There's a word that I don’t understand the meaning of even in my mother tongue and cannot find in any dictionary — ideotechnical/idiotechnical — not even sure which one.

I would appreciate it if someone read the background and suggested a proper translation of the word.

Does the text look as if written by an English-speaking person?

Annotation.The article covers the description of the Arabic and Russian anthroponymy systems.As the information of linguistic and extralinguistic anthroponymy planes is multidimentional, not only idiotechnical and universal features of national anthroponymy systems are illustrated by modelling configurations,but also an attempt has been made to offer a complex analysis of the materials investigated.

keywords: onomastics,proper name,Arabic anthroponymy model,Russian anthroponymy model,name,surname,middle name.

closed as unclear what you're asking by Mari-Lou A, anongoodnurse, tchrist, aedia λ, Kristina Lopez Feb 5 '14 at 19:26

Please clarify your specific problem or add additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it’s hard to tell exactly what you're asking. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • 1
    I think this is a hoax. There's the tag: jargon. And the text is that, it makes no sense. – Mari-Lou A Jul 27 '13 at 9:49
  • 1
    In context, it means that they claim to take into account the universal features of anthroponymy, and the features that Russian and Arabic cultures share technologically (ideotechnical), and they also claim to provide a complex analysis of the Arabic and Russian materials investigated. A little Greek helps in reading this kind of jargon. Everybody's cool on anthroponymy, right? – John Lawler Jul 27 '13 at 13:43
  • 2
    @JohnLawler I’m just trying to figure out why they are spelling the ever-popular Christmas stocking-stuffer “my anthro pony” with such a funny word order. :) – tchrist Jul 27 '13 at 13:58
  • 1
    Used in context here: myweb.rollins.edu/jsiry/toolsthreefacets.html – MetaEd Jul 27 '13 at 18:03
  • 1
    User48618 is active, but has not confirmed whether @J.R. answer/guess is correct. Furthermore, User48618 cannot be bothered (or does not know how) to reply to any of the comments. Finally, if someone accused me of pulling a hoax I would respond, instantly. But not everyone is me. – Mari-Lou A Jul 28 '13 at 6:45

This is just jargon someone is using in discussing anthroponymy, which appears to be a sub-branch of anthropology mostly concerned with the names of people.

It is not at all uncommon for scientific communities to come up with their own jargon for certain concepts that might not be common in the English-speaking community at large. But in a paper this one concept might need to be referenced multiple times, preferably without a long explanation each time.

Sometimes this will even be done in the space of a single paper. There's nothing really wrong with this, as long as the first usage is explained. A mathemetician in a paper might say, "Let X = ..." (some grisly formula follows here), while a sociology researcher might say "By ideotechnical I mean the ..." (some long explanation of the concept follows here)

There has been found one use of this word on what looks like a sociology-related website. There they appear to be using it to describe one of three ways people intereact with tools; the other two being "tectonic" and "sociotechnical" (who knew using a hammer was this complicated?). I can't guarantee that your author is using it in the same way, but its possible.

  • Hmm. It seems that @MετάEd found the same thing and mentioned it in the comments a couple of months ago. I'd claim I found it indpendently, but he could well have jacked up its page rank for me, so I'll give it to him. :-) – T.E.D. Sep 9 '13 at 14:47
  • Upvote for that anthroponymy link - interesting. The etymology of handles is a rich well I don't see many people drawing from (I'm quite sure that statement will draw an URLStorm of links). – lonstar Oct 2 '13 at 23:46

A Google Ngrams search for 'ideotechnical' reveals this word has never been used in any book(that Google has indexed).

Also, please have a look at Brian Tower's comment below.

  • Oh, really? – phenry Feb 2 '14 at 2:21
  • 1
    @kkaosninja That's not a correct interpretation of a Google Ngram search. There is considerable filtering between all the books that Google scanned and what appears in the Ngrams. The most important filter in this case is probably the one which excludes words which appear in fewer than 40 books. So, it may have been used but very infrequently. – Brian Towers Dec 22 '14 at 21:48

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.