What semantic notions underlie "inmost, innermost" (intimus) with "make known, announce" (intimo)?

[scherz0]

How did intimus "inmost, innermost, deepest" (adj.) semantically shift to intimare "make known, announce, impress" ?

These meanings are polar opposites! If something is inmost, then it's private — and you would not "make known" or "announce" a secret!

intimate (adj.) [on Etymonline]

1630s, "closely acquainted, very familiar," also "inmost, intrinsic,"
from Late Latin intimatus, past participle of intimare "make known, announce, impress,"
from Latin intimus "inmost, innermost, deepest" (adj.), also used figuratively, of affections, feelings, as a noun, "close friend;" superlative of in "in"
(from PIE root *en "in")

 

[Pacifica]

To make something known to someone is to make them familiar/intimate with it.

 

[scherz0]

To make something known to someone is to make them familiar/intimate with it.

Can you please expatiate? Your one short sentence is too gruff for me to grok this.

"make something known" can be much more public and exposed, unlike intimacy. In English, it is weird to say that notifying someone about INanimate arcana or technicalities made them "intimate" with the INanimate object. One example is stock prices. A website may make known stock prices to investors, but it's bizarre to say that this website made investors "intimate" with stock prices.

Second example is the law. A lawyer makes known the law to a client, but it's bizarre to say that the lawyer made his client "intimate" with the law.

 

[Pacifica]

In English, it is weird to say that notifying someone about INanimate arcana or technicalities made them "intimate"

Yes, of course you usually wouldn't say that in English. But the two ideas are still connected enough for a semantic shift to happen, as I think it did in Latin.

 

[Laurentius]

According to some sources I am reading it Italian, the meaning shiftes from "pass through, put inside" to "make known".