Isn't "To throw at..." an English idiomatic expression?
I've found that the meaning is different from "throwing to someone" as we would do with a ball. but in this sentence
"He crumpled up the contract and threw it at the bank manager.", the meaning seems close.
But: "To throw to someone is to give someone an item (the ball is "travelling in the air), and: to throw at someone is generally to try and hit the person with it."
So, I think "at" is wrong here.
I though it would be "Corinna nobis crustulam iacit/jacit"
But this would mean "Corinna throw us the little layer, the little crust. (small "Crusta")
But Dicolatin also give this feminine noun
"Crustula (sing)/Crustulae (plur)
with the meaning of "cake" (gâteau)
Gaffiot confirms it, Crustula, the feminine noun, also means a cake, not only the Crustulum, neutral. But Crustulum seems to mean something smaller, and candies, delicacies.
Here, they ask use the neutral noun
Crustulum (sing) -> Crustula (plural),
meaning Candy, cookie, cake, pastry, delicacy, sweetmeat.
So, what is the difference between the feminine Crustula and the neutral Crustulum? I was sure -only- the later, crustulum, means a cookie, but I'm not sure anymore.
Edit: I've found. They say it was after the 4th century BC, that "Crustula" started to mean cake, pastry. Those early Latin/late Latin things are really confusing.