Language and "style" can be hard to disassociate, though. Unless that kind of flexibility is part of the design ethos of the language.
The word "style" generally means a superficial characteristic of appearance, but "style" in a discussion of programming languages could mean the appearance of the language, the loop/state paradigm, or the design ethos of the language itself.
For example, the design ethos of Java is entirely bound to OOP. Python on the other hand has a celebrated syntactic style, an OOP foundation, and a flexible loop/state paradigm.
Python has flaws, of course. But its development community has paid attention to syntactic style and to the loop/state paradigm. Java became a successful corporate language; Python entered the corporation because it has become a popular language.
The word "style" generally means a superficial characteristic of appearance, but "style" in a discussion of programming languages could mean the appearance of the language, the loop/state paradigm, or the design ethos of the language itself.
For example, the design ethos of Java is entirely bound to OOP. Python on the other hand has a celebrated syntactic style, an OOP foundation, and a flexible loop/state paradigm.
Python has flaws, of course. But its development community has paid attention to syntactic style and to the loop/state paradigm. Java became a successful corporate language; Python entered the corporation because it has become a popular language.