I seek advice for elucidating How did I misunderstand the Latin 'consisto' in interpreting 'X consists in Y'? here, instead of in comments. I paraphrase my problem: I am trying to ask how the Latin verb 'consisto' and any possible semantic shifts, explain why 1 means 3 (and NOT 4 as I (wrongly) interpret it to). Please reference the original question to see the referents of the integers that I do not reproduce to avoid needing to update 2 posts.
My Answers to the 6 questions below:
I wish to understand the English phrase "X consists in Y", with the help of the Latin verb consistere; I am assuming a semantic connection between the 2.
Example: Milk consists in (Vitamin B12). By definition, this means: Milk features B12.
But my interpretation reverses the order: Milk consists in B12. ↔ Milk stands in B12. ↔ B12 features Milk. So should not 'consist in' mean my interpretation instead?
- Yes, I know of the differences between English and Latin syntax; but some Latin(ate) verbs do retain the morphology and syntax when borrowed by English. So what explains the difference here? Semantically, does the Latin 'consistit' differ from the English 'consist'? If so, how?
My 4 in the picture in the question: Because the Latin consistere means 'stand', I interpret the English 'consist' to mean 'stand'. But this analogy may be false, as you wrote: is it?
I pursue not 'well-documented' semantic shifts: I can happily accept conjectures or opinions.
A semantic shift appears to have occured somewhere, but not preceisely where, from the Latin consistere, to the English use of the phrase 'consist in'.