Тhe processes of growth and decay are natural to development of language. So, the analytical form, a complex system of verb formation is developed in English, but the system of the declination and personal endings of the verb is decayed, the words from the vocabulary are dropped, the new ones are appeared by borrowing or tumors [2, 56]. While Ancient English was not so strongly inflected language ​​like Sanskrit, Greek or Latin, it had a complex system of declension and conjugation. Because nouns persisted case endings, many relationships can be expressed without the help of prepositions, in contrast to the modern English language.

The process of withering away of the inflections accelerated in the inflective Ancient English, extends from north to south, explained by the proximity in the dictionary against the conquerors and the Anglo-Saxon language, which could contribute to linguistic confusion with its usual consequences in the field of morphology [1, 134].

The peculiarity of Greek word formation was to preserve certain types of word formation, the presence, in many cases synonymous suffixes and prefixes and suffixes ambiguity. Parts of speech in the ancient Greek  differ in the way of word formation and activity of a word-formation process. So, derivative nouns have more verbal formations and adjectives – denominative; the names used suffixation, and the verbs in the main – prefixing.

Most Greek words are derivatives formed using archaic, productive or later productive ways of word formation. Archaic methods of derivation are prosodic derivation and flexion (morphological) derivation. The most productive way of derivation is an affixation, which has its own characteristics in the ancient Greek.

Turning to the inflection (morphological) derivation, we can say  following: the crossing processes of word formation and morphogenesis were typical for the Indo-European language. The relics of this state are preserved in ancient Greek. So, the endings ο / ε and α of the basics of nouns, in many cases could not only be an indicator of various types of declinations (morphological variability), but also the act as word-formation suffix that left a trace in the form of a significant number of doublets: τρόπος – τροπή, βόλος – βολή.

Some of them have the same value (for example, τρόπος, τροπή «turn”), and part has a difference in meaning, either in use (maybe it’s later distinction): morphological variation, being excessive, became accompanied by a semantic difference. Comp .: ‘ρόος «tax file» -’ ροή «wearing, harvest». [3, 218]. Comp. in Russian: цеп и цепь.

If we consider affixed derivation, then it includes suffixation: verbal nouns (indicating the protagonist – σωτήρ «savior» from σώζω «save», an action or state – δεσμός «node» from δέω «associate», the result of – γνώμη «knowledge» by γιγνώσκω «know», with a value of instruments or means – λύτρον «buy» from λύω «buy back»), denominative (with a value of quality – φιλία «friendship» from φίλος «other», pet names – βιβλίον «book» from βίβλος «book» magnifying – χείλον «wrasse (fish)» from χε ~ ιλος « lip », denoting the offspring of ancestors, parents Δανα ~ ις« Dana “from Δαναός «Danaets» denoting the place of action – ο’ινός «Wine Warehouse» from ο ‘ίνος «Wine», a man name of the area – Σύριος «Syrian” from Συρία «Syria»); adjectives formed from nouns – λίθινος «stone» from λίθος «stone» verbs – φυγάς «runaway» from φέυγω «runaway», adverbs – χθές «yesterday» from χθεσινός «yesterday»; adverbs and suffixes – ‘άλλοθι «elsewhere» from’ άλλος «other».

Thus, the cause of the historical transformation of Morphosyntax was the loss (to varying degrees) case forms, substitute synthetic means and paradigmatic order [4, 268]. Of course, this process is not instantaneous. On the contrary, it lasted for many centuries and was the result of many factors, including the following: 1) the tendency to active expansion of prepositions; 2) preference for a system of analytical forms of expression that talker felt more simple, predictable and regular than literary inflected; 3) some weaknesses declinable classes, as well as the presence of a number of tokens indeclinable; 4) certain phonetic changes, which led to the destruction of the classical image of the overwhelming mass of words.

Later on, compound names formed by the combination of the two names of women came into existence and became popular within the society: ANELLA (<ANN (E) + ELLA), MARIANNE (<MARY + ANNE), SARALINDA (<SARA (H) + LINDA) and so on. This is still being considered to be one of the most productive ways of creating new names in the English language naming system as there was a desire to make names shorter and more meaningful.Gradually, such names have caused to the decline in the use of binary names, such as MARY ANNE and MARY JANE, and they are still a rare occurrence among the English and Americans.

