The idea here is not what words a language has names for, but what words a language considers "primary".
"Azure" is an English color-word, but an English speaker recognizes "azure" as a kind of "blue". But "blue" is not a kind of "green" or a kind of "purple" or a kind of anything else. Hence, "blue" is a basic English color-word.
Typical English dialects have eleven basic color words: white, gray, black, brown, pink, red, orange, yellow, green, blue, and purple. Other color-words in English are considered variants of one of these eleven terms. That wasn't always true ("pink" is the most recent addition, dating to the early 1700s), but it's pretty well-established by modern English speakers. Other languages may make fewer distinctions (e.g. until about the last century Japanese used ao(i) as a basic color word that encompassed both blue and green, so e.g. a traffic light is aoi by tradition even though the modern word for green is midori) or more (e.g. Russian distinguishes light blue goluboi and dark blue sinii similarly to how English distinguishes red and pink). To an old Japanese speaker, blue and green were both shades of ao, and to a modern Russian speaker, goluboi is as distinct from sinii as "red" is from "pink" in English (they are not both "shades of blue" any more than pink and red are "shades of reddish" in English).
Sometimes people use "pink" or "purple" to describe magenta, but (to me) magenta isn't either of those colors. Purple is the color that in technical contexts is known as violet, and pink is absolutely a type of red to me, specifically a desaturated red.
I'm guessing it was more the other way around, based on known etymologies.
The origin is Latin "lapis lazuli", where "lapis" is "stone" (thus not the word of interest here) and "lazuli" is "sky", ultimately from Persian (perhaps "blue stone"). The "laz" part is probably related to Irish "glas" though.
The r/l blur is very common so doesn't help narrow anything down; the Arabic/Persian had "w" anyway.
We can blame French speakers for interpreting it as "l'azuli" with reasonable confidence; I'm vaguely aware that some regional dialects(*) of Spanish do similar but can't find evidence of them preceding French at a glance. Also, France was more dominant than Spain for the relevant periods of history - although Spain did have the direct Arabic connection I guess. It's not like I have good sources here.
* unless they have separate navies, they can't be languages.
"Azure" is an English color-word, but an English speaker recognizes "azure" as a kind of "blue". But "blue" is not a kind of "green" or a kind of "purple" or a kind of anything else. Hence, "blue" is a basic English color-word.
Typical English dialects have eleven basic color words: white, gray, black, brown, pink, red, orange, yellow, green, blue, and purple. Other color-words in English are considered variants of one of these eleven terms. That wasn't always true ("pink" is the most recent addition, dating to the early 1700s), but it's pretty well-established by modern English speakers. Other languages may make fewer distinctions (e.g. until about the last century Japanese used ao(i) as a basic color word that encompassed both blue and green, so e.g. a traffic light is aoi by tradition even though the modern word for green is midori) or more (e.g. Russian distinguishes light blue goluboi and dark blue sinii similarly to how English distinguishes red and pink). To an old Japanese speaker, blue and green were both shades of ao, and to a modern Russian speaker, goluboi is as distinct from sinii as "red" is from "pink" in English (they are not both "shades of blue" any more than pink and red are "shades of reddish" in English).