That means very little. A quick check shows that it generally employs the word for “rose”. And there’s a fundamental difference there. “Rose” is the name of a flower that can also be used as the name of a color, as can thousands of other non-color words. “Pink” was once exactly the same; but now, in English, it has evolved into a full-blown color word that is also the name of a flower. To illustrate what I’m getting at: “Pinks, assorted colors” is funny, but “Roses, assorted colors” isn’t.
The discussion regarding the words for colors with regard to ancient man SEEING colors is, in my mind, not nearly as important as looking at their art.
The Egyptian bust of Nefertiti is polychrome and dates to the 1300s bc, before the Greeks and Romans and whatever words they may or may not have had for color. Natural mineral oxides have been arranged to create art nearly forever whether the artists could describe the colors in their written languages or not.
I didn’t read the paper in depth, but did read through the paragraphs describing methods. Yes, the intent of the test was to determine the number of bands of color they see, irrespective of the terms used for the colors. But what bugs me is the ambiguity over the use of the word “rainbow”. I cannot tell if they are trying to, for instance, characterize the “rainbow” as the typical color schemata seen in the sky, including the value and chroma such associated.
Look here:
You will see three terms describing color: chroma, value, and hue. Hue is what we generically call “color”, i.e. the distinction between red to yellow to blue, etc. Chroma and value get combined in what we generically term “shade”, such as the distinction between crimson and scarlett, or forest vs teal, or pink vs red. Canary vs lemon. Value is a measure if lightness to darkness, so “sky blue” vs “midnight”. Chroma is a difference between dullness or grayness to brightness.
The typical “colors” of a rainbow have particular values and chromas associated with them. “Red” is a shade of red that does not look maroon, nor does it look pink. Looking at a rainbow, maroon and pink do not show up.
So when I look at the color band they show, and there are really dark reds at one end and dark purples at the other, and their are light sky blues and teals in the color band, and then they say “mark the farthest left edge of the rainbow”, I am confused. One reading is to mark the farthest edge of the color band they show - but that would be the edge of the color band, same for everybody. The other would be to differentiate the “red” of a rainbow from the colors on that color bar.
Do you see my source of confusion yet?
Reading the Wikipedia page, it appears that much of the criticism of the Berlin and Kay findings is from “the last 20 years”, which is from 1990 on. Cecil wrote that article in 1986. I think it is safe to say that criticisms and further study from 1987 and on will not be reflected in that article, without assuming the author of the article is at fault.
I’m certainly not an expert on the topic, but from reading the Wiki page, those seem to be addressed by the stated criteria used. In particular:
Also, with respect to “metallic”, to what does that refer? In English, that gives a characterization of the color that typically means shiny, but if there is a default color it is gray or “silver” - the color of polished and reflective silver. It is a common appearance of several metals.
That word and the corresponding cerulean are both confusing. For example, I find this definition:
That seems self contradictory. “Sky blue” as a shade, most familiar from crayons, but also common in articles for baby boys, is a light pastel blue, having no relationship to a deep blue or purple. Cerulean has the same flaw.
I do not know how this confusion arises, but “sky blue” as a shade is not dark or purple in any way.
But would they describe anything - another object, like a baby blanket, as being that form of blue?
I do also spot this subcriteria from that Wikipedia page:
Would that apply to, say, orange? 
One other tangent: it’s amusing that the word “monomorphemic” isn’t. (See the wiki page.)
I discussed Newton’s different references to the colours of the spectrum in some detail in this old post. With Cal, I certainly wouldn’t describe the matter as one of “numerology” and the passage people (possibly somewhat narrowly) focus on certainly is instead drawing an harmonic analogy.
Pythagorean harmonies were often historically tangled up with numerology, but I don’t see that in Newton’s thinking.
This is an interesting theory, but I think it has two drawbacks:
- The ordering should be far less orderly than this column indicates. For instance, an area where there were more sources of blue dyes than red, the name color blue should come earlier. Also, true red dye is one of the hardest dyes to come by (as I understand it, I’m neither a dyer or a fabric historian)
- Indigo has been in cultivation as a dye as early as 4 BC, and comes from quite a common plant.
As long as we’re doing theories, my theory is that color words show up in the importance to the culture: - Day and night
- Someone’s bleeding
3&4. Growing/not growing season - Good weather
- Whatever color the local favorite food is when ripe.
In the experiment the participants were asked to do more than one specific task. The results of three tasks were analyzed: 1.) where the projected spectrum begins and ends (the red edge and violet edge); 2.) what delineations the spectrum can be divided into, and 3.) where the “best exemplars” are of the seven “Roy G Biv” colors. So as I understand it, the “rainbow” is the spectrum and both its divisions and color names were examined.
The Munsell color system appears to be essentially the same as the Hue-Saturation-Luminance system. Every wavelength will of course have its own HSL value, the hue varying in sequence from red to violet while the luminance increases and then decreases. Presumably the saturation maintains a high value over the whole visible spectrum.
So languages may not happen to have a separate word for pink that doesn’t also describe a flower. Are you saying that English doesn’t have a word for the color “orange”?
No, because “orange” has been promoted to a standard color word, like “red” or “blue”, while “rose” hasn’t been, certainly not in English, and not that I know of in any other language.
It’s a subtle distinction, I know, but it’s a real one that we all make every day. When we say “That paint is orange,” we are not normally thinking that it’s the color of the fruit of Citrus × sinensis, we mean that it’s orange.
Well, I think we missed the promotion ceremony, because “rose” means pink in many languages. Pink isn’t a single color; it can be any shade or hue of pink. The word rose shares it’s name with a flower. It’s every bit as much a color as is brown.
Thai has a distinct word for “pink”, but it’s named after the pink varieties of the rose apple fruit, not a rose. A rose apple is a chompoo, and the color pink is si chompoo. (All colors are preceded by the word si, which means “color.”) A rose itself is a dawk koolap (dawk meaning “flower,” it precedes the names of all flowers) and is not used for a color. (“Red” is “si daeng.”)
I’ve always been struck by how many languages seem to use the same word for orange the fruit and orange the color. English, German, Thai (som). Never heard it happen for grapes. Is there a language that ever says “Get me a bunch of purples”?
Google Translate only proves that it can be used to mean “pink”.
Oh for Heaven’s sake, you can say that even of “black” and “white”. Totally irrelevant.
Really? We have all heard of the name of the rose, but what can the name of the word “rose” be? “Griselda?”
Sometimes Cecil reprints columns with updates. In this case, the original column had been based on a single study which has since been heavily criticized and, indeed, partiallly withdrawn by its authors. Seems like a bit of updating was in order.
I’m not an expert either, but I think that the two Welsh terms for red refer to two different kinds of red - rhudd is a deeper red, coch is a more scarlet kind, and there’s no general cover term for both. I may be wrong here, though.
It refers to being bright and shiny, but it’s a primary color. The word is “geal.” It’s used for The White House, for example; if you used the normal word for white, bán, that would imply that it wasn’t quite the brilliant white that it is, might be even an off-white. The two words for green are “glas” (obviously a cognate of the Welsh word for green+blue), which is for vegetation, and “uanine” which is for mineral or artificial green and neither is a cover term that includes the other. Someone who knows more Irish than I (which would be pretty much anyone who knows any at all) might want to offer a corrective.
As for azure and cerulean, they’re terms of fashion and commerce as much as anything. “Sky blue” is pretty meaningless, also, to judge from the wide varieties of blues that it indicates to different people, not surprisingly, given the huge variation in color in the sky.