Yes. "Word," said of God in its proper sense, is used personally, and is the proper name of the person of the Son because it signifies an emanation of the intellect (and the person Who proceeds in God, by way of emanation of the intellect, is called the Son).
"To be" and "to understand" are not the same in us. Hence that which in us has intellectual being, does not belong to our nature.
But in God "to be" and "to understand" are one and the same: hence the Word of God is not an accident in Him, or an effect of His, but belongs to His very nature. And therefore it must needs be something subsistent, for whatever is in the nature of God subsists.
The Son's nativity, which is His personal property, is signified by different names, which are attributed to the Son to express His perfection in various ways.
To show that He is of the same nature as the Father, He is called the Son.
To show that He is co-eternal, He is called the Splendor.
To show that He is altogether like, He is called the Image.
To show that He is begotten immaterially, He is called the Word.
All these truths cannot be expressed by only one name.
In God the Word proceeding does not differ really from the divine intellect, but is distinguished from the principle of the Word only by relation.