- This topic has 9 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 9 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
He doesn’t know how to use the citation “ad locum.”
He wants to cite a radak on a passuk. He thinks that you can cite “Radak ad loc.” and that means it is the radak on the passuk he is discussing.
Are you all ignorant also? Do you know?
I don’t really care enough to know
what’s ignorant?
Hi PBA.
coffee addict is much to visceral to care. After all, he killed a troll with his bare hands. lol
Regarding your question, I avoid all latin terminology since they are the epitome of goyishness and the romaine catholic church. lol
BTGuy,
I am ad idem.
Popa,
No, yes.
Better, though, to just write ??.
et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
That’s all I have to say on the matter… etc.
Whats “ad locum”? (but I will take a serious look at your d’var torah)
Ad locum is correct. Or ad loc. Sometimes for ?? you write ibidem, or ibid. The difference is that ad loc. means on that thing, like when you cite a pasuk, and Rashi ad loc. Ibid. is used when you are citing another pasuk from the same place.
DY: It is correct?
I believe so (although yit beat me to it).
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.