Technically and historically, "evolution" means ontogeny, or developmental change. It's use for what we now think of as evolution is due to the developmentalist, or Lamarckian, notion of evolution as a predetermined trajectory (Lamarck's "tree" diagram is effectively a road map of pathways a species might evolve), which was adopted by Spencer before Darwin and imposed upon him thereafter.
I know, but that's of historical interest only. "Evolution" hasn't been used to mean ontogeny in a long time.
Evolution *does* mean "change over time" - that is its general sense.
In my impression, this "general sense" is a metaphorical use of the sense "evolution" had in biology in the 1950s (when some kind of "progress" was widely thought to be part of it). It is more widespread in English than elsewhere, and doesn't occur in science except maybe geology.
I think it is better to call descent with modification "phylogeny" and natural selection "natural selection", etc. Just for clarity. And ontogeny "ontogeny". And leave "evolution" to advertisers, and Romans reading scrolls.
Not going to happen. In all languages that are fine with importing words at all, "evolution" is a very widely known technical term of biology, used as I described it, and "phylogeny" is a much less widely known technical term that refers to, well, entire phylogenetic trees, not a bit of anagenesis in a petri dish.
We scientists coined the technical term, we own it. That's the advertisers' problem, not ours.