Journal of Modern Education Review, ISSN 2155-7993, USA May 2018, Volume 8, No. 5, pp. 348–362 Doi: 10.15341/jmer(2155-7993)/05.08.2018/003 © Academic Star Publishing Company, 2018 http://www.academicstar.us The Ancient Greek Lexicon of Colours between Universalism and Relativism Emanuele Miranda (University of Perugia, Italy) Abstract: We aim to investigate characteristics and complexities of ancient Greek chromatic lexicon in the wake of the discussion triggered by the well-known theory formulated by B. Berlin and P. Kay in 1969 (eleven universal basic colour terms appear according to an evolutionist-implicational sequence articulated in 7 stages), thus further understanding, from a neo-relativistic perspective, specific ways of conceptualizing and verbalizing colour in Greek culture. This investigation is carried out through the analysis of a corpus particularly representative: Aristophanes’ comedies. For various terms and epithets new and original explanations and translations are presented with respect to tradition, stressing the importance of socio-cultural factors (e.g., technology of production of purple), and also using modern anthropological comparisons (e.g., Hanunóo system from the Philippines) or concepts of Cognitive Linguistics, such as “prototype”. We will see how this type of approach allows to solve some secular “aporias” related to the subject, and how the universalist hypothesis of the two American scholars as well as the notion of basic color term, neglecting important connotative, diachronic and cultural aspects, are inadequate to describe, understand and interpret ancient Greek chromonymy, both for the richness and structural complexity of the latter and for its peculiar diachronic development. Key words: Ancient Greek, colour term, linguistic relativity, prototype, purple 1. Introduction and Theoretical Framework of Reference The use of colour terms in ancient Greek seems unusual, off-putting, difficult to understand. In epic poetry the green of the vegetation is never noticed, sea and sky are described through numerous adjectives none of which suggests a shade of blue, and their attributes rather reveal a primary attention towards their movement and shimmer. There are many images that cannot be traced back to our chromatic schemes except for the attempt to apply twisted and pseudo-scientific solutions. When the translation of terms such as oi|nwy (“wine-like”) or clwrov" is attempted, any transposition into a modern language appears insufficient. The interpretations given to epithets such as kuanocaivth" and glaukw'pi", or to expressions like ijodnefhv" (“violet” sheep), also appear to be unsure and naïve. The use of xanqov", wjcrov" Emanuele Miranda, Ph.D. in Romance Philology and General Linguistics at University of Perugia, Teacher of Humanities at the Secondary School in Perugia; research areas/interests: classical languages and literature especially Latin and Ancient Greek, etymology, historical linguistics, cognitive linguistics, anthropological linguistics, colour semantics, education. E-mail: [email protected]. 348 The Ancient Greek Lexicon of Colours between Universalism and Relativism and clwrov" does not correspond to the strict differentiation that we perceive between yellow, ochre and green. The same tint may be defined by different terms according to brightness and saturation, just like several words may refer to the same colour or object; inversely, the same word may indicate different tints. Polysemy, overlaps (yellow not strictly defined with respect to red and blue, red with respect to yellow and blue: xanqov" covers the most diversified shades of yellow, porfuvreo" flutters between red and blue, wjcrov" between greenish and yellowish nuance, purrov" is translated in various forms “reddish/brown/orange/yellow”), ambivalences, metaphorical uses, metonymy, shades that are favourable to the insertion of affective-symbolic data increase difficulties; etymology does not help much as the chromatic value is often secondary or absent at origin, therefore making the context the determinant factor. The documentation shows a lack of abstract terms and little attention for the qualitative dimension of colour to the benefit of quantitative aspects such as brightness, lightness and saturation: in many adjectives the chromatic value is nothing but the later development of the original brightness factor. In Homer we find frequent references to white and black, red and yellow increase thereafter, while short wavelengths (green/blue) are perceived as hues only later and more slowly. The question is a part of the language/culture relationship, not in the sense of linguistic determinism but of a neo-relativism that considers colour as a product of language under the influence of culture. We inquire about the ancient Greek lexicon of colours in the wake of the universalism/relativism debate triggered by the hypothesis formulated by Berlin and Kay (B.