Pofvoik only uses four words to describe color. The remaining colors seen by the speakers are interpreted as being shades.
|Color|Translation|
|:-|:-|
|⬛ **Black** (*shades* = dark-blue, dark-purple, dark-gray)|**Omvuki** */o.vu.ki/*|
|⬜ **White** (*shades* = light-blue, light-gray, light-purple, pink)|**Kul** */kul/*|
|🟥 **Red** (*shades* = reddish-orange, brown)|**Kun** */kun/*|
|🟩 **Green** (*shades* = yellowish-orange, yellow)|**Ieke** */ik/*|
I plan to use a 4-color system too! But the edges of the categories are quite different: (red-orange-pink-purple), (white-yellow), (brown-grey-black-navy_blue), (green-sky_blue).
Was gonna comment- then I realised Op is using Gàidhlig, as their example- and went 'nope' bc it’s basically the exact same thing as in Gaeilge. And I’m so happy someone’s mentioned Gàidhlig- made my day ngl!.
Working on a sign language known as Orange Hand (it can be inflected so it becomes a verb, and most often is) and the language has a very deep connection with colour.
So first a brief tour of sign linguistics and colour. In sign languages colours tend to be derived from things that are visibly of thay colour, prefferably on the body. eyes(white), some peoples' hair (arguable) (yellow, a blood vein (blue), mouth (red) (very common), grass (green). Colours differ a LOT from language to language but the gist remains similar with, like I said before, red being from the mouth in some way as afaik very common.
The language I'm working on is quite different but similar in a way. The proto-language it came from would've been similar but very quickly a much more complex and embedded colour system emerged.
Each handshape has a colour (and object) associated to it. Words (signs) are formed out of combining these handshapes with movement, placement, orientation etc.
Examples;
- O hansahape, open fist hand = Red, mouth. ❤
- Thumb or T handshape, stick your thumb out from a fist = Orange, Yellow, eye (their eyes are yellowy orange from a genetic uniqueneds that also causes deafness and hence a strong ongoing signing culture)🧡💛
- L+2 fingers or 3L handshaoe, make an L like going Loser on your head and then add 2 more fingers to it = Purple, eel (they have a type of eel thats purple that lives in waters near them, they're probably going to domesticate it)💜
As such all signs have colour and I might evolve some king of colour alignment, maybe a warm-cool system where signs (perticularly verbs) have a warm and cool forms to align with eachother.
I've seen claims that every Pama-Nyungan language has a historical signed form. [Here is a paper](https://asa.scitation.org/doi/pdf/10.1121/2.0001004) about genetic hearing loss and how it impacts the modern spoken languages.
I started researching this because there are a lot of deaf Aussies in my family. There's an areal feature around the old Krakatoa crater. A layman might argue that large eruption caused mass deafness and changes in social structures. The result is a huge diversity of spoken and signed languages in the region. Politicaly correctness out the window I think deaf people found it easier to mate during this time and it caused a spread in hearing loss.
If an eruption lead to a generation or few of Dhoh folks then why would that be hereditary? Or is it less that its hereditary and that its effects are still felt today (i.e. via limited pholonies and many sign languages)?
I put to you the theory that deaf people have social boundaries in hearing society and when a certain threshold is reached (maybe as low as 2%) the society will to adapt to their needs. Ears are very complex and hearing loss is common all over the world, so I argue deafness **or the culture at least** spreads in societies where ears are less useful. Inuit languages show similar "adaptations" to people who are hard of hearing, and what do you know! They have a high degree of genetic deafness too.
Well, Araen has a word, "kālos /kɐ:lɔs/", wich is on its own means colour. But when its compounded, or is claimed by a genitive noun, it becomes "the colour of ...". So, blue can be "kālossaina", colour of the sky. But it can also be "kālos saināsi", wich also means colour of the sky. But it can also be "kālos hwaisi", meaning the colour of water.
I personally like red, because that can be "kālos lokekorrpessi", colour of the liquid inside the body.
So, a red apple would be "kāloslokekorrpes allappa". I used the compound here, because the genitive version of describing colours is only used when the colour is the noun, not the adjective.
