speech

Distinctions

dibbur (דיבור)

Root ד-ב-ר. Rashi (to Shemos 6:2 and 32:7): dibbur is harsh speech, learned from "the man, the master of the land, spoke (dibber) with us harshly" (Bereishis 42:30), and set against amirah as supplicatory speech that seeks the listener's favor (to Bamidbar 12:1). Rabbi Yaakov Tzvi Mecklenburg limits this: vayedaber to Dinah's heart (Bereishis 34:3) was intense, not harsh, or she would not have yielded; and Rashi himself (to Vayikra 10:19) reads dibbur as boldness rather than harshness. The Gemara (Makkos 11a) separates yadber (Tehillim 47:4), a term of leadership and of softness, from dibbur proper. Maharal (Nesivos Olam): in the context of Torah study dibbur is always pleasant, and only elsewhere is it harsh. Moshav Zekeinim (to Shemos 6:2) confines the harsh sense to the Chumash. Zohar (Idra Rabbah 132b): dibbur requires raising the voice to make a forceful announcement; amirah does not. Rabbi Shlomo Pappenheim (Yerios Shlomo): dibbur is the use of the vocal cords, with or without meaningful sound. Rav Hirsch develops this: dibbur is the physiological act of putting an idea into words, and applies even with no one present to hear; it is sound organized to carry an idea. Malbim, against the grain of the others: amirah is absolute while dibbur is a proposal, not necessarily binding.

amirah (אמירה)

Root א-מ-ר. Rashi (to Shemos 19:3): "so shall you say (tomar) to the House of Yaakov," the women, gently. Rabbi Pappenheim: amirah is speech uttered to convey a definite meaning, and its underlying two-letter root מ-ר, "exchange," fits, since dialogue is a constant switching of the parties between speaking and listening. Rabbi Wolf Heidenheim notes Ibn Ezra and Rabbi Yoel Ibn Shuaib (both to Tehillim 19:4) reaching much the same place. Rav Hirsch: amirah is communication, said to someone who converts the sounds back into ideas. Mecklenburg extends the מ-ר sense: amirah is speech that creates a reality, a switching of the situation into something else. Malbim, second approach: amirah is for short statements, dibbur for the long discourse that unpacks them; Rabbi Shmuel Jaffa-Ashkenazi similarly calls amirah the headings of a topic without the details, on the strength of rosh amir (Yeshayahu 17:6), the topmost branch, which the harvester cannot reach. The Vilna Gaon (to Bamidbar 22:5, second version) runs the other way and reads dibbur as the more communicative of the two.

maamar (מאמר) against dibrah (דיברה)

The question that organizes the whole piece: why Asarah Maamaros for creation (Avos 5:1) and Aseres HaDibros at Sinai. Zohar's line, that raising the voice serves only where there is a listener, gives one answer: at creation there was no audience, at Sinai there was. Rav Hirsch inverts it: maamar needs a receiver who turns the utterance into reality, and at creation each utterance took effect at once, while dibbur stands independent of the listener, as the Decalogue expresses Hashem's will whether or not it is obeyed. Sefer HaChachmah (ascribed to Rabbi Elazar Rokeach of Worms): amirah sets up the framework within which a dibbur can be said, so the ten utterances built the reality in which the Ten Statements have force. Rabbeinu Bachaya (to Shemos 13:1): dibbur alludes to the Written Torah, amirah to the Oral Torah, taken up by the Vilna Gaon, Rabbi Pinchas Horowitz of Frankfurt and the Netziv; hence Amora, the sage of the Oral Torah. The Vilna Gaon reads Haazinu by it: "Listen, heavens, and I will speak (va'adabeirah)," the Written Torah from above, "and let the earth hear the sayings (imrei) of my mouth" (Devarim 32:1), the Oral Torah from below. Zohar (Bereishis 239b): in Vayedaber Hashem el Moshe leymor, the leymor reveals what the vayedaber did not contain, so amirah is an expansion upon dibbur.

he'emarta / he'emircha (האמרת / האמירך) and chativah (חטיבה)

