Language is the place we call “home”—that which bonds, binds us to the Other. But what happens if we leave home and wander into other reaches of language? Who and what do we leave behind and with what consequences? While we psychoanalysts are trained to pull for deep modes of expression from our patients, there is still a strong pull from our own academy to stay within bounds of the proven or provable, the intellectual, the abstract, the theoretical—to exclude the affective from our own discourse. This article explores this turn away from affectivity, not only in the clinical setting, but in other venues where analysts/therapists meet, greet, write, speak to each other. Our guides for this exploration are Kohut, Loewald, and Ferenczi, who brought us his concept of the “confusion of tongues.” The article suggests another reading of Ferenczi’s words, pointing to a new language of affectivity and inclusion.