En réponse à Nik Taylor <[log in to unmask]>:

> Christophe Grandsire wrote:
> > Well, the strangeness of English is getting worse! What's the point of
> calling
> > it "indigo" if it's a kind of blue?
> The same as using terms like "scarlet" or "sky blue" or "crimson" etc.

But scarlet and crimson are specific terms which refer first to a thing and
then to its colour. And "sky blue" is a compound, comparable to "apple green".
Indigo is something else. At least to me.

> > I would have a hard time describing pink without a word for it
> "Light red", that's how I sometimes think of it.  :-)

But for me light red is light red, not pink :)) . The two don't look alike at
all. Also, you can lighten and darken pink too, and dark pink absolutely
doesn't look like red, or what I would call red (it is more browny, though not
really brown).

> In fact, sometimes I think that light blue and dark blue would be more
> justified being split up into two basic colors than red and pink.

I don't think so. You can go continuously from dark blue to light blue simply
by lightening it up. You cannot do that between red and pink. My perception of
colours seems to be related to those considerations. That's maybe why I tend to
recognise more colours than you do :)) .

> I don't think so.  Well, I tend to see something that's a bit of a
> purplish-blue, so maybe it's the blue that's lacking.  :-)

I'm very good at differentiating different colours in that end of the spectrum.
But then again, it's where my favourite colours are found :)) . And my living-
room is painted with different shades of purple, so I have an example
everyday :)) .

Natlangy note :)) : Purple and violet are different colours in English? That's
strange. I was taught that the equivalent of French "violet" was purple. But if
you also have violet, what is then the correspondent in French? I'm confused,
because maybe I've been using the term purple all along when I should have said


Take your life as a movie: do not let anybody else play the leading role.