The ideas in that book helped create the notion of "design patterns" in software and engineering. The book provides hundreds of insights into the way people use their environment: marriage beds, child caves, dancing in the streets, staircases as stages, sleeping in public, spaces for self-governance...
Pattern Language is a more humanizing design philosophy than Bauhaus. It brings the emotional and sociological aspects of design together with technological complexity.
The concepts of vocabulary, syntax and grammar are applicable to programming language and API design, as well as visual design and architecture.
I am generally sympathetic with the aesthetic choices of this school. But it is necessary to note that Bauhaus's approach, as informed by socialist ideology of its core members, is dehumanizing at scale. And when 'it' -- it being the logical conclusion via Corbu et al -- was embraced (at scale), it resulted in the backlash that was Post-Modernism and the rest of it.
Finally, it needs to be pointed out that the 'problem' that informed the ideological 'solution' of Bauhaus maps far more sensibly to software methodology rather than software manifestation.
Postmodernism (in architecture) was an academic reactionary movement: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Venturi
[p.s.: This is the seminal critical retort that started it: http://designtheory.fiu.edu/readings/venturi_complexity_comp...]
The concept comes from the American Louis Sullivan, not the Bauhaus. His use of ornamentation and references to forms from the past (e.g. the skyscraper as a column with base, shaft, and capital) would have been rejected.