The female founders and Latin

[random_monkey0_0]

No: HPFGUIDX 40701

Laura wrote:
> There was some discussion awhile ago about Latin and spells and the 
like that hit upon something that has been bothering me for some time:
> 
> I don't understand what it is about a few utterances that creates a 
magic effect -- or how those utterance should form words of a specific 
language that relate to the magic effect itself.

> <snip> And it's not like it's only the *intent* behind the words 
>that matters, as in PS we find Hermione correcting Ron's 
>pronunciation.

Ugh! Yahoo screwed up, and I have to write my post all over again!

I was reading Fantastic Beasts last night, when something of this ilk 
jumped out at me. Page 26, U.S., under "Leithfold":

"The thing attempted to smother me, sliding inexorably up my face, 
over my mouth and nostrils, ... _incapable_of_drawing_breath_ 
[emphasis mine], I concentrated upon the Stupefying Charm and then... 
upon the Impediment Curse...

"I knew I was about to lose consciousness completely as I suffocated. 
Desperately, I mustered up my last reserve of energy... I performed 
the Patronus Charm."

See that?! He never said anything! He couldn't breathe!

Also, in GoF, Mrs. Weasleysimply points her wand at the twins and says 
"Accio!" and makes the toffees fly to her. This also would indicate 
that spells don't neessarily need to be said, or at least not 
completely said, to work.

Perhaps young wizards are taught to use words to focus their thoughts. 
If they associate saying the word "Lumos!" with thinking a certain 
way, they might learn better, or remember better. Older wizards would 
be advanced enough to just "think" the spell, although they might 
still use the words out of habit.

I don't know why Hermione was correcting pronounciation. Perhaps it's 
just because she's a perfectionist.

The Random Monkey, who bets JKR is lurking around here, reading our 
theories, so she can use them to explain away flints when someone 
brings them up...