Lemma BLACK on the basis of (monolingual) dictionary definitions

Colours in lexicography

Is there anything trivial and at the same time impossible (or nearly impossible) to define solely in linguistic terms? An immediate answer that comes to most peoples’ mind is a negative one based on the fact that they have got dozens of professionally compiled dictionaries which abound in definitions of lemmas of different kinds. Add to it the existence of encyclopaedic dictionaries and encyclopaedias and you have perfect instantiations of reference books which can be consulted when need for clarifying/explaining any word[1] arises. Yet, many theoretical lexicographers pinpoint drawbacks of contemporary dictionaries which should seek immediate remedy. The definitions for instance, they say, do not aim at presenting a dictionary user with the “truth” about a word (Wierzbicka 1985, 1992), abound in circularity (e.g. Johnson 1755, Bejoint 1981, Sinclair 1993, for more radical views see Wierzbicka 1992/1993) and are almost entirely dependable on the publisher (e.g. Atkins 1992, Adamaska-Sałaciak 2006), to name the worst. Although a panoply of issues has been raised so far, regrettably few (meta)lexicographers kindly devoted their attention to the defining methods of colour words; to the best of my knowledge only Barratt and Kontra 1998 performed empirical tests with respect to Hungarian and English colour terms and their presentation in bilingual dictionaries.

[1] This is a conscious exaggeration since there is (and there will never be!) any dictionary possessing the entire vocabulary stock.

One might ask why is it that the combination of colour terminology and dictionaries that fell victim to this modest investigation. The answer is a pretty common sense one to a 2 in 1 lexicographer and semanticist (as professional dictionary compilers often seem to merge the skills of the two), both colour terms and dictionaries are deeply embedded in the culture associated with a language (for the former view see Berlin and Kay 1969, Tokarski 2004, for the latter Piotrowski 1994, 2001). Secondly, these two areas of the study of language have received a substantial amount of interest from professionals so as to equip researchers with the appropriate tools for investigating colour terminology via the means of dictionary definitions. And finally, following Wierzbicka’s (1985, 1987, 1992/1993, 1996) attitude towards the relationship between linguistics and lexicography the latter should be founded on the former. This short paper seeks to examine if this is the case.

The following paper will deal specifically with the lemma BLACK i.e. the basic colour term with accordance to the classic, Berlin and Kay (1969) classification. Five dictionaries will be used as a source of definitions, namely ISJP, STPS, MW, SOED and finally LDCE[1] (four dictionaries for native speakers, two of which are for Poles and another two for the English and one monolingual for learners of English).

Defining colours – a harmful drudge[2]

Several difficulties arise when a lexicographer attempts to define a colour term. Firstly, it seems that the medium of written language, in this case, is at best artificial. This is a consequence of the fact that people learn colour terms (their recognition and subsequently naming) ostensively, i.e. by indicating an exemplary object in the real world and uttering its colour. Saying that the medium of the dictionary is incapable of doing so is something of a truism as it seems quite commonsense that definitions can merely name objects which are typically characterised by a given colour or “embody” instantiations of colour prototypes (e.g. night for black or day for white (Wierzbicka 1996). However, it is immensely difficult to decide on a (prototypical) denotata which would epitomize a given colour. Secondly, some dictionaries employ extralinguistic knowledge which according to some mainstream lexicographers should never find its way into dictionary definitions. Thirdly, circularity is compounding the difficult task of extracting the meaning of colour terms or as Wierzbicka (1992/1993, 1996) puts it, the thing that people have in mind when using words from this particular semantic domain.

Black – colour of the night

BLACK is one of the two basic colours present in every language of the world[3] (Berlin and Kay 1969). Therefore it might seem that defining such a concept should not constitute special problems. Yet, from the semantic point of view, defining the meaning of the concept BLACK is far from being straightforward. This refers mostly to the choice of the denotatum (or denotata) which is used as an example of a thing most commonly associated with the colour name[4]. Theoretically, the lexicographer facing this problem has a panoply of possibilities at his/her disposal. They can rely on introspection (which happens quite often) thus presenting the dictionary user with his/her own subjective judgement, another possibility is to ask a representative group of informants for their opinion, the third alternative involves putting metalexicographic suggestions into use.

Introspection was the only method of writing dictionary definitions before the advent of citation files and ultimately using the achievements of corpus linguistics in dictionary compilation (Bańko 2001) (COBUILD 1987 is the precursor here). Despite the availability of excerpted citations lexicographers often resorted to their own knowledge while producing an entry, as a matter of fact many contemporary ones still do it, e.g. in Poland. The following OALDCE (1974) definition might serve as a manifestation of a lexicographer’s introspection (and/or creativity!):

BLACK 1. Without light or almost without light ; the colour of this printing-ink; opposite to white.

