1.3.4 Denotative, significative and connotative meanings

Lexical meaning is not homogeneous either. The plane of content in speech reflects the whole human consciousness, which comprises not only mental activity but also emotions. So lexical meaning may be analyzed as including denotational and connotational components.

The notional content of a word is expressed by the denotative or denotational meaning also called referential or extentional meaning.

Denotative meaning is the interrelation between the sound form of the linguistic sign and the concept, on the one hand, and the object named, on the other hand.

To denote, then, is to serve as linguistic expression for a notion or as a name for an actually existing object referred to by a word. The term denotatum or referent means either a notion or an actually existing individual thing to which reference is made.

Denotative meaning should be distinguished from significative meaning. Significative meaning is the interrelation between the sound form of the linguistic sign (phonetic word) with the concept of the object it denotes.

1.3.5. Connotative meaning

The emotional content of the word is its capacity to evoke or directly express emotions. It is rendered by the emotional or expressive counterpart of meaning, also called emotive charge< intentional or affective connotations of words.

Connotative or connotational meaning is termed as part of lexical meaning expressing the emotive charge and stylistic value of a linguistic unit.

The emotive charge is one of the objective semantic features proper to words as linguistic units and forms part of the connotational component of meaning. Let us compare the following words: like, love, cherish, adore, worship. We cannot fail to observe the difference in the emotive charge of the members of this set of synonyms. The emotive charge of the words adore and worship is much heavier than that of the words like and love.

The emotive charge should not be confused with emotive implications that words may acquire in speech. The emotive implication of the word is to a great extent subjective as it depends on the personal experience of the speaker, on the mental imagery the evokes in him. Words seemingly devoid of any emotional element may possess strong emotive implications in the case of certain individual speakers.

The meaning of many words is subject to complex associations originating in habitual contexts, verbal or situational, of which the speaker and the listener are aware, and which form the connotational component of meaning.

In some words the realization of meaning is accompanied by additional stylistic features revealing the speaker’s attitude to the situation, the subject-matter, and to his interlocutor.

1.3.6. Emotive charge and sociostylistic reference of words

Words differ not only in their emotive charge but also in their sociostylistic reference. In the sociostylistic plane according to the sociolinguistic norm words can be subdivided into two complex groups of vocabulary layers: the literary standard vocabulary and non-standard or substandard vocabulary.

The literary standard vocabulary, in its turn, includes three stylistic layers of words – literary or bookish words, neutral words and literary colloquial words.

Let us compare, for example, the following set of synonyms which are almost identical in their denotational meaning: countenance, face, phiz (cf. their Russian counterparts: лик, лицо, физия). The word countenance belongs to the bookish or poetic layer of vocabulary. The word face belongs to the neutral layer of vocabulary. And the word phiz belongs to the literary colloquial layer of vocabulary.

Against the neural layer of vocabulary we can distinguish words belonging to higher and lower layers of vocabulary. Here, in comparison with the word face, which is stylistically neutral, the word countenance is felt as bookish and the word phiz stands out as jocular colloquial.

The non-standard vocabulary, in its turn, comprises five sociostylistic layers of words – low colloquialisms, general slang, professional and corporative jargons, argot or cant and vulgarisms.

Let us enlarge further the above given set of synonyms: countenance, face, phiz, map, mug, pan, biscuit, clock, dial, gills, squash (cf. their Russian counterparts: морда, рожа, рыло, харя, мурло). All of them belong to, slang, jargons, argot and some of them may be considered even vulgar.

The stylistic reference of bookish, colloquial, slang words, jargonisms and vulgarisms is clearly observed when we compare them with their neutral synonyms.

Stylistic reference and emotive charge of words are closely connected and to a certain degree interdependent. As a rule stylistically coloured words, that is words belonging to all stylistic layers except the neutral one, are observed to possess a considerable emotive charge. This can be proved by comparing stylistically labelled words with their neutral synonyms.

The poetic word countenance and the literary colloquial word phiz carry heavier emotive charges than their neutral counterpart face; but the low colloquialisms and slangy words map, mug, pan, biscuit, clock, dial, not mentioning gills, squash, are still by far more expressive even than phiz. Here we see that words of low stylistic styles differ in the degree of their emotive charge.

However, words of neutral style may also differ in the degree of their emotive charge. Compare, for example, the words large, tremendous, enormous; though equally neutral as to their stylistic reference, they are not identical as far as their emotive charge is concerned.

So in conclusion, connotative meaning may be defined as emotional, expressive and stylistic coloring of the word as an additional component to its denotative and significative meanings within its lexical meaning.