How did rǣda work syntactically, after shifting from 'advise' to mean 'interpret and understand the meaning of written symbols'?
But isn't this semantic shift unsyntactical and infelicitous?
Advisor's writing rǣda (in the sense of 'advise') Advisee.
Advisor's writing rǣda (in the sense of 'read') Advisee.
is infelicitous. The correct syntax is
Advisee rǣda (qua 'read') Advisor's writing.
To wit, if an advisor counsels an advisee in writing, then the advisor doesn't need to read. It is the advisee who shall read the advisor's writing!