The link between language and emotions is quite usually handled in daily communication. Firstly, it is essential to explain the concept of ‘emotion’. Albeit Wierzbicka (1995) states that if you aim to study a notion, you should not begin with a plain definition of it – or you will finish with something very strict – still it appears great to take a plain linguistic concept of emotions. A linguist may not be interested just in how they act at a chemical level, but in how they are voiced in language. Even so, a farther limit appears to be invited. If the query is “What are emotions?” the reply should be: it relies on the theoretical view. Within language studies, for instance, emotions can be viewed from the view of linguistics and cognitive psychology, or linguistics and philosophy, for example. When viewing the pragmatics of emotions, the same is true for the query “What is Pragmatics?” The reply relies on the view taken, as there are distinct theories, for instance, to clarify how we hint at more than we say. This paper will abstain from taking the view of discursive psychology or conversation analysis. Rather, it adopts the cognitive view that people communicate in order to settle connections and to transfer intentions. In this line of reasoning, people also communicate to transfer their emotions, and they may do that through linguistic marks, weak implicatures, and the like. If one takes a cognitive view on communication, we must also clarify how cognition and communication are bound together.Taking the essential ravel of the topic, this paper only tries to elicudate the basis of its search, including philosophical and neurological facets of emotion studies in order to expand it towards a pragmatic theory, more specifically towards relevance theory.