Intergenerational differences in Russian color naming in the globalized era: linguistic analysis

The present study is an apparent-time analysis of color terms in Russian native speakers (N = 1927), whose age varied between 16 and 98 years. Stratified sampling was employed with the following age groups: 16–19, 20–29, and so on, with the oldest group of 70 years and over. Color names were elicited in a web-based psycholinguistic experiment (http://colournaming.com). Participants labeled color samples (N = 606) using an unconstrained color-naming method. Color vocabulary of each age group was estimated using multiple linguistic measures: diversity index; frequency of occurrences of 12 Russian basic color terms (BCTs) and of most frequent non-BCTs; color-naming pattern. Our findings show intergenerational differences in Russian color-term vocabulary, color-naming patterns, and object referents. The CT diversity (measured by the Margalef index) progressively increments with speakers’ juniority; the lexical refinement is manifested by the increasing variety of BCT modifiers and growing use of non-BCTs, both traditional and novel. Furthermore, the most frequent Russian non-BCTs sirenevyj “lilac”, salatovyj “lettuce‐colored”, and birûzovyj “turquoise” appear to be the emerging BCTs. The greatest diversity and richness of CT inventory is observed in Russian speakers aged 20–59 years, i.e., those who constitute the active workforce and are enthusiastic consumers. In comparison, speakers of 60 and over manifest less diverse color inventory and greater prevalence of (modified) BCTs. The two youngest groups (16–29 years) are linguistic innovators: their color vocabulary includes abundant recent loanwords, predominantly from English and, not infrequently, CTs as nouns rather than adjectives. Moreover, Generation Z (16–19 years) tend to offer highly specific or idiosyncratic color descriptors that serve expressive rather than informative function. The apprehended dynamics of color naming in apparent time reflects intergenerational differences as such, but even more so dramatic changes of sociocultural reality in the post-Soviet era, whereby Russian speakers, in particular under 60 years, were/are greatly impacted by globalization of trade: new market product arrivals resulted in adoption of novel and elaboration of traditional CTs for efficient communication about perceived color

Cultural Implications in Basic Color Terms “Black” and “White” in Chinese and English

Color is a kind of human perception towards the objective world. In intercultural communications, the English people and the Chinese people are different in many aspects, and their perceptions of various color symbols are not the same. Color words in English and Chinese languages have rich connotations and play a very important role in both cultural manifestations and ethnic customs. This article discusses the Chinese and English symbolic meanings of the two color words, “black” and “white” in Chinese and English cultures. By comparing and contrasting these two words’ differences in the two cultures, we can deepen understanding of the two cultures, overcoming the conflicts and promoting Chinese and English cross-culture exchanges and communications.

Lexical Color Categories

Color is a continuous variable, and humans can distinguish more than a million colors, yet world color lexicons contain no more than a dozen basic color terms. It has been understood for 160 years that the number of color terms in a lexicon varies greatly across languages, yet the lexical color categories defined by these terms are similar worldwide. Starting with the seminal study by Berlin and Kay, this review considers how and why this is so. Evidence from psychological, linguistic, and computational studies has advanced our understanding of how color categories came into being, how they contribute to our shared understanding of color, and how the resultant categories influence color perception and cognition. A key insight from the last 50 years of research is how human perception and the need for communication within a society worked together to create color lexicons that are somewhat diverse, yet show striking regularities worldwide.

