Radwa Ayman
Semantics 5: Color Terms
Introduction:
Color is a fundamental part of how we experience and describe the world, but different
languages categorize colors in unique ways. This paper sheds light on the universal patterns in
color terms across languages, focusing on the theory of Berlin and Kay. Their research suggests
that, despite cultural differences, there are shared principles in how languages name colors. This
paper examines their theory, the criteria for "basic color terms," and the ongoing debates
surrounding their findings.
5.1 Semantic Universals:
One of the recurring questions in linguistics is: How far can we apply the same semantic
analysis to all natural languages? Chomsky draws a clear distinction between formal
universals (general rules of language structure, e.g., all lexical definitions can be broken into
components) and substantive universals (specific elements all languages share, like the
animate/inanimate distinction). While formal universals are widely accepted, substantive
universals spark debate. Another distinction, within substantive universals, is between strong
and weak interpretations of what universals mean. The strong version claims that if (x) is a
universal component, all languages have it. But this version isn’t accurate in practice; linguists
discovered that the same semantic categories operate in different languages (e.g., categories of
meaning are language-neutral and can function across languages). A weaker version proposes
a universal set of semantic features, where each language possesses a subset.
5.2 Color terms in Semantics: Basic Color Terms (BCTs)
The reason for identifying different kinds of ‘semantic universals’ stems from the scarcity of
detailed resources on the comparison of conceptual systems across languages. One of the most
interesting studies on the relationship between language conceptual systems and semantics
focuses on ‘color terms.’ In this field, Berlin and Kay’s study Basic Color Terms compared
nearly a hundred languages. They investigated how many color terms these languages possess
and the range of colors each term refers to. Such an investigation is only possible when
restricted to what Berlin and Kay called Basic Color Terms (BCTs, for short). English, for
example, has hundreds of lexicalized color terms (words for lipstick shades, eye shadows,
fashion accessories, cars, etc.), but only a few qualify as basic.
There are five criteria for basicness in color terms: First, BCTs aren’t subordinate to other
color terms, which excludes terms like olive (a shade of green) and chocolate (a shade of
brown). Second, BCTs are simple words, not compounds or derivations (like greenish, dark
green, or blue-green). Third, BCTs aren’t restricted to a narrow class of objects (e.g., blond for
hair). Fourth, BCTs are psychologically salient; they tend to occur first in elicited lists of color
terms. Fifth, their use is stable across informants and occasions, and they’re recognized by all
native speakers. Berlin and Kay also ruled out loanwords (such as aubergine) and object-
derived color terms (like gold or silver). Orange originally belonged to this excluded class but
qualifies as a genuine BCT because it now functions as a primary color term equal to red and
yellow, rather than being subordinate to either.
5.3 Color terms in Semantics: The hypothesis of Berlin and Kay
Berlin and Kay’s hypothesis was remarkable because it proposed the universality of color
categorization. Previously, researchers had easily demonstrated that color term systems vary
widely across languages in how they divide the color spectrum. However, Berlin and Kay
boldly hypothesized that there exists a universal set of eleven color categories, with each
language selecting a subset from this collection. To test this, they conducted two tests with
participants: First, they documented the basic color terms (BCTs) in participants’ native
languages. Second, they presented informants with a chart of 329 color chips - including 9
chips for black, white, and various shades of gray, plus 320 additional chips arranged in an
8×40 grid. This grid ranged horizontally from red through orange, yellow, green, blue, and
purple back to red, and vertically from near-white to near-black. For each BCT, participants
completed two tasks: (a) identifying the focal color chip (the best example of that color term),
and (b) marking the outer boundaries of where that color term could be applied.
The results revealed three key findings. First, while speakers of the same language
consistently identified the same focal colors (the prototypical examples of each color term),
they showed variation in where they drew the boundaries between colors. Second, the study
demonstrated that languages differ significantly in their number of basic color terms (BCTs),
ranging from just two to the full set of eleven. Importantly, the focal colors themselves were not
randomly distributed across the color spectrum, but instead clustered around eleven specific
reference points that appear to be universal.
the symbol (<) represents ‘conditional universality’, and is explained as follows: if [x] and [y]
are two color categories, [x] < [y] means that if a language contains [y], it must also contain [x].