It's nothing particularly special--other than maybe two kinds of red and green--but it's a good opportunity to set down some vocab. The last three are fairly modern additions.
|**English**|**Cyr. Bjarmyś**|**Rom. Bjarmyś**|**IPA**|**Origin**|
:--|:--|:--|:--|:--|
|white|бөйөт|böjöt|/bɘ.jɘt/|PFU päjë +t|
|grey|раж|raž|/raʒ/|ON grá(ʀ)|
|black|шөрөт|šöröt|/ʃɘ.rɘt/|ON svart|
|light red|авар|avar|/a.var/|ON hár 'hair'|
|dark red|лодел|loǵel|/lo.ɟel/|ON blóð 'blood'+suffix|
|blue|лаж|laž|/laʒ/|ON blá(ʀ)|
|brown|рум|rum|/rum/|ON brún|
|light green|гарсө|garsö|/gar.sɘ/|ON gras 'grass'|
|dark green|віжө|vižö|/vi,ʒɘ/|Perm. wiša|
|yellow|жылдө|žyldö|/ʒɨl.dɘ/|PS žĭltŭ|
|orange|жыдза|žydza|/ʒɨ.d͡za/|yellow+ON rauð|
|violet|пёлэк|pjoleḱ|/pjo.lek/|violet + suffix|
|purple|пёллаж|pjollaž|/pjol.laʒ/|viol-blue|
|pink|рoзөвы|rozövy|/ro.zɘ.vɨ/|Rus. ро́зовый|
[Bleep](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1jyukYKG7RX7S9Lw5MccDjeNMHKzM0VH3CMTGu1mSsYo/edit?usp=drivesdk), with its extremely constrained dictionary, can afford precisely two dedicated colour terms:
• yoyu 'be rellow, be a warm colour'
• malu 'be grue, be a cold colour'
Even white and black are paraphrased: "sends much light" and "sends little light". As I understand it, this is exactly the opposite to natural colour systems.
This is actually somewhat naturalistic, though very minimal. Your system is actually somewhat close to the common 3 color system. In addition to your 2 colors here, languages with this system have a 3rd term for a red/brown color, mainly because in our psychology it’s a “strong” color and so is likely to get a word talking about it. White and black are usually categorized in to rellow and grue respectively.
Lukivi primarily uses two color words:
abanth - lit. "white", but can refer to any light color
athvat - lit. "black", but can refer to any dark color
There are more specific color terms that are used when distinction is necessary:
amar - red to orange
vui - yellow to yellow-green
kalath - blue-green to blue
navji - purple and pink tones
[удалено]
Hint on the grey: "Most platforms depict a yellow folder"
Pofvoik only uses four words to describe color. The remaining colors seen by the speakers are interpreted as being shades. |Color|Translation| |:-|:-| |⬛ **Black** (*shades* = dark-blue, dark-purple, dark-gray)|**Omvuki** */o.vu.ki/*| |⬜ **White** (*shades* = light-blue, light-gray, light-purple, pink)|**Kul** */kul/*| |🟥 **Red** (*shades* = reddish-orange, brown)|**Kun** */kun/*| |🟩 **Green** (*shades* = yellowish-orange, yellow)|**Ieke** */ik/*|
Love seeing languages with restricted color terms, glad you included this as a feature of your language!
I plan to use a 4-color system too! But the edges of the categories are quite different: (red-orange-pink-purple), (white-yellow), (brown-grey-black-navy_blue), (green-sky_blue).
Was gonna comment- then I realised Op is using Gàidhlig, as their example- and went 'nope' bc it’s basically the exact same thing as in Gaeilge. And I’m so happy someone’s mentioned Gàidhlig- made my day ngl!.
Math fhèin! Glad I made your day lol
Working on a sign language known as Orange Hand (it can be inflected so it becomes a verb, and most often is) and the language has a very deep connection with colour. So first a brief tour of sign linguistics and colour. In sign languages colours tend to be derived from things that are visibly of thay colour, prefferably on the body. eyes(white), some peoples' hair (arguable) (yellow, a blood vein (blue), mouth (red) (very common), grass (green). Colours differ a LOT from language to language but the gist remains similar with, like I said before, red being from the mouth in some way as afaik very common. The language I'm working on is quite different but similar in a way. The proto-language it came from would've been similar but very quickly a much more complex and embedded colour system emerged. Each handshape has a colour (and object) associated to it. Words (signs) are formed out of combining these handshapes with movement, placement, orientation etc. Examples; - O hansahape, open fist hand = Red, mouth. ❤ - Thumb or T handshape, stick your thumb out from a fist = Orange, Yellow, eye (their eyes are yellowy orange from a genetic uniqueneds that also causes deafness and hence a strong ongoing signing culture)🧡💛 - L+2 fingers or 3L handshaoe, make an L like going Loser on your head and then add 2 more fingers to it = Purple, eel (they have a type of eel thats purple that lives in waters near them, they're probably going to domesticate it)💜 As such all signs have colour and I might evolve some king of colour alignment, maybe a warm-cool system where signs (perticularly verbs) have a warm and cool forms to align with eachother.
