In other words, ditto!
This is getting silly. The whole discussion has deteriorates into "Does too!" "Does not!" with episodes of "Is too!" "Is not!" yelled at increasingly higher pitches, between two English-speaking Christians full of inflamed concordance information, maybe a page and a half apiece.
If we were serious about getting past English-speaking concordance and lexicon writers, we might try asking people whose native language is actually Greek, don't you think? It would be interesting to ask people who have been reading and analyzing Greek literature for a millennium or two, wouldn't it?
Are you following this?
The upshot here, is that for the last couple of millennia, the Greeks have been unanimous in saying that "Kecharitomene" is fully congruent in meaning with "Panagia,", which means ---
Oh, dear, I'm almost afraid to tell you.
My point is, this is what the Greek-speakers say.
If I have to choose between actual Greek-as-a-first-language scholarship, and some 19th century English-speaking lexicon compiler, I judge it fully reasonable to go with the Greek-speakers.
Bu I'm open-minded. Go ahead and try to convince me that some 19th century U.S. Methodist knew Greek grammar better than St. John of Damascus...
BTW, no part of my argument rests on the Douay-Rheims or the Latin Vulgate tranlsations. So if you want to get into an entended tussle about that, please direct your tussle towards some Vulgate scholar. That wouldn’t be me.
Documentation and source please.