mere commonplaces of existence. If we could fly out of that window hand in hand, hover over this great city, gently remove the roofs, and peep in at the queer things which are going on, the strange coincidences, the plannings, the cross-purposes, the wonderful chains of events, working through generations, and leading to the most outre results, it would make all fiction with its conventionalities and foreseen conclusions most stale and unprofitable.
- Sherlock Holmes, A Case of Identity