I've seen somewhere a test for how many color words are there in the language - only color-words which do not correspond to a specific material or plant which color is emulated are accepted. So “red” or “blue” is fine, as is “piros” or “vörös” - but “sky blue” (color of sky), “ruby” (color of the gemstone) or “scarlet” (color of the Scarlet cloth) are not.

but when you ask a non-specialist[1] "what color is this", pointing to a scarlet object, they'll say "red". They will also take longer to tell the difference between turquoise and blue than between proper green and blue, where (I think it was) Thai-speakers wouldn't[2] (who have a primary-colour word for turquoise).

[1] specialist = (color-theorist, decorator)

[2] http://www.pnas.org/content/104/19/7780.full actually, this article seems to talk about Russian, I'm getting the Thai thing from a discussion I remember (a video by the authors at the Long Now foundation[3].)

[3] http://longnow.org/seminars/02010/oct/26/how-language-shapes...

in english/italian etc.. I can say that magenta and scarlet are both kinds of red, but there is nothing above the hungarian voros & piros, you can only say they are both colors.