child (neutral) – kid (colloq.) – infant (e.g. infant schools – official, bookish) – offspring (also bookish, used in scientific works);

father (neut.) – daddy (coll.) – male parent/ancestor (formal);

leave/go away (neut.) – be off/get out/get away/get lost (coll., or familiar– colloquial) – retire/withdraw (bookish);

continue (neutr.) – go on, carry on (coll.) – proceed (bookish, formal);

begin/start (neutr.) – get going/get started/Come on! (coll.) – commence (formal);

Stylistically neutral words usually constitute the main member in a group of synonyms, the so-called synonymic dominant (синонимическая доминанта): they can be used in any style, they are not emotionally coloured and have no additional evaluating elements; such are the words child, father, begin, leave/go away, continue in the examples above.

Unlike neutral words (synonymic dominants), which only denote (обозначают) a certain notion and thus have only a denotational meaning (денотативное значение, обозначение некоторого понятия), their stylistic synonyms usually contain some connotations (коннотации), i.e. additional components of meaning which express some emotional colouring or evaluation (оценка) of the object named; these additional components may also be simply signs of a particular functional style of speech. Observe, for example, the following connotations:

an endearing connotation (ласкат.) – e.g. in the words kid, daddy, mummy (as different from the neutral words child, father, mother); derogatory (презрит.-уничижит.) connotation – e.g. in rot, trash, stuff (as different from the neutral 'something worthless or silly'); jocular/humourous – e.g. in comestibles (=food), beak ( = nose), to kick the bucket (= to die); rude or vulgar, e.g. in shut up/shut your trap; ironical or sarcastic – brain-wash (= промывка мозгов), a pretty kettle of fish (= an embarrassing situation), notorious (= пресловутый; his notorious jokes; he is notorious for his bad behaviour – "славится", т.е. "печально известен"); approving evaluation (одобрительная оценка) – e.g. in the word renowned (a renowned poet = прославленный; Edison is renowned for his great inventions); on the other hand, its synonyms like well-known, famous are neutral in this respect (have no connotations).

It should be noted that we do not include into the stylistically coloured vocabulary words that directly express some positive or negative evaluation of an object – хороший, плохой, красивый, некрасивый, прекрасный, уродливый; good, bad, pretty, ugly. Here the evaluation expressed makes up their denotational meaning proper (it represents the notion expressed by the word), but not an additional connotation. Also, it is easy to notice that words like ugly, awful, beautiful, wonderful, superb denote a high degree of quality (negative or positive), but this component of degree (of intensity) is again part of their denotational meaning, not a connotation (which is understood as an additional element accompanying the denotational meaning of a word).

As connotation proper (a special colouring), negative evaluation is present e.g. in the word scary (a scary girl — cf. the Russian страшненькая; both words have an ironic or derogatory colouring) or pretty — when it is used in phrases like a pretty boy/man (humorous, ironical or derogatory connotations; cf. also the Russian красавчик, красотка), or a pretty state (It's a pretty state of affairs when I can't afford the price of a pint of beer any morel). That's a pretty kettle of fish (= ну и дела!); there is ironical connotation in the word cox-comb (literally "петушиный хохолок"), like in the corresponding Russian word щеголь, or in a cock of the walk (зазнайка).

There is a derogatory connotation in the words to fabricate, to concoct (сфабриковать, выдумать), as different from the neutral phrase 'to create a false story' (which expresses the negative evaluation by the denotational meanings of the words); there is a negative evaluative connotation in to slander (клеветать) – as different from emotionally neutral expressions like to distort facts (искажать факты), which again express the idea of 'falsification' directly. In the sentence Don't read this bad book the negative evaluation is expressed directly (by the denotational meaning of the adjective bad), whereas in Don't read this trash the evaluation is expressed by the derogatory colouring of the noun trash — in other words, it is present here only as a connotation; thus, words like trash, rot, stuff (= "something worthless, bad") are stylistically marked (стилистически маркированы, т.е. обладают определенной стилистической окраской), while the word bad is stylistically unmarked (стилистически немаркировано, нейтрально).

Apart from that, as was already mentioned above, the stylistic connotation of a word may be just a sign of a certain functional style to which the word belongs, without carrying any emotional or evaluative element. Thus, sentences like She is cute (= pretty), It is cute (= very good), It's cool (Это круто) contain not only a high positive evaluation (in the same way as the stylistically neutral variants She is pretty/good-looking or It is very good), but also a stylistic connotation which shows that they belong to the familiar-colloquial style (фамильярно-разговорный стиль), or even to slang. Colloquial connotations are also present in the phrases to fix a watch (neutral – to repair a watch), to fix an appointment for seven o'clock (= to arrange), to fix breakfast (American – to cook breakfast). On the other hand, a bookish connotation, or colouring (as a feature of official or scientific style of speech) is present in expressions like to cause/to inflict bodily injuries (neutral – to hit/to beat/to hurt), to cause/to inflict damage (neutr. to harm/to do harm), to impose a tax/a fine (neutr. to tax/to fine), an impoverished person (neutr. a poor person), highly improbable (neutr. very unlikely), etc.

A rude (vulgar) connotation is present in vulgarisms, or taboo words, which are not to be used in the speech of educated people and are therefore often replaced by euphemisms (эвфемизмы) – the more 'gentle' names of the object. Thus, the word 'devil' is, for many people, unacceptable in speech and may be replaced by phrases like 'the evil one', 'the fallen angel', 'the Prince of darkness',' Lucifer', 'Mephistopheles'. The same concerns expletives (curse-words, бранная лексика): damn, damned are often replaced by the euphemistic darn, darned, dashed; bloody is sometimes replaced by blooming, blasted, blessed, etc. 

With respect to the accepted literary norm (standard) of the language, we distinguish Standard (Received) English (the variant that is fixed in the written language, in works of fiction, in radio and TV speech, etc.), and non-standard English (не входящий в литературную норму), which is represented by dialects and variants of the language found in the different geographical areas where English is used. To the dialects are usually referred the non-standard varieties of English used on the territory of Great Britain, while the word variants (varieties) refers to the use of English outside this territory, e.g. the English language of the USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, etc.