What’s in a Word?

other

with

את · אתו · אתי · עם · עמו · עמי

Bottom line

Both render with in English, and no English preposition separates them. The difference is whether the two parties stand as equals. The Vilna Gaon and Malbim: im is "with" in the full sense, two equal and cooperative parties, while es is the weaker "with," one party dominant and the other along for the ride. Rabbi Shlomo Pappenheim and Rabbi Yaakov Tzvi Mecklenburg hold the exact reverse: im is circumstantial, they merely happened to be together, while es is deliberate and full. Neither view is marginal; when a source darshens a switch between the two words, find out which school it belongs to before translating, because the two produce opposite readings of the same pasuk.

Distinctions

es (את) as a preposition

Es is the commonest word in Tanach, roughly twelve thousand appearances, and usually carries no lexical meaning at all: it marks the object of a verb, and Rabbi Nachman Marcuson likens it to an arrow pointing the reader to what the verb acts on. Ibn Janach and Radak list the places where it does carry meaning: "to" (Vayikra 13:49; Bamidbar 13:17), "from" (Bereishis 44:4; Bamidbar 35:26), "next to" (Bereishis 40:4, 44:24), "instead of" (Vayikra 22:17; II Shmuel 12:6), "on top of" (I Melachim 9:25), and "with." Suffixed it gives itto, itti, itah. Rashi (to Bereishis 37:18) simply glosses itto as imo.

im (עם)

Ayin-mem, "with," suffixed as imo, imi, imah.

the Vilna Gaon and Malbim: im is the stronger

The Gra reads the Bilam narrative on this. Hashem first forbade him to go imahem (Bamidbar 22:12), then told him to rise and go itam (22:20), and the Torah reports that he went im Balak's men, whereupon Hashem's anger flared (22:21-22). The Gra: im is "with" in the fullest sense, the joining of two equal and cooperative parties; es carries no such equality. So Bilam was barred from joining their effort (im), permitted only to travel alongside them (es), and when he went im he broke the condition. The Gra and Malbim both derive this from es's ordinary grammatical use: in achalta es halechem the eater and the bread are anything but equal, so es in the sense of "with" marks the unequal pair, one active and one passive. Malbim applies it to Lot: he came to Eretz Yisrael itto with Avraham (Bereishis 12:4), deferring to him, and by the parting he is imo (13:14), asserting himself as an equal.

Rabbi Shlomo Pappenheim and Rabbi Yaakov Tzvi Mecklenburg: es is the stronger

Rabbi Shlomo Pappenheim (Cheishek Shlomo) and Rabbi Yaakov Tzvi Mecklenburg (HaKesav VeHaKabbalah): im is "with" circumstantially, two who happen to be together, and es is "with" deliberately and absolutely. Rabbi Mecklenburg reads the same Lot verses the other way round: itto at the outset because Lot attached himself to Avraham in order to learn from him and become his equal, and imo at the parting because he never got there, which he takes as the basis of the Zohar (Bereishis 78b). Two more of his cases: Besuel washed the feet of the men who were itto with Eliezer (Bereishis 24:32) while he still took them all for equals, and once Eliezer had explained his mission and emerged as the leader the Torah says the men who were imo ate and drank (24:54). At Yaakov's burial, Pharaoh's servants and the elders of Mitzrayim went up itto with Yosef (Bereishis 50:7) as near-equals, while the chariots and horsemen, far below him in rank, went up imo (50:9). On Bilam, though, Rabbi Mecklenburg's own reading follows the Gra rather than his general rule.

Rendering guidance

  • Ordinary prose, either word: "with." No English preposition marks the distinction, and forcing one ("together with" against "alongside") reads strained if the source is not making the point.
  • Where a source is darshening the switch, supply the sense in a bracket or a note rather than in the preposition: "with them [imahem, as full partners]" against "with them [itam, merely accompanying]."
  • Trap: "with" absorbs both words completely, so a derashah built on the change from itto to imo simply vanishes in translation unless the Hebrew is kept visible. Where the pair turns up in one passage (Bereishis 12:4 and 13:14; 24:32 and 24:54; 50:7 and 50:9), quote both Hebrew forms.
  • Second trap: most appearances of את are the object marker and carry no meaning at all. Before reading "with" into one, check that the word is not simply pointing at the object.
  • Never render the two by a single English word in a passage where the source reads them as opposites; and note which school the source belongs to, since the Gra and Rabbi Pappenheim assign the equality to different words.

Sources

Rabbi Reuven Chaim Klein, "Are You Really 'With Me'?", What's in a Word?, Ohr Somayach, 10 Tammuz 5779 (2019-07-13), https://articles.ohr.edu/articles/are-you-really-with-me; raw text in sources/whats-in-a-word/raw/8323-are-you-really-with-me.md. Primary loci cited: Bamidbar 22:12, 22:20, 22:21-22, 13:17, 35:26; Bereishis 12:4, 13:14, 24:32, 24:54, 37:18, 40:4, 44:4, 44:24, 50:7, 50:9; Vayikra 13:49, 22:17; II Shmuel 12:6; I Melachim 9:25; Zohar Bereishis 78b; Rabbi Shlomo Pappenheim, Cheishek Shlomo; Rabbi Yaakov Tzvi Mecklenburg, HaKesav VeHaKabbalah.