Last modified on 31 March 2014, at 13:22

Talk:technical

Return to "technical" page.

At the end of this entry, one can read the following text:

→"[...]; as, the words of an indictment must be technical. --w:Blackstone."

which was taken from ARTFL Project: Webster Dictionary, 1913. Is it a quotation from that Mr. Blackstone? If it is, it should be highlighted as an example of use. Piolinfax 09:04, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

additional adj sense?Edit

I think this word can also mean "good at computers/technology", e.g. "Don't ask me about your computer, I'm not technical or anything." ---> Tooironic 13:48, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Tea room discussionEdit

Teacup clipart.svg

The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Tea room.

This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, though feel free to discuss its conclusions.


I think we're missing a definition here. When people say they are (or aren't) "mechanical" they don't mean they are made of mechanical parts, but that they are (or aren't) good with machinery, and similarly with "technical". I've been trying for a day or so and cannot come up with a decent way of phrasing a defintion, other than it should probably start with {{context|of a person}}. Thryduulf 23:49, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

I've added that sense and some others to mechanical, and split the pre-existing sense into two. (I haven't touched technical.)​—msh210 20:03, 9 March 2010 (UTC)


At least one missing meaningEdit

To be perfectly honest I think this entry is pretty poor. One thing I see missing is "a technical routine", for example a technical gymnastics routine, or a technical juggling routine. Mglovesfun (talk) 20:01, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

RFV discussion: September 2013–March 2014Edit

Keep tidy.svg

The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Requests for verification.

Failure to be verified may either mean that this information is fabricated, or is merely beyond our resources to confirm. We have archived here the disputed information, the verification discussion, and any documentation gathered so far, pending further evidence.
Do not re-add this information to the article without also submitting proof that it meets Wiktionary's criteria for inclusion. See also Wiktionary:Previously deleted entries.


"(slang) A secretarial way of saying "specific"." Equinox 19:10, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Doesn't make any sense to me. I am struggling to see how this could be used;
"Bring me the file on Jones please."
"Which technical Jones do you want?"
"Shall I arrange the meeting for a technical time?"
Don't really seem to work. SpinningSpark 15:57, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
Our whole set of words revolving around technical needs reworking. It looks to me like they're trying, in a lame sort of way, to deal with examples like "don't be so technical", that deal with the idea of technicalities as the kind of things nitpickers seize on. Only technically has a sense for it, while technical loads too much into the first definition and the other entries just keep leading back to it without explaining anything. Chuck Entz (talk) 21:52, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
Other common phases: "to be a little more technical," "technically speaking," "if you want to get technical about it," ... BB12 (talk) 22:03, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
None of them usually mean "specific" though, and they are not particularly limited to secretaries. SpinningSpark 17:38, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
MWOnline has six senses, a total of ten definitions for technical. RHU has eleven. Even Collins and WNW have six. So we should look to add at least one sense that covers what might have been intended, however badly worded and erroneously restricted it may be.
Perhaps something like: "Marked by or derived from a strict, especially overly strict, interpretation of rules or of wording." Is that close to what BB and Chuck's examples need?
Another sense more related "specific" might be: "marked by or related to specialization", as in technical language. DCDuring TALK 19:23, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
Also: our first definition is the same as that from Webster 1913. DCDuring TALK 19:26, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 21:03, 24 March 2014 (UTC)