Half-Blood Prince

[Carol]

No: HPFGUIDX 183857

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" <foxmoth at ...> wrote:
>
> > 
Carol earlier:
>  Unless, of course, you disregard the literal meaning of the spell.
> 
> Pippin:
> 
> How much do literal meanings matter in magic?
> 
>  "Sempra" occurs  in "Rictusempra" and that is not a spell that
can't be reversed except by a special countercurse. I think the
"sempra" in Sectum Sempra only means that it keeps cutting as long as
the caster is waving his wand like a sword, just like rictusempra
continues the tickling effect indefinitely. 

Carol responds:
"Rictusempra," an unimportant spell that, IIRC, occurs only once in an
earlier book, is certainly an example of a spell name that can't be
taken literally. But in other instances, JKR seems to have chosen the
names of her spells with great care, possibly because the particular
spells are important. Crucio means "I torture" ("crucio -are [to
torture , torment]." Surely, that literal meaning is important.
Imperio, dog Latin for "I command", is derived from "imperiosus -a -um
[commanding]; 'sibi', [master of oneself]; in bad sense, [imperious,
tyrannical]." It's interesting that she chose this form over the
actual Latin verb "impero" ("impero -are [to impose]; hence [to
requisition, order a thing]; [to order an action to be done, give
orders to a person]; [to rule over, govern, command].") Maybe she
forgot the correct form; maybe she liked the sound of "imperio" (which
brings to mind "imperious" and related adjectives as "Crucio" brings
to mind "crucify" and "excruciating"), maybe she liked the connection
of "imperio" with "tyrannical." At any rate, the name of the spell
tells the reader (at least a reader acquainted with Latin itself or
Latin roots in English) what the particular spells, complete with
negative connotations in these two instances.

http://catholic.archives.nd.edu/cgi-bin/lookup.pl?stem=crucio&ending=
http://catholic.archives.nd.edu/cgi-bin/lookup.pl?stem=imperio&ending=

Teen!Snape somehow learned Latin (maybe Tobias sent him to a Catholic
parochial school <g>) or at least enough Latin to create spells with
appropriate names. Corpus, of course, means "body." The adjective
"livis" means "light." Putting them together and dropping the awkward
"e" gives "Levicorpus" ("light body"). Similarly, "liber" means "free"
("liber (1) -era -erum [free , independent, unrestrained; free from,
exempt]," so Liberacorpus means "free body." (Alternatively, JKR could
have been thinking of the verb "libero" ("libero -are [to set free ,
liberate, release, exempt]"), with Liberacorpus being a command ("free
or release the body"), but there's no comparable verb meaning "make
light," so she resorts to "levi" (suggesting "levitate"). "Suspendo"
might have been better ("suspendo -pendere -pendi -pensum [to hang up;
to prop up , support; to keep in suspense, leave undecided; to check,
break off]. Hence partic. suspensus -a -um, [hovering, hanging,
suspended; dependent; ambiguous, doubtful, in suspense]"). Maybe
"Suspendicorpus" sounded comic or maybe she rejected it because it
didn't alliterate with "Liberacorpus.")

At any rate, it's clear that both the HBP and his creator gave these
spells considerable thought.

http://www.archives.nd.edu/cgi-bin/lookup.pl?stem=corpus&ending=
http://www.archives.nd.edu/cgi-bin/lookup.pl?stem=levis&ending=

The same seems to be true to an even greater degree for Sectumsempra.
"Sempra" is a minor alteration of "semper [always , at all times]." It
does not mean and cannot be made to mean "until the action is
stopped." "Sectum" is the fourth principal part of "seco secare secui
sectum [to cut, amputate; to wound, hurt; to divide, part]; hence [to
settle disputes; to cut out, make by cutting]." I suppose that JKR
could have improved her Latin by making the spell "Secosemper" but
chose "Sectumsempra" to convey the same meaning more euphoniously.

http://www.archives.nd.edu/cgi-bin/lookup.pl?stem=seco&ending=
http://catholic.archives.nd.edu/cgi-bin/lookup.pl?stem=semper&ending=

Pippin: 
> The ability to cause multiple cuts with a single spell is what makes
it "for enemies", IMO. <snip>

Carol:
Possibly, but I'm not aware of any canon support for that speculation.
We do, however, know that Snape himself considers it Dark magic (in
which Madam Pomfrey is canonically no expert but Snape is) and that it
requires an elaborate countercurse, different from the uncomplicated
nonverbal spell that DD used to cure a knife wound. (Snape recommends
dittany to heal the scars, but dittany would not have closed the cuts
or, probably, stopped the bleeding, as it seems to do, in DH, at
least, with such Dark magic involved.) 

Pippin: 
> But  in order to stop George's bleeding something had to keep the
blood from  leaking out of severed veins and capillaries. It's
difficult to see how that could happen if they were permanently cut open. 

Carol responds:
Possibly we're confronted here with yet another of JKR's
inconsistencies. By comparison with HBP, George ought to have bled to
death (I'm glad, of course, that he didn't). Maybe JKR has decided
that dittany will stop George's bleeding (Hermione uses it for a
similar purpose later in the book), forgetting that Snape's
countercurse first stopped the bleeding and then closed the cuts, with
dittany used only to prevent scars on Draco's body (and possibly, his
psyche or ego). Once again, JKR didn't check her facts. At any rate,
the ear can't be restored without the countercurse, leaving "his
holiness" with a permanent hole in his head (the unprotected ear
canal). Maybe "cut always" in this instance means "permanently
amputated"--unless, of course, the countercurse is performed,
magically restoring the lost ear. (Would Snape have needed to have the
severed ear in his possession to restore it to its owner, or could it
have been conjured like a Vanished object using his special spell?
Alas, we'll never know.)
> 
> Carol:
>  (James, however, would be unlikely to ask Madam Pomfrey for dittany
and equally unlikely to have any on hand.)
> 
> Pippin:
> 
> Why not?
> Dittany is a real herb, and I'm not sure why James wouldn't have
any, since he would be exposed to cuts and scratches during his
outings with Lupin. <snip>

Carol:
Okay, I'll concede that point. Maybe James had some dittany in his
Potions kit. But dittany can only stop the scarring from Sectumsempra
(HBP) or, possibly, stop the bleeding (DH). It cannot, however, close
up a wound caused by DARK MAGIC that can only be closed by an
elaborate countercurse that only Severus Snape would know and that he
might not even have invented (or discovered through research) at this
point.

I've already accepted Jen's explanation for how Lupin might have
learned about Snape's use of Sectumsempra, so I'm dropping that part
of the discussion.

Carol, for whom "cut always" means "cut always" (unless you know the
countercurse!)