In his commentary on Job, David Clines, while outlining different possibilities for understanding the unique use of אֵמֶר‎ in Job 20.29, suggests that the word is out of place and that no convincing emendation has been proposed. This article explores this lexeme, showing that there are good reasons for reading אִמְרוֹ‎ as ‘his speech’ or ‘his word’, rather than the stunning consensus that reads the lexeme as ‘decreed to him’ or other minority positions that propose various emendations. This article first outlines the various readings found in both major translations and interpreters, also showing two problems with the current understanding. Then this article validates my own proposal by considering how the ancient versions rendered אִמְרוֹ‎, by examining the parallelism of Job 20.29, and by demonstrating how my proposal coheres with the narrow context of Job 20, the broader context of the second speech cycle, and the virtual quotation in 27.13.

大卫·克莱恩斯（David Clines）在关于约伯的评论中，概述了理解约伯20.29中对אֵמֶר的独特用法的各种可能性，但表明这个词不合适，也没有提出令人信服的建议。本文探讨了这个词素，表明有充分的理由将אִמְרוֹ读作“他的讲话”或“他的话”，而不是那种令人震惊的共识，即把词素理解为“对他有礼貌”或其他提出各种建议的少数派立场。本文首先概述了在主要翻译和口译员中发现的各种读物，还显示了当前理解中存在的两个问题。然后，本文通过考察约伯20.29的并行性，通过考虑古代版本如何渲染אִמְרוֹ来验证我的建议。