Hogwart's Motto, help!

[Jen Faulkner]

No: HPFGUIDX 21320

> --- In HPforGrownups at y..., rcraigharman at h... wrote:

> However, neither "imperio" nor "crucio" is an imperative in Latin.
> "Crucio", which is an actual Latin verb (crucio, cruciare, cruciavi,
> cruciatus), is in the first person singular present indicative
> active = "I crucify".  As a present active imperative, it would be
> "cruci" in the singular, and "crucite" in the plural.

*frowns*  Unless I'm missing something very obvious, a present active
imperative from 'crucio' would be 'crucia', singular, 'cruciate',
plural.  First conjugation.

But I'd also be willing to bet that you never, ever find an active
imperative, since crucio occurs nearly always in the passive.  It also
means something more like 'to torment, esp. mentally', rather than
'to be crucified', in non-ecclesiastical Latin.[1] 'Cruciare' and
'cruciamini' would really be the most natural Latin, I think.  

In fact, if I were coming up with a spell in correct Latin, I'd probably
use the future imperative, 'cruciator', since spells, like legal
language, should use the formal, solemnizing future imperative.

Along these same lines, little alex wrote:

> True and true, but I think "crucio" makes more sense than "cruci" as
> a spell, 'cause "crucio" probably has the implication of "I crucify
> [you]" but "cruci" is telling the object to go crucify someone.  
> The latter doesn't sound like it can hurt the object of the spell...  

I agree; the active imperative would make much less sense than a 1st
person present active indicative (crucio).  The finite form (with a
personal subject) also makes you think a little more about the wizard
casting the spell as the agent.  It's not like a cloud of torture is
floating around, waiting to descend and torture victims, but rather the
wizard casting the crucio spell must actively torture the victim: *I* am
torturing you.

Much more chilling that way, isn't it?

> I'll leave the "imperio" for someone else.

As I said yesterday, I really believe 'imperio' is intended to be a 1st
person singular present active indicative, like 'crucio' or 'accio',
with an -i- introduced by analogy.  Analyzing it as a dative or ablative
noun makes little to no sense.  (But in form, it could be that, sure.)

[1] As in the poem of Catullus: odi et amo.  quare id faciam fortasse
requiris. / nescio, sed fieri sentio et excrucior.

--jen :)

* * * * * * 
Jen's HP fics:
http://www.eden.rutgers.edu/~jfaulkne/hp.html
Snapeslash listmom: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/snapeslash
Yes, I *am* the Deictrix.