How did ascrībō ('write') shift to mean figuratively 'impute'?

[12john]

Without explanation, Lewis & Short jumps from

'to annex by writing, to add to a writing'

to

'B. Trop. 1. To impute, ascribe, attribute to one the cause of something'.

Etymonline fails at explanation also. How's 'write' semantically related to 'impute'?

Latin ascribere "to write in, enter in a list; add to in a writing," figuratively "impute, attribute,"
from ad "to" (see [ad-])
+ scriber "to write" (from PIE root [*skribh-] "to cut")

 

[fresh_42]

Interesting question. Write stems from Latin scribere and impute from Latin imputare that still can be identified as put into. So where did the merge in meaning happen? Both words are far closer in German, as write translates to schreiben (scribere) and impute translates to zuschreiben.

mittelhochdeutsch zuoschrīben = schriftlich zusichern, melden, althochdeutsch zuoscrīban = hinzu-, zusammenfügen

(Middle High German zuoschrīben = to confirm in writing, to report, Old High German zuoscrīban = to add, to put together, https://www.duden.de/rechtschreibung/zuschreiben)

The prefix zu stands for add to. Here we have directly the same verb. English is a Germanic language and zu is to in English. That collides with the English way of writing an infinitive by to as in to write. In any case, we have words that all stem from scribere to cover both meanings: to write and to impute. That double meaning has seemingly never been lost.

Maybe the meaning zuschreiben survived and the prefix zu (=to, add-to) was lost since to is ambiguous in English: preposition versus infinitive. However, I am no linguist and that explanation might be a bit too far-fetched.

 

[Bandersnatch]

When you write a name next to e.g. a quote or at the end of a letter, you ascribe (attribute, impute) it to the name bearer.