> you form a "household language" with your partner
This has more to do with alignment of signifiers and emphasis (determined by the concerns particular to that relationship). Language is, of course, not just the collection of signifiers, but the signs in toto, which means signifier, concept/proposition, and signified.
> the origin of the hermaneutic effort comes from aneffort to reconcile inconsistencies in the christian texts
I would just emphasize that what constitutes a cohesive corpus of text (like the Bible) is determined by prior Tradition. That is, it wasn't the case that the Bible came first in absolute terms (it didn't fall from the sky), but that the Bible was assembled (by the Catholic Church) through the lens of Tradition from texts written over the course of thousands of years. This Tradition provides not only the hermeneutic means that allowed said text to be compiled in the first place, but also the means to interpret the text in the future with greater depth as more is learned and the Tradition is refined and developed. That's how we know that Genesis, having been written in a different language, time period, style, and cultural climate than the the Gospel of John, must be read differently from the Gospel of John. (Incidentally, this is the reason behind the absurdity of sola scriptura. By doing away with the unbroken Tradition that links us to the past and gives us the means by which to interpret Scripture, we are left to whatever parochial devices we happen to have. This explains, in part, the great variability and divergence of interpretation among Protestants, made evident by the presence of over 40 thousand Protestant sects in the US alone.)
This has more to do with alignment of signifiers and emphasis (determined by the concerns particular to that relationship). Language is, of course, not just the collection of signifiers, but the signs in toto, which means signifier, concept/proposition, and signified.
> the origin of the hermaneutic effort comes from aneffort to reconcile inconsistencies in the christian texts
I would just emphasize that what constitutes a cohesive corpus of text (like the Bible) is determined by prior Tradition. That is, it wasn't the case that the Bible came first in absolute terms (it didn't fall from the sky), but that the Bible was assembled (by the Catholic Church) through the lens of Tradition from texts written over the course of thousands of years. This Tradition provides not only the hermeneutic means that allowed said text to be compiled in the first place, but also the means to interpret the text in the future with greater depth as more is learned and the Tradition is refined and developed. That's how we know that Genesis, having been written in a different language, time period, style, and cultural climate than the the Gospel of John, must be read differently from the Gospel of John. (Incidentally, this is the reason behind the absurdity of sola scriptura. By doing away with the unbroken Tradition that links us to the past and gives us the means by which to interpret Scripture, we are left to whatever parochial devices we happen to have. This explains, in part, the great variability and divergence of interpretation among Protestants, made evident by the presence of over 40 thousand Protestant sects in the US alone.)