"Each thing has it  word, but the word has become a thing by itself why shouldn't I find it? Why can't a tree be called Pluplusch and Pluplubasch when it has been raining? 

What i think that the author is saying why can't we name a thing, describe a thing however we want to whenever we want to. If we have free will why can't we use it all the time. I think the author is also saying that why can't a thing have several meaning or that same thing meaning changes depending of the state it is at a particular time.

I choose this quote because words  is a form of expression and as human we they can choose to express ourselves however we want to . Sometimes we are led to conform instead of transform, we have to do what the masses are doing or say what they are saying and in the process we loose ourselves and our voices. But here we have a quote that is saying everything has it's own word, it own description of what that thing is. Why can't the meaning of that word or thing changes when the state (physical) of it changes also..

The quote did challenge me I would say. It shows that one thing can have several different meaning without changing that thing, just like human beings we all have our complexities, differences and all reason and believe in different things but we are all still humans. We might look, talk, behave differently but that doesn't make me human and someone else not. There isn't any one definition to any one thing. I might see something one way and someone else might see it another way but still, we are referring to the same thing. There isn't any rule that one thing or a word have to be called just that "word"