[Source:] [D1.] dispose (v.) - (a) to arrange in order; (b) to lean toward or incline (typically used as a past participle). ...
[D2.] dispose of (phrasal v.) - (a) to throw away or discard; (b) to settle or attend to.
1. How and why does the particle of change the definition of dispose from D1 to D2?
Why does D2 require the particle of?
I already understand and so ask NOT about the above definitions. I heed the Etymological Fallacy. I recognise idioms' illogic, but what are some right ways of interpreting this idiom, so that it feels reasonable and intuitive?
2. « de » in French roughly means of in English. But contrary to D2:
[D3.] « disposer de » = have (at your disposal).
How did the particle « de » (= of) induce opposite definitions (D2 and D3) for the same root verb (though in two different languages)?