Referring to the colour of print seems a marvellous idea because it directly points to “the colour” and does not require the dictionary user to focus their attention on any other object which may not be within their visual field. Other definitions are more down-to-earth as they refer to things thought as the most commonly associated with BLACK, cf. INJP definition:

CZARNY 1. Coś co jest czarne ma kolor węgla.[5] [my emphasis]

STPS offers a somewhat richer choice of denotata:

CZARNY 1. Mający barwę najciemniejszą ze wszystkich, właściwą węglowi i sadzy[6] [my emphasis]

It should be noted that the two objects referred to constitute the prototypical, (most) characteristic denotata of this particular colour (e.g. Tokarski 2004, Wierzbicka 1996)[7], yet it is far from clear that the majority of Polish native speakers would agree on them. One of the least controversial methods of resolving this doubt is to put such questions to the empirical test. Such a test was conducted by myself in 2007 (unpublished presentation) in order to test Poles’ conception of the best denotata which ‘epitomised’ each of the first seven colours in the Berlin and Kay evolutionary hierarchy (1969). 46 high school and university students were asked to come up with as many concrete associations of colours presented to them on cardboard as possible. The data was collected and statistically analysed. As far as the colour in question is considered, ‘soil’ was the concrete object most commonly associated with it. There were just a few mentions of ‘coal’ and no ‘soot’ was recorded. This methodologically-shaky research was by no means to discredit the definitions presented above, it was rather to emphasise the difficult labour of lexicographers compiling the COLOUR entry.

Regrettably, metalexicography has little to offer here. However, this does not mean that no (semantic) theory is available to an insightful dictionary compiler, he/she can be referred to the brilliant discussions of Tokarski (2004), Wierzbicka (1992/1993, 1996) or Waszakowa (2000) regarding colour prototypes and their best exemplifications.

Drawing our attention to the OALDCE entry one more time it has to be emphasised that apart from creativity this definition poses some problems, namely it incorporates some elements of extralinguistic knowledge which according to some theoreticians should not constitute a part of dictionaries.

Knowledge of the world is considered an integral part of encyclopaedic definitions (e.g. Wierzbicka 1992/1993). Accordingly, some (meta)lexicographers claim that dictionary entries should be concerned solely with the naïve picture of the world as perceived by native speakers of a given language thus leaving specialist knowledge for encyclopaedias. It’s nevertheless true that drawing a clear demarcation line between linguistic and extralinguistic knowledge is an intellectually Herculean if not impossible task. Yet it seems that specialist knowledge must not constitute a prevalent part of the dictionary entry. Let us analyse MW definition for BLACK:

1. the achromatic color of least lightness characteristically perceived to belong to objects that neither reflect nor transmit light

Saying that this is more of an encyclopaedic explanation does not seem too controversial. However, such definition is not that surprising as American tradition of dictionary making abounds in entries stuffed with specialist knowledge.

Compare the SOED definition:

BLACK 1. Opposite to white; colourless from the absence or complete absorption of light. Also, so near this as to have no distinguishable colour, very dark.[x1]

The two English dictionary definitions stand in strong opposition to the Polish ones. The most conspicuous difference is their 'digestibility' which is due to the use of scientific knowledge. It is hardly possible to imagine the prototypical black having read such an explanation. The problem arises due to the lack of appropriate knowledge, in this case of physics, which is not a must for most people. Therefore, the view of simple definitions clothed in everyday language wins the dictionary user’s recognition as commonsense knowledge is at everybody’s disposal. How do pedagogical dictionaries cope with defining BLACK? Let us have a glance at the LDCE entry:

1 COLOUR having the darkest colour; like coal or night [my emphasis]

This definition as well as the one quoted from STPS seems the best for a twofold reason. Firstly, they contrast BLACK with the remaining colours which is of great help as black seems to be one of the most salient colours. Secondly, they refer to at least two denotata for which there is a high possibility of positive inference. The LDCE definition also seems to have taken advantage of semantic discussion concerning colour prototypes because it includes ‘night’ and combined it with the most often used example of ‘coal’.

One more inconspicuous advantage of the last definition is that it smartly avoids direct circularity. ‘Coal’ is circular in all of the dictionaries by being defined via the term BLACK (and BLACK via coal):

ISJP:

1. Węgiel to czarna lub brunatna skała [my emphasis]

STPS:

1. Czarna lub brązowa skała, powstała w dawnych epokach geologicznych z obumarłych roślin[8] [my emphasis]

LDCE:

1. [U] a hard black mineral which is dug out of the ground and burned to produce heat [my emphasis]

However, the case is different for ‘night’:

LDCE:

1. WHEN IT IS DARK the dark part of each 24-hour period when the sun cannot be seen and when most people sleep

What is more, dark is not defined via BLACK. This secures the dictionary user from entering a vicious circle and thus assures inferral of the meaning of lemma BLACK in case the definition denotata were unfamiliar to him/her. It seems that the lexicographer did a really good job here and Wierzbicka would be satisfied with such a definition. She would, however, critically evaluate the rest of the definitions for incorporating specialist knowledge and not even trying to avoid direct circularity.

