This keeps coming up and it is incorrect.
Morse is not English or even a language. A code is not an alphabet or a word list. It is a shorthand, for efficiency in transmitting. There is no 1=1 correspondence with sounds, figures or anything else. Morse groupings stand for groups of words and sentences.
There's a great example of this in the Navajo code-talkers of WWII, or the Cherokee and Choctaw code-talkers in WWI. Their messages might/could be deciphered after some difficulty. Say the message is "spotted pony woman drums" and is deciphered. However,
that message gives no information to anyone but a Navajo, because the word-group "spotted pony woman drums" links to a specific cultural knowledge mostly unknown to anyone who was not raised Navajo.
Ciphers Vs Code [Khan Academy]
Navajo Code Talkers' Dictionary
REVISED 15 JUNE 1945
(DECLASSIFIED UNDER DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE DIRECTIVE 5200.9)
I think you're misinterpreting what I'm saying bud. Either that or the old Nokia 'new message' notification tone was never actually saying 'SMS'
Pretty certain I've never said morse is a language, so I'm not sure where you're coming from on that front.
An alphabet or word list could form the basis of a code - all it needs to do is to say what each letter or word is code for. Similarly for a list of phrases.
When you're talking about there not being a 1=1 correspondence are you talking about inherent correspondence? If so, no dispute on that, and I never said there was an inherent correspondence. The correspondence is just whatever set of conventions are used.
I'm really not sure what to make of that point combined with your following point about morse groupings standing for words and sentences though.
I've always understood that standard morse code had each letter of the latin alphabet, the digits 0-9, and several extra characters, each one of which was represented by a specific pattern of dots and dashes. (And that the selection of pattern for letter was based on efficiency and so the simplicity of the pattern was in inverse proportion to the frequency of a letter being used in English - so the more often a letter was used, the simpler the pattern, hence e = . t = - i = .. and so on.
Are you saying none of that's correct? (I'm not saying that in an accusatory tone btw, I'm just genuinely unclear what you're meaning!

)
Or are you talking about the stuff that's essentially communication protocol instructions - wait, understood, etc.? They don't invalidate the code for letters etc. though...
My point anyway was not about how things are, but how they might appear to be to an alien species.
Consider for example if we have beacons in a groups of systems (let's say the Pleiades Sector, for no particular reason

) and those beacons regularly transmit the following in morse "Start-<System Name>-<Date>-<Time>-<Status>-Stop". This will result in various patterns of dots and dashes.
Given enough time surveying the messages, they will realise that some of the pattern never changes, some of the pattern changes by time and some of it changes according to the system. And hey presto! - they'd be able to identify our system names in morse code.
It doesn't matter what the code is, what language it translates back to or anything like that, each system would still have a unique pattern of dots and dashes and it's those specific patterns that they'd identify as the system names
My other point here is that they would not necessarily realise that what they were hearing was a code rather than our native language.
If the descriptions are accurate then they wouldn't have lungs and so wouldn't be able to talk in the way we do, and our speech might not even be recognisable to them as form of language. They would however communicate themselves via clacking their chelicrae together. Imagine if your means of communication was by clicking your fingers - would you be able to get the same range of sounds from that as you do when speaking? Or would you be able to get only a very small number of sounds, and then communicate via patterns of those sounds?
Now imagine your finger-click patterns were the only audio representation of language that you knew (because your species doesn't have lungs/windpipes/vocal cords/etc. and so can't speak).
You now hear someone speaking and you hear some morse - which ones sounds like a language to you?
(In the beacon scenario above, they'd also be able to work how our dates and times corresponded to their own measurements of time, and the might even be able to take a stab at the likely origins of our measurements of time. That's a bit of an aside from the main point though!

)