Naming a thing refers to its generic or unique name. By convention, the convention specifies the spelling of an object’s name. The formal specification of an object’s name defines how the name is spelled and thus what it should look like. In most cases, there is no need to indicate the spelling of a name. All objects have a common form of name.
A unique or personal name, on the other hand, can only be derived from a single source, whether it be a human or a plant, or both. In many cultures, naming is a part of social life. A person often has certain nicknames and/or given names which are connecting to his/her characteristics, and/or history. Such as Jack-o-lantern, Mother-in-law, Brain-in-charge, Red-faced Reindeer, Uncle Joe, Fudge Whicker Man, etc. A good example of a unique name is “Brain in Charge.”
Some cultures place great value on the convention and use it as a means of ranking, classifying, and rewarding. In some instances, a culture may choose specific names for its members to signify certain traits. This process of ranking and classifying may be used to help identify, and keep track of, members within a group or organization. In organizations such as the armed forces, the Navy and the Air Force, for instance, naming serves as a significant symbol of power and authority. A variation on this theme is applied to the English language, with many words today having both a common and unique meaning.
Naming conventions in the science of names stem from the study of Latin and Greek mythology. For example, the goddess Eostre was associated with the rainbow; thereafter, she was known as Arose, a goddess of love and color. Similarities in the names of Eostre and herself point to connections between love and the elements of nature, while other namesakes were borne of the element Earth or of vegetation. By the twelfth century, European scholars were applying the naming conventions of the Greeks and Romans to the Indo-European language and naming each individual’s personal name in accordance with his ability or station in society. Thus, in the case of a knight, his name would be connotes bravery, valor, chivalry and prowess, while a scholar, his position would dictate the sort of name that best fits his profession.
In the early Renaissance, when the naming system of Europe first began to evolve, naming customs were based more on custom rather than on logic. Thus, while infants were christened with traditional monotonic names such as John, Michael and Mary, their real names were unknown. After some time, the procedure for naming babies was determined more by tradition than by any rational thinking. While individual monotonic titles were eventually absorbed into the naming service, it was not until the fourteenth century that naming customs began to reflect social understandings and rational thinking. By the fifteenth century, common people in Europe had begun to give practical names to babies, much as they had named adults. While this may have been motivated by practical necessities, naming decisions were no longer based on what was “right,” but on what fitted with the person’s title or position in society.
With the exception of Latin roots such as colum, coluere, and corpus, all nouns in French and Latin origin words are also verbs in their stems (as in year, les and leser). This makes the act of naming an action verb in its own right and makes naming rules more rigid in comparison with those in other languages. The exceptions are the comparative and superlative forms of many pronouns such as the un, under and on. A notable exception to this rule is found in the word suite, which literally means “sovereress” but comes from the feminine form of seis (“girl”), so in this instance the prefix su is actually a Masculine root. While it would be inaccurate to claim that French names are always indicative, there is a marked tendency towards titles that imply certain things about the child, and these gender-based suffixes serve to reinforce these ideas in the minds of the listeners.