[HPFGU-Movie] Re:Rictus not so sempra

[Amanda Geist]

Scott bemoaned:

> Yes, yes, all this is well and good, but, unless I'm very much
> mistaken, "Rictusempra" (or "Rictus Sempra") is not correct latin.
> My latin is slightly rusty; however, I do know that Rictus is a 4th
> declension singular masculine noun (in nominative case), and Sempra
> is a feminine singular adjective (in nominative case).  These two do
> not gel. Shouldn't it be "Rictus Semper," if anything?

I really do mean this in the very friendliest of ways---> *do* lighten up.
;P

Seriously, there's been debates on the quality of the Latin in these books
before over on the main list. I have never quite found enough basis to
participate, because while I am a perfectionist, a student of language, and
an editor, the creative use of various roots by JKR has never bothered me at
all.

I believe that JKR's genius is not only that she can tell a ripping good
story, but she can reach into the communal consciousness and pluck out names
for people, things, spells, and the like which just *feel* right. They fit.
They work. For whatever reason, they're *right,* they plug into the reader's
big, subconscious ocean of associations and hook the right fish.

In doing this, JKR reaches beyond the bounds of any single language, Latin
included. She uses Latin roots to great effect, but not within a Latin
structure. Her structure is the correct fit to the feel of the world she has
created. And in that context, she is absolutely spot-on.

> I guess this is just modified latin (or I may just be incorrect to
> begin with), but it gets on my nerves all the same. I must say,
> though, the spell has a very nice intonation. I liked the way it
> rolled off of Dan's tounge the first time I heard it, and that alone
> may be why they chose to modify it.

See? See? It *worked* for you. And "they" didn't modify it, it was
"Rictusempra" in the book. JKR wrote it that way.

> More than perfect latin, I do wish the spell *worked*. (perhaps its
> the incorrectness of the spell that makes it defective?) Knocking
> Draco backwards serves the plot well enough, but it's naunces like
> having someone (Draco) laugh uncontrollably that make the books so
> imaginative and fun.

Yes and yes and yes. Goober movie people who would rather have seventeen
people flipping through the air than any genuine spell effects (up to and
including "Expelliarmus," which flipped Lockhart but did *not* disarm him).

> (and, Ye learned Scholars, if I am wrong about the latin, do correct
> me!)

I am many things, but not a learned Scholar. But I followed most of the
Latin arguments, and you're not wrong in noting that JKR (and the movie
folk, following her patterns) do not use correct classical Latin.

~Amanda, many things