Defining loss of temper

My deposition, vol. I, p. 47-48, had this exchange:

Q. Have you ever lost your temper with [your wife]?
A. No.
Q. Never?
A. Never.
Q. Have either of your children ever attended counseling?
A. You mean psychological counseling?
Q. Yes.
A. Not to my knowledge.
Q. Going back to losing your temper, what do you describe as losing your temper?
A. And you want me to describe what I didn't do?
Q. I would like to know in your mind what it means to lose your temper.
A. Well, I -- I would define it as getting sufficiently angry as to lose control of one's rational thought processes.
Q. Does it mean raising your voice?
A. It often includes that.
Q. But it doesn't have to?
A. No, not necessarily.
Q. So you have always had rational thoughts with [your wife].
A. I am saying that I haven't lost my temper.
Q. In your description of losing your temper -- you can correct me -- that means losing your ability to think rationally; is that right?
A. You could ask the court reporter to read back what I said. I would rather not try to quote myself.
Q. Based on your definition, that never occurred in your relationship with [my wife] for you.
A. In your question does the word "that" refer to losing my temper?
Q. Correct.
A. Asked and answered.
Q. And you can answer.
A. That's correct, I have not lost my temper with [my wife].

I have no idea why my wife's lawyer pursued this line of questioning. She couldn't possibly have any evidence that I lost my temper, and didn't confront me with any.

In court on Friday, she asked me similar questions. She asked me if I lost my temper, and then asked me to define what it was that I didn't do. I objected to be asked to give a definition, but the judge ordered me to do it. I don't know why anyone would want me to define a term that she was introducing, and that I hadn't even used at all. I don't know why she was asking any of the questions.