Colour Terms

^So, basically we're back at there are no blue foodstuffs! - ?

(Except for Blue Curaçao and Romulan ale -one of which is artificial and the other imaginary )

 

The corn chips and mashed potatoes that come from them look blue (sometimes), just not the corn and potatoes themselves.

 

Earlier in the thread I said I don't have many terms for orange but I have realised that I don't have many for yellow either (yellow, lemon, gold and maybe very occasionally saffron). I would add amber to terms I use for orange.

 

This is quite true. Maroon is NOT purple.

 

^But it can easily look brown! -as it does to mee in this chart.

 

This lack of blue food has me fascinated.

 

There is a natural reason for it, I think


Most plant life contains a combination ofchlorophyll, keratins and anthocyanins

Chlorophyll makes things appear green
Keratins make things look red, yellow and orange
Anthcyanins makes things look]red, purple, yellow, and blue.

However for a part of a plant to look blue would mean that that part would not be able to have chlorophyll or keratins in it (or these in very low amounts) and therefore wouldn't be very high in nutrients which is fine for flowers which a short-termed and only aim is to attract pollinators.

I think fruit/berries would need more nutrients than flowers would.

Maybe someone witha better understanding of plant biology could tell me if I am on the right track here.

 

Also, that perhaps covers plants, but what about animal meat, fungus, and other edible nutrients?

 

There is blue fungi, such as this one here, but I am not sure if any of them are edible.

There are some fish with blue meat such as the blue ling.

 

Awesomeness.

 

Sloe (blackthorn?) is blue!

And if I could remember what fish it was I'd go search for it; you steam it like any other fish, but just before you serve it you pour some (hot) vinegar over it and the skin turns bright blue.

 

There is no such thing as pink . . . only light red.

 

No, Superman likes pink very much, Lois.

 

I will use some of the more common, more specific ones; teal, maroon, lime, tangerine, etc.

But most of the time I'll just say "bluey-green" or "pinkish-orange". Things like that.

 

I once argued (good-natured) with a friend as we walked over the Williamsburg Bridge about whether the bridge was pink, as he claimed, or faded red, as I claimed.

 

The strawberry leopard-thread reminded me that I actually know (and on occasion use) a few more colour-names than I have admitted to in an earlier post:

Tawny, Champagne, Cognac, Burgundy...





(I think of them as brown, yellow and red though.)

 

I'm male, and an artist.
I think a lot of these are useful descriptions, but some are just fanciful vanity names.
Orchid? Like orchids only come in one color! same deal with carnation.
Flora, meaning plants, is also pretty useless as a description.
It's like Ralph Lauren designer paint, where they all have fancy-pants names to make you feel better about paying double for light brown paint. -like Rhino Tusk, Roaring Mountain, Garden Spigot or Golden Retriever.
(those are real by the way)

 

True, and honestly, if I'm picturing an orchid, the first color to pop in my head is white.

 

The use of orchid as a name for a shade of bright purple is around 100 years old snd probably it was named for the most popular orchid back then.

I suppose there is a logocal reason behind most of the names in that chart.

 

I'm colourblind (most likely deuteranomalous) so I rarely use colour in conversation. It's just not a currency for me: I don't organise things by colour, I find alternate ways to interpret colour-arranged systems, I don't notice eye colour...

Having said that, I like using fancy names for colours 'cause it sounds nice.