It seems that adding -er to some colors works, such as redder, greener, browner, whiter, blacker, pinker. But it doesn’t seem to work for bluer, yellower, purpler, oranger, etc. Are there any rules concerning this?
I dunno. Bluer and yellower work for me. I might say “more purple” (or I might not–these words don’t pop up in conversation often, since I don’t write laundry soap commercials).
I don’t think there is any specific rule regarding the comparative of a color word. It is mostly a matter of how it satisfies or offends your ear when one is spoken.
One syllable - always use -er and -est
Three or more syllables - always use more or most
Two syllables - I believe you usually use more or most, but some very common words may use the -er/-est endings.
Therefore bluer is correct, it looks weird but say “The sky is bluer today than yesterday” then use the more construction.
Purple and orange aren’t common words (unless you’re a fashion critic) so use the more/most construction.
But on a more metasemantic level, does the word “greener” really mean anything? Colors are whatever color they are. Is an apple redder than a tomato or a tomato redder than an apple? Today’s sky might be a darker shade of blue than yesterday’s or a lighter shade or just a different shade. But if today’s is blue and yesterday’s was blue, how do you objectively say one was bluer?
I would say so, not in terms of saturation, but in terms of hue. For instance yellow-green is not as green as green, so the intensifier is appropriate. It may also be functional, since in this case being greener indicates a healthier, more desirable condition.
I think “greener” or “bluer” make sense as each reflects a shift in the wavelength of the light in the visible spectrum.
I’m bluer than blue
Sadder than sad
You’re the only light
This empty room has ever had
Life without you is gonna be
Bluer than blue
Nothing to add, I just started singing this as soon as I saw the thread title.
The reason grass is always greener is that you only see the new tips on the other side of the fence. The grass under your feet shows all the old growth, dead blades and dirt.
Then why do some people have problems with fun/funner/funnest?
Curiouser and curiouser…
I believe the general rule here is to use -er/-est when the adjective ends in -y; otherwise use more/most. I’m sure there’s exceptions to this, but I can’t think of any off-hand.
When people in the paint business are talking about the color of a pigment or a batch of paint, they’ll always say something is “greener” or “redder” than it should be. Or they might say, “That’s the greenest yellow I’ve ever seen.” It’s never sounded wrong to me.
But colors don’t have absolutes; they are part of a continuous spectrum. You and I could look at two different shades of green and each of us could argue that we were seeing the greenest possible green. I’d argue that your choice was yellower than “true” green and you’d say mine was bluer.
dtilque wrote:
Then why do some people have problems with fun/funner/funnest?
I believe the general rule here is to use -er/-est when the adjective ends in -y; otherwise use more/most. I’m sure there’s exceptions to this, but I can’t think of any off-hand.
The general rule is to use -er and -est with one syllable words. “Fun” is an exception; no rule in the English language is absolute.
With regard to -er and -est as used with the word blue, Toni Morrison’s first novel was The Bluest Eye. It would be difficult to argue with the usage of a Nobel laureate.
‘Green’ comes from Old English ‘growan’: to grow. Thus, greener means it’s growing more.
If you give people a color chart and ask them to find pure red, everyone will point to about the same spot. Not only that, but French speakers will point to the same area if asked to find pure rouge and the same for speakers of other languages when asked to find pure red-equivalent in their languages. And the same for other basic colors: blue, green, yellow, orange, brown, purple, etc. At least for those languages that have equivalent terms (not all do).
Reference: Basic Color Terms by Berlin and Kay.
dtilque:
I agree with you in generality, but not completely. And it is a result of the question that sometimes keeps me awake at night.
Can you ever really be sure that the color you are seeing and calling red is the same color I am seeing and calling red? Perhaps what you call red, I see as green but have been trained to call red. Do you know what I mean?
Anyway, this is an interesting link that I thought was somewhat applicable, although a bit of a hijack, to this thread.
http://www.redherring.com/index.asp?layout=story&channel=70000007&doc_id=1910013991 It is about women who may possibly be tetrachromatic.
Booting up an old thread…
I attend the Evergren College in Washington. [Mentioned in one of the Straight Dope books during a conversation about geoducks] and Evergreen grads are called Greeners.
This has been today’s [thud] Useless Fact.