2 ms·
Some cultures just stop with "warm" and "cold" This is where the article (and maybe the underlying studies?) seems to go off the rails: asked him or her to na
by CWuestefeld 10y ago
Some cultures just stop with "warm" and "cold"
This is where the article (and maybe the underlying studies?) seems to go off the rails:
asked him or her to name each one’s “basic color term”—the simplest, broadest word that described its shade
If I (a native English speaker) were asked in those terms to describe the coloration of an object, I think I'd conclude that I would need to limit my answers to "warm" and "cold". These are certainly color concepts in English, and indeed, as a photography enthusiast I work with them all the time when I edit my photos in Lightroom. So I can't see why they've then broadened the terms out to the more specific red, orange, etc., as more general terms are available.
The article seems to make an overture toward the possibility of thinking in colors even outside of the hue, saturation, and value model that westerners at least seem to think in - which could be very interesting. But the question above also seems to preclude such a discovery. As I read it, "shade" seems to be synonymous with "hue", thus demanding that I follow our familiar model. But if a different word were substituted for "shade", like the generic term "color", I think I would have answered that the most generic words available in English are "light" and "dark". (That, of course, is basically the V in HSV, and not a different model, but still provides another set of possible English terms of broader foundational breadth than "red", "orange", etc.