Not in the way you are thinking (if I understand you correctly). The names of the parameters to the constructor and the names of the fields/properties are really just convenient labels for humans. A class should be independent and encapsulate it's state. Even allowing an compiler option to make external (passed in) names equate the internal ones confuses that concept.
You can do things like this:
public class foo {
public int X { get; set; }
public string Y { get { return X.ToString(); } }
public double Z { get; private set; }
private foo(int x) { X = x; }
public foo(int x, string y, double z = 1.0): this(x) {
Z = z;
}
}
Where a public constructor uses a private constructor (or other public constructor) to do some of the work (as the last foo constructor does). And you use optional parameters (as the seeing of z in the last foo constructor shows).