I don’t think “slake” is obscure but it doesn’t fit the OP. You slake a thirst not the person who is thirsty.
Perhaps it doesn’t fit well because the thing being slaked isn’t clear? Howzabout “Please pass the water so I may slake my thirst” ?
I thought about that definition number 3 a bit. Yeah I’ve read old literature where “to slake” was used to mean “to wipe with a damp cloth” or “to dip into water.” So you would slake the forehead of a fevered man, or slake a newly forged horseshoe to cool it down before attaching it to a horse. Still not what we’re looking for but closer. You could ask to have your throat slaked perhaps. Close. I still say “feed me some water” is the best option.
Several years ago a major soft drink ad campagne used the phrase “thirst slaker”. Mountain dew?
So am I reading that there exists no word that would fit the bill?
Serve imples to offer in a manner fit for consumption.
Feed implies comestibles.
Pour imples into an object…say a cup, but doesn’t mean into me.
Slake would be for thirst–to slake a thirst, and not a person.
There must be a word for this…I can’t seem to find it.
In bike racing, the ‘feed zone’ is where you can get water and food. IIRC, In some races you are not allowed to ‘feed’ outside the zone, meaning if someone hands you a water bottle you could be sanctioned.
There is an instance of ‘feed’ being used for potables.
“Water me,” sounds like a good alternative to me. Of course, I guess it doesn’t work with an object. “Water me some water.” I dunno, I kind of like it just for the absurdity.
I’m with Irishman’s suggestion of “give” or “get.”
It’s a separate issue, but I gave up on the kind of neat dichotomies the OP presumes when I realized that while the opposite of majority was minority, the opposite of plurality was … minority.