In this paper, the issue of the correlation between the status of the onymic object, its social range and the general rules used when naming is considered. The author proposes to distinguish two basic levels of where the proper names function: a local one and a global one. Then, two particular patterns of naming are connected with these levels: an innovative pattern and a conservative pattern. The conservative names mostly refer to objects that are of social importance and have a general, wide range of functioning. On the other hand, innovative names generally refer to unstable objects that have a rather low social position, and a restricted, narrow range of functioning. Examples of both levels are analyzed, particularly the anthroponyms, toponyms and chrematonyms. The paper contains the argument, that more known conservative names have provided the characteristics of the prototypical proper name in general, and these characteristics are usually expanded to all proper names in their theoretical approaches.