Conclusion

This short presentation of colour term definitions on the basis of lemma BLACK aimed at pinpointing troublesome areas of dictionary entries. It must be noted that four of the investigated dictionaries are meant to be used by native speakers, thus the need for consulting the meaning of specifically the adjectival sense of this particular lexical item seems not to be crucial as most humans learn it in their early childhood. Yet, dictionaries are not just reference books, they should be viewed as a consistently organised and executed word meaning definitions. Such an (idealistic) attitude should be the norm as dictionary making is both art and craft^[9]. Moreover, pedagogical dictionaries aimed at an international audience (such as e.g. LDCE) need to be more careful in defining colours. These are culturally specific words and their application can vary^[10] thus the choice of denotata must be thoroughly thought-out. Another important remark which has to be made is that words such as BLACK, WHITE, CZARNY, AOI^[11] belong to the set of so-called basic colour terms, lemmas such as e.g. PUCE pose greater difficulties. PUCE or GRANATOWY^[12], for instance, are language sensitive idiosyncrasies which if not treated properly in dictionary entries might bring about more confusion than clarification.

---

[1] All acronyms are explained in the reference section; additionally OALDCE will be used for diachronic comparison

[2] The second part of this subtitle is a paraphrase of Dr. Johnson’s definition of ‘lexicographer’

[3] WHITE is the second one; the concept of ‘colour’ (in block letters) is used here as the focal point of a given colour term

[4] It is not however an idiosyncratic problem associated only with the lemma BLACK, it pertains to all dictionary definitions of colours

[5] BLACK 1. Something that is Black is of the colour of coal

[6] BLACK 1. Having the darkest colour of all, characteristic of coal and soot

[7] There is little controversy as for monolingual dictionaries for native speakers, problems arise as to what should constitute a denotatum in a pedagogical dictionary aimed at international audience

[8] Apart from being circular this definition is heavily scientific as for a dictionary

[9] Paraphrase of Landau (1984)

[10] Consider e.g. Japanese AOI which generally stands for BLUE. AOI, however, can be also used to describe grass or traffic light meaning ‘go’; another term for GREEN is MIDORI.

[11] See footnote 11

[12] DARK-BLUE

References

Adamska-Sałaciak, Arleta. 2006. Meaning and the Bilingual Dictionary. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.

Atkins, Beryl T. S. 1992/1993. “Theoretical lexicography and its relation to dictionary-making”, Journal of the Dictionary Society of North America 14: 4-43.

Bańko, Mirosław. 2001. Z pogranicza leksykografii i językoznawstwa. Warszawa: Uniwersytet Warszawski.

Barrat, Leslie B. - Kontra, Miklos. 1998. “Matching Hungarian and English Color Terms”, International Journal of Lexicography. 9, 2: 102-117

Bejoint, Henri . 1981. Tradition and innovation in modern English dictionaries. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Berlin, Brent – Kay, Paul. 1969. Basic colour terms: their universality and evolution. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Grzegorczykowa, Ranata – Waszakowa,Krystyna. 2000. Studia z semantyki porównawczej. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego.

Johnson, Samuel. 1747. “The plan of a dictionary”. (Edited by John Lynch), in Samuel Johnson 1825 (http://www.andromeda.rutgers.edu/~jlynch/Texts/plan.html) (date of access: 8 April 2008)

Landau, Sidney I. 1984. Dictionaries: The art. And craft of lexicography. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.

Piotrowski, Tadeusz. 1994. Z zagadnień leksykografii. Warszawa: PWN.

Piotrowski, Tadeusz. 2001. Zrozumieć leksykografie. Warszawa: PWN.

Sinclair, John. 1993. Looking up : an account of the COBUILD Project in lexical computing and the Collins COBUILD English Language Dictionary. London: Harper Collins.

Tokarski, Ryszard. 2004. Semantyka barw we współczesnej polszczyźnie. Lublin: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej.

Wierzbicka, Anna. 1985. Lexicography and conceptual analysis. Ann Arbor: Karoma.

Wierzbicka, Anna. 1987. English Speech Act Verbs: A semantic dictionary. Sydney: Academic.

Wierzbicka, Anna. 1992/1993. “What are the uses of theoretical lexicography”, Dictionaries: Journal of the Dictionary Society of North America. 14, 44-78.

Wierzbicka, Anna. 1996. Semantics: Primes and Universals. Oxford: Oxford University

---

---