-K.) in 1969, underlining the limits of the universalistic paradigm. 2. The Indo-European Vocabulary of Colours There is no common term for the notion of “colour”. In fact, in Indo-European languages this meaning is formed as a determination of larger semantic values going back to forms that originally designated external surfaces, covering, skin (Sanskrit vara: “colour” and “caste”), or splendour/beauty (Celtic and Slavic terms). Also the numerous and polysemic Greek words for “colour” first indicate skin tone, complexion; crw'ma has had multiple meanings: dyes, roots, dyeing essences, but also in music, in rhetoric, in games (the factions of the circus in Constantinople). In the Indo-European vocabulary of colours the notation of the intensity and variability of light prevails over the qualitative one, linked to hue and wavelength: the roots from which the chromonyms originate all initially have a clearly luministic value, the generic indication of the intensity receives its precise determination as a gradation of colour through an object in which that colour is a peculiar note. Numerous terms for “black” and “white” derive from the same root *bhleg- “shine, burn”. In fact, it not only produced the Eng. black but also blank, Fr. blanche and It. bianco. In order to explain the two diverging meanings of “light” and “dark” we can start from the significance of “burnt”: the burnt effect (dark) and the glow of the flame (light), which causes the burnt, are aspects of a same phenomenon. The Greek ai[qwn also holds two apparently opposite meanings, “bright” and “dusky”: the ideas of movement and brightness act together, fused in a global intuition by means of referencing to the material “soot”. The root *ghel- “bright” refers to various chromonyms of the yellow-green type. The *bhle-/*bhle-was form, defining something light and then substantiating in the two meanings of “pale-blue” and “yellow”, leads to Germanic words for “blue”, passing from brightness to the colour of the sky, as well as to the Latin flāvus “blonde”. The meanings of blāo and flāvus differ greatly, but the connection is admissible in the hypothesis that the root *bhel- indicates an intense degree of brightness that could be achieved in light or dark tints. An original 349 The Ancient Greek Lexicon of Colours between Universalism and Relativism semantic luministic nucleus can also be found for brown; in fact, *brūna leads back to the root *bher- “bright” that materializes in different directions: various names derive from it, bear (“the brown”), beaver (Ger. Bibar “the very bright one”), therefore the Eng. brown and the It. bruno have the same origins as bright. We believe that in indicating a certain degree of intense brightness, and according to the reference to res, *bhel- e *bher- have specialized in certain languages towards the hue flāvus, in others towards blāo, in others towards brūn which could designate light shades (It. brunito and Eng. burnished puts together the notions of dusky and brilliant). Indo-European languages have given linguistic relevance to grey as well both for light and dark shades, using roots that indicate a certain degree of brightness; the perception of the precise amount of light varies from community to community and also in the same language a different suffix can lead to a distinctive element. To conclude, IE terms for “black-white-yellow-blue-grey-brown” derive from roots that indicate various degrees of brilliance, in relation to a larger or lesser dimension of saturation and not of hue. Moreover, almost all the chromonyms derive from only one root, *bhleg, the meaning of which is “glare, sparkle” but that could assume multiple qualities of colour. When the glare shines so much as to merge the colours, the result are terms that lead to white; if this were to be dimmed, *bhleg- becomes *bhle-was, origin of lexemes indicating blue; a yellowish light coming into play leads to variant *ghel-; if the brightness tends towards red *bher- generates chromonyms relating to brown; when the brightness diminishes *bhles- gives rise to terms indicating pallor, while the variant *gher- produces grey; if it revives so much as to dazzle and burn, the root designates dark or black shades. 3. New Methodological Approaches in A Neo-Relativistic Perspective 3.1 Limits to Berlin & Kay’s Hierarchy After B.-K.’s first monograph (11 universal basic chromonyms appear according to an evolutionist-implicational sequence articulated in 7 stages), new versions of the model were developed, among which the fuzzy set theory (the sequence is reinterpreted as a progressive differentiation