Why does "spoil" account for both

Why does "spoil" account for both
The worst and for the best?

i.e.
That food is spoiled
&
Tonight i'm gonna spoil you he whispered to the girl.

you are the spoils of war and is about to be raped

I don't understand

Sometimes words have more than one definition.

I can't think of another with opposite definitions

Pretty simple desu. You can think of it as spoil as in the Latin "to rob", or spoil as in to give the thing that was taken. So if it spoils something is taken from it,while if it is poiled something is given to it. Works in both respects, just depends on context

The verb 'cleave' can mean to split something in two, or to stick two things together.

nonplussed means that someone has been rattled, or unaffected. Since I used to learn most new vocab by context, nonplussed confused me for years.

Didn't know it had latin roots

Yeh, that's one of those Americanisms where they change the meaning of something entirely. Like when they say they "could care less" to imply that they could not, in fact, care less.

"Didn't do nothing"

or something weird like making ask into "aks"

there's a place in Plato where he takes the word "difficult" as an example. Good things are difficult (demanding) / bad things are difficult (annoying).
Interesting remark by OP, btw.

I think when you say you're spoiling someone, even though you're referring to providing them with positive treatment, the spoil means you are going to make them bad by giving them too much positive attention. It's the same usage as when people complain about a child being spoiled. So while the act of spoiling someone describes a good action, the word by word meaning retains the negative connotation.

Pretty much this, the implication is really that by indulging someone you're "spoiling" their character (but that's okay perhaps because you love them/want them to depend on you). I've always felt like it was the kind of phrase you'd use if you were trying to say something cute

In your cases it isn't contradictory. "Spoiling" and being "spoiled" is to ruin someone's character by being too good to them.

I thought this came closer, but apparently, spoils of war is equivalent to the plunder of war, so it still has the ruinous connotations.

The internet in particular has ruined the word "literally" forever, making it mean both "accurately and without exaggeration" to "very nearly and virtually".

Jesus you people are stupid to not know what a contronym is

But the verb "to spoil" is really not that

>you is
>not you are

hello, sir

Spoils of war is an episode on GOT

>Tonight i'm gonna spoil you he whispered to the girl.
the target takes it as an endearing remark but the perpetrator intends he will be ruinous to the target
just slave culture things

Yeah, right.

More like: The perpetrator intends he will be ruinous to the target but the target has already had BBC. So Chad will just be a let-down.

That is NOT what the perpetrator intends in the slightest