[rhizome]

This isn't the same thing. The Radiolab episode is about the physical interface to color and the above article is about words changing the meaning of color. Strangely, in none of the comments here or on the article does anybody mention the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis, which covers the linguistic aspects of this story. While there is some debate about the validity of linguistic relativity in the general case, it's basically a "nope."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_relativity

[gruseom]

"or [i]n the article does anybody mention the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis"

The name "Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis" may not literally appear but the whole article is obviously about it:

This question goes back to an idea by the American linguist Benjamin Whorf, who suggested that our language determines how we perceive the world.

There have been other recent discoveries in favor of the hypothesis posted here as well. I've felt for a long time that Sapir-Whorf will be rehabilitated; it doesn't make sense that something so fundamental as language wouldn't have cognitive effects.

[rhizome]

Well that's just my mistake, then. :/ Thanks for the backup, I didn't mean to post half-cocked.

[gruseom]

No worries. I actually went and looked for the post I was thinking of that last touched on this, and found that we'd both already commented in that thread.

[eli]

The show specifically talked about words changing the meaning of color. In fact they used the same japanese example mentioned elsewhere in these comments. Did you perhaps listen to one act instead of the whole thing?

[mratzloff]

Guys, this article is "part 2" for a reason. If you read part 1 they even mention the Radiolab show, as well as the Japanese blue/green thing.