Concepts, prior to articulation, exist as hunches that some elusive but relevant similarity exists, then as analogies. From there, things get more explicit, but the root of every concept remain tacit — a spontaneous capacity to recognize likes and differences which can be stated in conceptual terms. I would argue, though, that these articulations are still articulations of something — something tacit, without which the language loses all meaning. In other words, concepts are not themselves constituted of language, but inform language. From this perspective, conceptual (know-what) understanding more similar to practical (know-how) and moral (know-why) knowing than if conceptual understanding is assumed to be essentially linguistic in nature. I’m not even sure if factual (know-that) understanding is necessarily linguistic.