Talk:Coquus

Cocus
Doesn't seem to be a name, but a misunderstanding of the word /. Smurrayinchester (talk) 13:28, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Probably as you say, but I would like to be able to check it in loco, and I don't have a copy of Pseudolus, so I'm not certain on this. Aperiarcam (talk) 15:36, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
 * The internet always provides! Smurrayinchester (talk) 17:25, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
 * suggests that coquos is the right form for the time of 's (c. 254 – 184 BC) writing. Coquos occurs three times in the online text. DCDuring TALK 18:26, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, it's certainly just a cook, though it is awfully strange that Plautus uses "coquos" throughout the text except in the cast (and to note who is speaking), where we find "cocus" and "coc."; this may well be an editorial issue, perhaps attributable to a lazy scribe rather than our dear Plautus. The nominative in -os is certainly the norm for Plautus, but perhaps something about the "qu" would make "coquos" simplify to "cocus"? All idle speculation, in any event. We also have another such entry, Harpax, but I'm tempted to let this one stay, as it's really a Greek word (ἅρπαξ ); also attested as a Roman war machine, but this is after Plautus was writing. In any event, this person has done us a favor, because they have drawn our attention to several words that need to be added, including ἅρπαξ. Aperiarcam (talk) 20:09, 21 July 2015 (UTC)