“…It is also rooted in cultural geography through the articulation between social representations and spatial practices (Claval and Staszak, 2008: 3), by identifying how young people’s way of being (culture) enables them to formulate a critical discourse that takes shape around neotoponyms 3 in Tokombéré. In this sense, the act of naming places, an act that is first of all harmless, should be seen as a form of territory’s appropriation, as demonstrated by reflexions in Francophone area (Ben Arrous, 2009; Bopda, 2001; de La Soudière, 2004; Garakcheme, 2011; Giraut and Houssay-Holzschuch, 2008; Guillorel, 2008; Leimdorfer et al, 2002; Nissabouri, 2006; Njoh, 2010; Siblot, 2006), as well as the English-language trend of critical toponymy, which is based on comparative studies in former settlements and highlights the relationship between analysis of place names and study of power (Alderman, 2008; Berg and Vuolteenaho, 2009: 6, 12; Bigon, 2016: 2–3; Bigon, 2020; Bourdieu, 1979: 79; Giraut and Houssay-Holzschuch, 2016: 4; Njoh, 2017; Njoh and Chie, 2019; Rose-Redwood et al, 2018: 457). Thus, the central question is how are neotoponyms indicators of the Tokombéré’s youth response to their marginalization from the public sphere by local authorities?…”