To anticipate another objection, yes, I celebrate the flexibility, adaptability and inventiveness of the English language, but it`s one thing to invent a new useful word to meet a need. But I`m so scary when English words invent because they don`t know or haven`t forgotten a perfectly good standard word. There is nothing wrong with reaching an agreement. This is not archaism, although there is probably a consensus. In most cases, the use of concordance is only linguistic antinomianism. It is irritating. Interesting – I`ve never heard the word consent, but I wonder if it still means the same as consent (not that most users know or would take care of it). If you agree with me, I will make these changes. Britannica.com: Encyclopedia articles on agreement I don`t think “consent” is a universally accepted word. “They had agreed that they would not interfere in each other`s affairs” “If we agree, let`s sign the agreement.” Have convergence and convergence always meant exactly the same thing? After all, feelings and sensitivity don`t, do they? Is it possible that history is peppered with agreements that were not agreements? Using Agreeance for Agreement is probably the linguistic equivalent of using a half-moon key instead of a combined key or a plug key..
. . .