“Red-Green” or “Brown-Green” Dichromats? The Accuracy of Dichromat Basic Color Terms Metacognition Supports Denomination Change

Two experiments compared “Red-Green” (R-G) dichromats’ empirical and metacognized capacities to discriminate basic color categories (BCCs) and to use the corresponding basic color terms (BCTs). A first experiment used a 102-related-colors set for a pointing task to identify all the stimuli that could be named with each BCT by each R-G dichromat type (8 protanopes and 9 deuteranopes). In a second experiment, a group of R-G dichromats (15 protanopes and 16 deuteranopes) estimated their difficulty discriminating BCCs-BCTs in a verbal task. The strong coincidences between the results derived from the pointing and the verbal tasks indicated that R-G dichromats have very accurate metacognition about their capacities (they only had considerable difficulty discriminating 13 out of the total of 55 possible BCT pairs) and limitations (Brown-Green and Blue-Purple pairs were rated especially difficult to differentiate) in the use of BCTs. Multidimensional scaling (MDS) solutions derived from both tasks were very similar: BCTs in R-G dichromats were properly represented in 2D MDS solutions that clearly show one chromatic dimension and one achromatic dimension. Important concordances were found between protanopes and deuteranopes. None of these dichromats showed substantial difficulty discriminating the Red-Green pair. So, to name them “R-G” dichromats is misleading considering their empirical capacities and their metacognition. Further reasons to propose the use of the alternative denomination “Brown-Green” dichromats are also discussed. We found some relevant differences between the “Brown-Green” dichromats’ empirical and self-reported difficulties using BCTs. Their metacognition can be considered a “caricature” of their practical difficulties. This caricature omits some difficulties including their problems differentiating “white” and “black” from other BCTs, while they overestimate their limitations in differentiating the most difficult pairs (Brown-Green and Blue-Purple). Individual differences scaling (INDSCAL) analyses indicated that the metacognition regarding the use of BCTs in “Brown-Green” dichromats, especially deuteranopes, is driven slightly more by the chromatic dimension and driven slightly less by the achromatic dimension, than their practical use of BCTs. We discuss the relevance of our results in the framework of the debate between the linguistic relativity hypothesis (LRH) and the universal evolution (UE) theories.

Etymological Notes on Yakut Color Terms

The goal of the paper is to analyze Yakut color terms from an etymological perspective. In all, fifty-one color terms have been collected from different Yakut dictionaries and electronic sources. The terms show a heterogeneous picture: the basic color terms are of Common Turkic origin (e.g. küöx ‘blue’, qara ‘black’, kïhïl ‘red’) representing the archaic features, some basic color terms are absent in other Modern Turkic languages due to internal developments involving special Turkic or specifically Yakut suffixes (e.g. saharxay ‘yellow’, kïtarxay ‘red’). The largest group of Yakut color terms includes Mongolic loanwords, most of which are connected to the colors of animals (especially horses), which prove the Mongolic influence on the Yakut lifestyle. Another part of the paper considers the special suffixes in Yakut forming adjectives designating shades of colors, which have a mixed, i.e. Turkic and Mongolic origin. The paper tries to shed light on the way color terms may play in determining the place of the Yakut language among the Turkic languages.

The Metaphorical Expressions of Basic Color Words in English and Chinese

This study makes a comparison of color metaphors about the similarities and differences between English and Chinese for few articles study the metaphorical usage of shared basic color terms in Chinese and English. The author makes a relatively systematic study of the color metaphors, which has some significance in the light of the cross-cultural communication, language teaching, language learning, as well as translation practice.

The Metaphorical Expressions of Basic Color Words in English and Chinese

This study makes a comparison of color metaphors about the similarities and differences between English and Chinese for few articles study the metaphorical usage of shared basic color terms in Chinese and English. The author makes a relatively systematic study of the color metaphors, which has some significance in the light of the cross-cultural communication, language teaching, language learning, as well as translation practice.

Basic Color Terms in Khanty

The Khanty language contains the minimum number of words ‒ color terms. For “black”, the word “pity” is used, presumably related to the single root “pătlam” “dark”, for “white” ‒ the word “nŏvi”, meaning also “light”, “moon”, for “red” ‒ the word “wŭrty” (from “wŭr” ‘blood’). One word “wŏsty” is used for the undifferentiated designation of shades of the yellow- green-blue spectrum. Currently, the differentiation of color terms is achieved by using phrases with the base word, which is a comparison standard (“blue as the sky”, “green as the grass”, etc.).