Chromatic dimensions: earthy, watery, airy and fiery

In our study, for a small number of antonyms we investigate whether they are cross-modally or ideasthetically related to the space of colors. We analyze the affinities of seven antonyms (cold-hot, dull-radiant, dead-vivid, soft-hard, transparent-chalky, dry-wet, acid-treacly) and their intermediate connotations (cool-warm, matte-shiny, numb-lively, mellow-firm, semi-transparent-opaque, semi-dry-moist, sour-sweet) as a function of color. We find that some antonyms relate to chromatic dimensions, others to achromatic ones. The cold–hot antonym turns out to be the most salient dimension. The dry–wet dimension coincides with the cold–hot dimension, with dry corresponding to hot, and wet to cold. The acid–treacly dimension turns out to be transverse to the cold–hot dimension, hence the pairs mutually span the chromatic domain. The cold–hot and acid–treacly antinomies perhaps remind one of Hering’s opponent color system. The dull-radiant, transparent-chalky and dead-vivid pairs hardly depend upon chromaticity. Of all seven antonyms, only the soft-hard turns out to be independent of the chromatic structure.