Third, languages with the same number of BCTs have basic color terms with the same focal
colors, and if a language has n+1 BCTs, it has BCTs with all those focal colors that exist in
languages with n BCTs, plus an additional BCT with a new focal color. This means the 8 types
mentioned below form a sequence where a BCT for a new focal color is added step by step; at
the final stage, there are eleven BCTs that correspond to the eleven focal colors.
The first focal colors in this sequence are white and black (type 1); the third focal color is red
(type 2). Red is followed by green and yellow in either order (types 3 & 4), then blue (type 5),
then brown (type 6). For the remaining four focal colors, grey, pink, purple, and orange, there is
no fixed order. Crucially, this developmental sequence means no language will have, for
example, a BCT for brown without also having BCTs for blue and green.
5.4 Range of color terms
If a language has just three BCTs focused on focal white, black, and red, the red term doesn't
have the same narrow meaning as the red term in a language with eleven BCTs like English.
The fewer BCTs a language has, the broader the range of colors each term covers. For example,
the red term in a language with five BCTs will include reddish parts of orange, brown, pink, and
purple (since there are no more specific terms for these hues). Lighter orange and yellowish
brown will fall under the yellow term, while blue and bluish purple will be covered by either the
green term or the black term (if the colors are very dark). This shows how the range of colors
covered by a BCT depends on both the total number of BCTs in the language and which focal
colors are present. As a result, even the same term - like "black" in a Type 1 system - doesn't
mean exactly the same thing as in languages with more complex systems.
From the distribution of BCT systems, Berlin and Kay drew the conclusion that the possible
systems form evolutionary stages. The two BCTs of Stage 1 systems, WHITE/2 and BLACK/2,
are terms for light/warm colors (white, yellow, red) and dark/cool colors (black, blue, green),
respectively. In the transition to Stage II, WHITE/2 splits into WHITE/3 for light colors (white)
and RED/3 for warm colors (red, yellow), while BLACK/3 continues to denote dark/cool
colors. When we proceed to Stage III, in one variant yellow splits from RED/3 to form a
category of its own, resulting in a system with WHITE/4 for light (white), RED/4 for red,
YELLOW/4 for yellow, and BLACK/4 still covering all dark/cool colors. Alternatively, green
and blue together split from BLACK/3, forming a new color category often called 'grue' that
focuses on either focal green or focal blue (but not on some blue-green midway between focal
blue and focal green). In later stages (e.g., stage V) BCTs split further; for example, grue into
blue and green. The higher BCTs with foci on brown, grey, orange, pink and purple aren't the
result of splitting but of establishing terms for hues that lie between the foci of the six terms of
Stage V: grey between white and black, pink between white and red, orange between yellow and
red, purple between red and blue, and brown between yellow and black.
5.5 Controversy over Berlin and Kay’s theory
There has been much controversy over the color theory, and new evidence has been
introduced both in its favor and against it. There is also uncertainty over details of the theory.
Berlin and Kay noted, for example, that two languages were exceptional in that they appeared to
have twelve basic color terms (Russian has two basic terms in the 'blue' area and Hungarian in
the 'red' area). Also, it has been argued that larger categories of early stages may have more than
one focus (e.g., white, yellow, and red for WHITE/2 or green and blue for GREEN/4).
Additionally, it turned out that there are certain types that don't fit into the sequential chain; for
example, languages of Stage III with a BCT for grue but yellow still grouped with white, while
in Stage II systems yellow is already separated from white. What's more, the order of
appearance of the 'higher' colors is less strict: a BCT for brown may appear before a term for
blue. That being said, these are minor modifications, and the main tendencies of the theory have
been confirmed.
- The denotations of BCTs are best described in terms of focal colors.
- The range of colors that a given BCT denotes depends on the total number of BCTs in the
language and on the focal colors they have.
- There is a limited set of eleven (or twelve) focal colors. The best representatives of BCTs
are among these focal colors.
- The possible types of systems form a sequence: starting with a contrast between
WHITE/WARM and BLACK/COOL, in which the higher systems are extensions of lower
systems.
Conclusion:
languages structure something as universal as color. While their hypothesis, that all languages
draw from a limited set of basic color categories, has faced some challenges, the core idea
remains influential. The study of color terms not only reveals linguistic patterns but also raises
deeper questions about how language shapes perception. Though debates continue, this research
highlights the balance between cultural diversity and shared human cognition in how we name
the world around us.
References:
Leech, G. N. (1974). Semantics: The study of meaning. Penguin Books.
Löbner, S. (2013). Understanding semantics (2nd ed.). Routledge.
