I am guessing that here, the prefix with- means against, per the foregoing and this answer. However, if something is "against the outside", then it must be the opposite of 'outside': ie, INside or withIN. But then this is a contradiction. So where did I err in interpreting the dead metaphor?
Please expose and explain all this etymology's (hidden and missing) semantic drifts and links. What is a right way of interpreting the etymology, to understand how the semantic jumps abstracted and severed from the original literal meaning? What bridges the jumps with the original meaning?