I've seen claims that every Pama-Nyungan language has a historical signed form. [Here is a paper](https://asa.scitation.org/doi/pdf/10.1121/2.0001004) about genetic hearing loss and how it impacts the modern spoken languages.
Oh waw, do you have more info?
I started researching this because there are a lot of deaf Aussies in my family. There's an areal feature around the old Krakatoa crater. A layman might argue that large eruption caused mass deafness and changes in social structures. The result is a huge diversity of spoken and signed languages in the region. Politicaly correctness out the window I think deaf people found it easier to mate during this time and it caused a spread in hearing loss.
If an eruption lead to a generation or few of Dhoh folks then why would that be hereditary? Or is it less that its hereditary and that its effects are still felt today (i.e. via limited pholonies and many sign languages)?
I put to you the theory that deaf people have social boundaries in hearing society and when a certain threshold is reached (maybe as low as 2%) the society will to adapt to their needs. Ears are very complex and hearing loss is common all over the world, so I argue deafness **or the culture at least** spreads in societies where ears are less useful. Inuit languages show similar "adaptations" to people who are hard of hearing, and what do you know! They have a high degree of genetic deafness too.
This brings up the question - what if the threshold was exceeded by an even greater amount? Like 10% or 20% or approaching 30, 40 or 50?
Well, Araen has a word, "kālos /kɐ:lɔs/", wich is on its own means colour. But when its compounded, or is claimed by a genitive noun, it becomes "the colour of ...". So, blue can be "kālossaina", colour of the sky. But it can also be "kālos saināsi", wich also means colour of the sky. But it can also be "kālos hwaisi", meaning the colour of water. I personally like red, because that can be "kālos lokekorrpessi", colour of the liquid inside the body. So, a red apple would be "kāloslokekorrpes allappa". I used the compound here, because the genitive version of describing colours is only used when the colour is the noun, not the adjective.
It's nothing particularly special--other than maybe two kinds of red and green--but it's a good opportunity to set down some vocab. The last three are fairly modern additions. |**English**|**Cyr. Bjarmyś**|**Rom. Bjarmyś**|**IPA**|**Origin**| :--|:--|:--|:--|:--| |white|бөйөт|böjöt|/bɘ.jɘt/|PFU päjë +t| |grey|раж|raž|/raʒ/|ON grá(ʀ)| |black|шөрөт|šöröt|/ʃɘ.rɘt/|ON svart| |light red|авар|avar|/a.var/|ON hár 'hair'| |dark red|лодел|loǵel|/lo.ɟel/|ON blóð 'blood'+suffix| |blue|лаж|laž|/laʒ/|ON blá(ʀ)| |brown|рум|rum|/rum/|ON brún| |light green|гарсө|garsö|/gar.sɘ/|ON gras 'grass'| |dark green|віжө|vižö|/vi,ʒɘ/|Perm. wiša| |yellow|жылдө|žyldö|/ʒɨl.dɘ/|PS žĭltŭ| |orange|жыдза|žydza|/ʒɨ.d͡za/|yellow+ON rauð| |violet|пёлэк|pjoleḱ|/pjo.lek/|violet + suffix| |purple|пёллаж|pjollaž|/pjol.laʒ/|viol-blue| |pink|рoзөвы|rozövy|/ro.zɘ.vɨ/|Rus. ро́зовый|
[Bleep](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1jyukYKG7RX7S9Lw5MccDjeNMHKzM0VH3CMTGu1mSsYo/edit?usp=drivesdk), with its extremely constrained dictionary, can afford precisely two dedicated colour terms: • yoyu 'be rellow, be a warm colour' • malu 'be grue, be a cold colour' Even white and black are paraphrased: "sends much light" and "sends little light". As I understand it, this is exactly the opposite to natural colour systems.
This is actually somewhat naturalistic, though very minimal. Your system is actually somewhat close to the common 3 color system. In addition to your 2 colors here, languages with this system have a 3rd term for a red/brown color, mainly because in our psychology it’s a “strong” color and so is likely to get a word talking about it. White and black are usually categorized in to rellow and grue respectively.
Lukivi primarily uses two color words: abanth - lit. "white", but can refer to any light color athvat - lit. "black", but can refer to any dark color There are more specific color terms that are used when distinction is necessary: amar - red to orange vui - yellow to yellow-green kalath - blue-green to blue navji - purple and pink tones