Devarim 26:17-18. Rashi: forms of separation and division; Israel set Hashem apart from the false gods, and Hashem set Israel apart from the nations. Rashi's alternative: forms of glory and pride, citing yisamru (Tehillim 94:4). Rav Saadia Gaon: expressions of being on top, from amir, the highest branch (Yeshayahu 17:6), each party placing the other on top; Donash Ibn Labrat preferred this, and Ibn Ezra (to Devarim 26:17) likewise reads greatness. Rav Saadia's second reading takes them plainly as what Hashem said to Israel and what Israel said of Him. Mecklenburg reads the doublet emor and ve'amarta of Vayikra 21:1 the same way: the first raises the kohanim's standing, the second is simply "say." Many chassidishe commentators (Rabbi Pinchas Horowitz of Frankfurt, Rabbi Shmuel Shmelka Horowitz of Nikolsburg, Rabbi Kalonymus Kalman Epstein of Krakow, Rabbi Yaakov Yosef of Ostrog, Rabbi Shimon Maryles of Jaroslaw) read amirah as an expression of love. The philological basis is the Targum, which renders these words chativah; chativah is "splitting" in Hebrew, which may underlie Rashi's "separation," but in Aramaic it also means to fall in love or to woo. Raavan, explaining the word in the piyut for the second night of Pesach, says outright that chativah is a term of love and points to these Targumim; the line in Akdamus about Israel making Him a chativah at dawn and dusk is read by Rabbi Yonah Isaac Neiman of Makow as the twice-daily declaration of love in Krias Shema (Berachos 6a). The resemblance to the Latin amor is a homonym and no basis for the reading.

Rendering guidance

• In the recurring Vayedaber Hashem el Moshe leymor, keep both verbs distinct: "Hashem spoke to Moshe, saying." "Said... to say" flattens the pair that the Zohar's derashah rests on.
• Trap: English "said" will absorb both words, and "spoke" will absorb dibbur and nefesh-level verbs like siach. Where a passage contrasts the two (Devarim 32:1; Shemos 19:3; the maamaros/dibros pairing), force the contrast: "speak" for dibbur, "say" for amirah, and let the surrounding clause carry the tone rather than smuggling "sternly" into the verb.
• Do not render dibbur as "commanded." Where the Torah wants a command it has tzivah; Malbim and Rabbi Moshe Feinstein both build on vayomer in the tzitzis parashah (Bamidbar 15:37) precisely because the verb there is not the usual vayedaber, and they draw opposite conclusions from it.
• Aseres HaDibros: "Ten Statements," "Ten Sayings," or "Decalogue." The popular "Ten Commandments" is a mistranslation, and any derashah on dibros against maamaros is lost with it.
• Where the pasuk pairs emor with ve'amarta (Vayikra 21:1), render the first as the charge and the second as the plain telling, following Mecklenburg, rather than repeating "say" twice.

Sources

Rabbi Reuven Chaim Klein, "Shavuot Special Feature!" (That's Amore, Parts 1 and 2), What's in a Word?, Ohr Somayach, 5 Sivan 5779 (2019-06-08): raw text in sources/whats-in-a-word/raw/8272-shavuot-special-feature.md. Primary loci: Bereishis 34:3, 42:30; Shemos 6:2, 13:1, 19:3, 32:7; Vayikra 10:19, 21:1; Bamidbar 12:1, 15:37, 22:5; Devarim 2:16, 26:17-18, 32:1; Yeshayahu 17:6; Tehillim 19:4, 47:4, 94:4; Avos 5:1; Makkos 11a; Berachos 6a; Zohar Idra Rabbah 132b, Zohar Bereishis 239b and Shemos 161a; Maharal, Nesivos Olam; Moshav Zekeinim to Shemos 6:2; Sefer HaChachmah; Rabbi Shlomo Pappenheim, Yerios Shlomo, with Rabbi Wolf Heidenheim's notes; Sifsei Chachamim to Devarim 2:16; Bartenura to Shekalim 5:3.