For what it's worth...
I seem to recall the following:
Back when "aeroplanes" were being developed, those of the nautical majority had extreme power. Hence the use of a number of nautical terms in aviation: ballast, engine deck, waterline, propeller, and el piloto. After all, these insignificant aircraft were to support naval dominance.
Fast forward and by the time Igor was making headway developers were free to use other terms based on function rather than nautical legacy.
On the flip side, I've read somewhere that a "propeller" provides thrust parallel to the fixed longitudinal axis of a vessel/aircraft and any other thrust provider is not a "propeller."
Lastly, I think this version came from a helicopter design white paper that a "aerodynamic rotor" was an assembly of field removable components and a propeller was a single component.
It is what it is. I'm just glad they didn't go with the word "fan" like some engine people did with the turbojet vs. turbofan.
W1