Channels, Fall 2017

Channels • 2017 • Volume 2 • Number 1 Page 3 different terms such as intensity, purity, or chroma—relative brilliance or dullness in a color. Stances on Color Theory Color theory and how colors are perceived and linked with color terms have intrigued many researchers, theorists, and writers for years (Jameson 2005; Adams and Osgood 1973; Berlin and Kay 1991; Puhalla 2008; Dedrick 1998; Grieve 1991; Ozgen 2004). Research, debates, books, and articles have divided color perception into two stances: universalist and relativist. These two viewpoints contrast starkly about how color and semantics are perceived and developed. Universalist stance The universalist stance claims that in any culture or language, there are color terms or a basic model that is universally the same (Jameson 2005; Dedrick 1998; Berlin and Kay 1991; Ozgen 2004; Adams and Osgood 1973; Puhalla 2008). Dedrick (1998) writes that the universalist stance supposes there are constraints on color naming that are determined by biology, not culture. Jameson (2005) adds that the universalist stance “asserts that although color naming differences exist across cultures, they are largely explained by a model of pan-human shared color experience; and this determines the nonarbitrary basis by which all cultures categorize and name color sensations” (p. 102). Back in 1969, Berlin and Kay advanced a new theory on color perception and color terms (Ozgen 2004). They believed there were eleven “universal” color terms present in any culture, no matter the differences in language (Ozgen 2004). According to Berlin and Kay (1991), their research “strongly indicates that semantic universals do exist in the domain of color vocabulary” and “appear to be related to the historical development of all languages in a way that can properly be termed evolutionary” (p. 1). They proposed the basic color terms evolved over time; any differences in the color terminologies were largely due to differences in the evolutionary stage (Ozgen 2004). There are some explanations for why universal color terms appear (Puhalla 2008; Adams and Osgood 1973). Social scientists believe perceived colors and their order and harmony may be related to a common evolutionary human trait that has continued for many centuries (Puhalla 2008). Adams and Osgood (1973) propose three explanations for why there may be universal color terms: physiological, environmental, and cultural. Similar color terms may arise from the physiology of vision and wavelengths of light, or they may originate from similar environmental features like blue skies and green plants, which are viewed positively (Adams and Osgood 1973). The cultural aspect is explained through common cultural beliefs, which come from ancient origins or recent cultural influences (Adams and Osgood 1973). Relativist stance In comparison, the relativist stance reasons that color terms are determined by cultural and linguistic factors (Jameson 2005; Dedrick 1998; Grieve 1991; Ozgen 2004). Jameson (2005) explains in detail, saying “certain social and linguistic factors varying across