In addition, there were optional derivational forms of names, which were made in a variety of ways. We have talked about the evolution of names in complex or compound forms used in a full form in official style. These initial (full) forms have also other derivative forms and are used mainly in informal style, such as among close friends, family members, relatives and so on. In fact, it is not possible to find the exact number of derivatives.This can be explained by the nature of their use: the creativity and imagination of people to change the initial form of the names that they use to refer to friends, loved ones, relatives and children are diverse and varied. The main methods of forming derivatives are shortening and affixation. Names formed with the help of shortening are: BEN (<BENJAMIN), DAN (DANIEL), and others; and the affixation is used to make diminutive nouns (hypocoristic names): DANNY (<DAN <DANIEL), JIMMY (<JIM <JAMES), and others [2, c. 33].

In compiling a proper noun, the reduction can be made at the beginning, middle, and end of the initial word:

• Aphaeresis – the loss of a short unaccented vowel or syllable in the beginning of a word. For example, NESS (<AGNES), TONY (<ANTHONY, ANTONY), TINA (<CHRISTINA) and so on;

• Syncope – the loss of one or more sounds or letters in the interior of a word. For example, AUSTIN (<AUGUSTIN), ALINE (<ADELINE), and etc;

• Apocope – the loss of one or more sounds or letters at the end of a word. For example, ALEC (<ALEXANDER), ALF (<ALFRED), AG (AGNES) and others.

The specificity of derivation in the English naming system is that affixation is not used as a secondary derivation without shortening. Accordingly, the structural scheme of the English derivatives can be summarized as follows: full or initial names are abbreviated, for example, DANIEL <DAN, THEODORE <TED, and diminutive names are derived from them: DANNY, TEDDY. Therefore, we can use terms like primary and secondary derivation to denote these processes [1, c. 23].

The shortened forms of names were also used in Anglo-Saxons. As early as the eighth century, it was possible to find the abbreviated names like EDA <EDWIN, SICGA <SIGEWRITH. After the Norman conquest, the use of the diminutive forms of proper names came from the old French, such as -el, -el, -in, -on, -ot, were frequent in the English naming system: HAMEL, HAMELIN, HAMELET (<HAM <HAMON(D) + -el, -el, -in, -on, -ot), BARTELOT, BARTELET (<BART <BARTHOLOMEW + -el, -et) and so on. Meanwhile, English suffixes – cock, -kin were also used widely for making secondary derivatives: ADCOCK, MALKIN and so on. These suffixes were considered to be productive in XI-XIV centuries. That’s why they are now commonly found in medieval English names: ATKIN (<AD <ADAM + -kin), BABCOCK (<BAB <BARBARA + -cock), TOMKIN (<TOM) <THOMAS + -kin) and etc.

Since the 15th century, diminutive masculine and feminine names have begun to be formed with the help of the productive suffixes -ie and -y. For example, BETTIE (<BET <ELIZABETH), JOHNNY (<JOHN), PEGGY (<PEG <MARGARET) and others. These suffixes, which were originated from Scotland, gradually shifted from proper nouns to the common nouns: birdie, doggie, granny, lassie, nightie, etc. [3, c. 11].

Currently, such derivatives are widely used even in formal style in meetings, conferences, public gatherings, the press and publications. The derivatives are gradually being used in conjunction with the words of politeness and decency and becoming legal official names: honourable (Hon.), reverend (Rev.), doctor (Dr.), mister (Mr.)andso on. For example, Dr. (doctor) Billy, Hon.(honourable) Jimmy, Rev. (reverend) Ikie and others.

Unlike common names, proper names don’t have an exact structure. This can be explained, first of all, by the diversity of anthroponyms in terms of their origin (creation). The naming system of any language includes both old and new names that were created and used by the speakers of that language. At the same time, modern names can be determined as the most relevant structures in the process of enriching anthroponymic sources and are “live” forms for new word formation. In contrast, historical names depend on the genetic characteristics of languages, which are difficult to form because their structure is divided into non-relevant, historical components.

However, the division of such anthroponyms into historical components does not always accurately reveal their morphemic segmentation. Many of these are related to the words or affixes originated from other languages. Many anthroponyms are often regarded as non-productive forms because of their components  lackingin their own intrinsic motive.All this suggests that there is a difference in the structure and classification of words in this category.

To sum up all, it should be noted that anthroponyms specific to English language and culture exhibit structurally diverse identities. Initial or full forms of proper nouns also have optional derivative forms, which are mainly made up of shortening and affixation.