1. C. Lejewski distinguishes in his works three classical types of logical languages: Aristotelian language (the name category forms here referential names), Frege-Russellian language (singular referential names) and Legniewskis language (referential names — general and singular, and non-referential — empty names). See for instance: Lejewski, C.: 1965, A Theory of Non-Reflexive Identity and Its Ontological Ramifications. In: Weingartner, P. ( Ed.) Grundfragen der Wissenschaften and ihre Wurzeln in der Metaphysik, Salzburg-München, pp. 65–102.
2. Kotarbinski, T.: 1961, Z zagadnied klasyfikacji nazw. In: Kotarbitiski, T., Elementy teorii poznania, logiki formalnej i metodologii nauk, 2nd Ed., Ossolineum. English: On the classification of names. In: Kotarbiríski, T., Gnosiology, Pergamon Press, Oxford, 1966. The notion of individual name depends on an assumed individual theory.
3. Quine in his logical system treats names such as clever, town as singular ones — they refer (indirectly according to us) to classes. See Quine, W. V. 0.: 1955, Mathematical Logic, 2nd Ed., Cambridge, Massachusetts, §22.
4. Cf. Ajdukiewicz, K.: 1934, W sprawie uniwersaliów, Przeglad Filozoficzny 37, 219–234. English: On the Problem of Universals. In: K. Ajdukiewicz, The Scientific World-Perspective and Other Essays 1931–1963, Ed. by Jerzy Giedymin, Reidel, Dordrecht, 1978, pp. 95–110. The distinguishing of these name subcategories is especially important for languages using articles. Let us take for example the propositions: Socrates is a man, Socrates is the husband of Xanthippe and the lion is an animal. The first and third are equivalents to the above analyzed propositions. Ascribing to the word is the category n/s/n, the definite article as functor would be of category n/o, the indefinite article of category n/u.
5. As is known, Aristotle in his syllogistic restricted the names to the general referential ones. See Lukasiewicz, J.: 1951, Aristotles Syllogistic from the Standpoint of Modern Formal Logic, Oxford, 4f.