It is striking that English color words come from many sources.Some of the more exotic ones, like vermilion and chartreuse, were borrowed from French, and are named after the color of a particular item (a type of mercury and a liquor, respectively).But even our words black and white didnt originate as color terms. Black comes from a word meaning burnt, and white comes from a word meaning shining.Color words vary a lot across the world. Most languages have between two and 11 basic color words. English, for example, has the full set of eight basic colors: black, white, red, green, yellow, blue, pink, gray, brown, orange and purple. In a 1999 survey by linguists Paul Kay and Luisa Maffi, languages were roughly equally distributed between the basic color categories that they tracked.In languages with fewer terms than thissuch as the Alaskan language Yup'ik with its five termsthe range of a word expands. For example, for languages without a separate word for orange, hues that wed call orange in English might be named by the same color that English speakers would call red or yellow. We can think of these terms as a system that together cover the visible spectrum, but where individual terms are centered on various parts of that spectrum.Does that mean that speakers of languages with fewer words for colors see less color' No, just as English speakers can see the difference between the blue of the sky and the blue of an M&M. Moreover, if language words limited our perception of color, words wouldnt be able to change; speakers would not be able to add new distinctions.My colleague Hannah Haynie and I were interested in how color terms might change over time, and in particular, in how color terms might change as a system. That is, do the words change independently, or does change in one word trigger a change in others' In our research, recently published in the journal PNAS, we used a computer modeling technique more common in biology than linguistics to investigate typical patterns and rates of color term change. Contrary to previous assumptions, what we found suggests that color words arent unique in how they evolve in language.Questioning common conceptions on colorsPrevious work (such as by anthropological linguists Brent Berlin and Paul Kay) has suggested that the order in which new color terms are added to a language is largely fixed. Speakers begin with two termsone covering black and dark hues, the other covering white and light hues. There are plenty of languages with only two color terms, but in all cases, one of the color terms is centered on black and the other on white.When a language has three terms, the third is one is almost always centered on hues that English speakers would call red. There are no languages with three color terms where the named colors are centered on black, white and light green, for example. If a language has four color terms, they will be black, white, red and either yellow or green. In the next stage, both yellow and green are present, while the next color terms to be added are blue and brown (in that order). Cognitive scientists and linguists such as Terry Regier have argued that these particular parts of the color spectrum are most noticeable for people.Berlin and Kay also hypothesized that language speakers dont lose color terms. For example, once a language has a distinction between red-like hues (such as blood) and yellow-like ones (such as bananas), they wouldnt collapse the distinction and go back to calling them all by the same color name again.This would make color words quite different from other areas of language change, where words come and go. For example, words can change their meaning when they are used metaphorically, but over time the metaphoric meaning becomes basic. They can broaden or narrow their meanings; for example, English starve used to mean die (generally), not die of hunger, as it primarily means now. Starve has also acquired metaphorical meanings.That theres something unique about the stability of color concepts is an assumption we wanted to investigate. We were also interested in patterns of color naming and where color terms come from. And we wanted to look at the rates of changethat is, if color terms are added, do speakers tend to add lots of them' Or are the additions more independent, with color terms added one at a time'Modeling how a language tree grewWe tested these ideas using color words in Australian Aboriginal languages. We worked with Australian languages (rather than European or other languages) for several reasons. Color demarcations vary in Indo-European, but the number of colors in each language is pretty similar; the ranges differ but the number of colors dont vary very much. Russian has two terms that cover the hues that English speakers call blue, but Indo-European languages have many terms.In contrast, Australian languages are a lot more variable, ranging from systems like Darkinyungs, with just two terms (mining for black and barag for white), to languages like Kaytetye, where there are at least eight colors, or Bidyara with six. That variation gave us more points of data. Also, there are simply a lot of languages in Australia: Of the more than 400 spoken at the time of European settlement, we had color data for 189 languages of the Pama-Nyungan family, from the Chirila database of Australian languages.In order to answer these questions, we used techniques originally developed in biology. Phylogenetic methods use computers to study the remote past. In brief, we use probability theory, combined with a family tree of languages, to make a model of what the history of the color words might have been.First, we construct a tree that shows how languages are related to one another. The contemporary Pama-Nyungan languages are all descended from a single ancestor language. Over 6,000 years, Proto-Pama-Nyungan split into different dialects, and those dialects turned into different languages: about 300 of them at the time of the European settlement of Australia. Linguists usually show those splits on a family tree diagram.Then, we build a model for that tree of how different features (in this case, color terms) are gained or lost, and how quickly those features might change. This is a complicated problem; we estimate likely reconstructions, evaluate that model for how well it fits our hypotheses, tweak the model parameters a bit to produce a different set of results, score that model, and so on. We repeat this many times (millions of times, usually) and then take a random sample of our estimates. This method is due originally to evolutionary biologists Mark Pagel and Andrew Meade.Estimates that are very consistent (like reconstructing terms for black, white and red) are highly likely to be good reconstructions. Other forms were consistently reconstructed as absent (for instance, blue from many parts of the tree). A third set of forms were more variable, such as yellow and green in some parts of the tree; in that case, we have some evidence they were present, but its unclear.Our results supported some of the previous findings, but questioned others. In general, our findings backed up Berlin and Kays ideas about the sequential adding of terms, in the order they proposed. For the most part, our color data showed that Australian languages also show the patterns of color term naming that have been proposed elsewhere in the world; if there are three named colors, they will be black, white and red (not, for example, black, white and purple). But we show that it is most likely that Australian languages have lost color terms, as well as gained them. This contradicts 40 years of assumptions of how color terms changeand makes color words look a lot more like other words.We also looked at where the color words themselves came from. Some were old in the family, and seemed to go back as color terms. Others relate to the environment (like tyimpa for black in Yandruwandha, which is related to a word which means ashes in other languages) or to other color words (compare Yol'u miku for red, which also sometimes means simply colored). So Australian languages show similar sources of color terms to languages elsewhere in the world: color words change when people draw analogies with items in their environment.Our research shows the potential for using language change to study areas of science that have previously been more closely examined by fields such as psychology. Psychologists and psycholinguists have described how constraints from our vision systems lead to particular areas of the color spectrum being named. We show that these constraints apply to color loss as well as gain. Just as its a lot easier to see a chameleon when it moves, language change makes it possible to see how words are working.Claire Bowern, Associate Professor of Linguistics, Yale UniversityThis article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.Join the conversation about this storyNOW WATCH: It's surreal to watch this 2011 video of Obama and Seth Meyers taunting Trump about a presidential run
Click here to read full news..
