most translations translate "of/about me"
for you have not spoken of me what is right, as my servant Job has. (in Job 42:7, ESV)
for you have not spoken the truth about Me as did My servant Job. (in Job 42:7, JPS)
However, some have taken this to mean "to me" meaning they did not retract and repent of what they said like Job did.
Senses of use in Old Testament
וַיְהִ֗י אַחַ֨ר דִּבֶּ֧ר יְהוָ֛ה אֶת־הַדְּבָרִ֥ים הָאֵ֖לֶּה אֶל־אִיֹּ֑וב וַיֹּ֨אמֶר יְהוָ֜ה אֶל־אֱלִיפַ֣ז הַתֵּֽימָנִ֗י חָרָ֨ה אַפִּ֤י בְךָ֙ וּבִשְׁנֵ֣י רֵעֶ֔יךָ כִּ֠י לֹ֣א דִבַּרְתֶּ֥ם אֵלַ֛י נְכֹונָ֖ה כְּעַבְדִּ֥י אִיֹּֽוב׃
And it was so, that after the LORD had spoken these words unto Job, the LORD said to Eliphaz the Temanite, My wrath is kindled against thee, and against thy two friends: for ye have not spoken of me the thing that is right, as my servant Job hath. (KJV)
As the question points out, there is more than one way to translate this. In fact, in Hebrew, the preposition could mean: concerning, to, at, by, against, unto, within, in between, toward, in among, etc. There is a wide range of possibilities when it comes to prepositions, and in Hebrew, context is key.
Based on the context, we know that it applies to what these men have already said. Because we can see their words recorded in Job, we also know to whom they were speaking.
They were speaking to Job.
Therefore, we can eliminate "to me" (God) as a reasonable option.
We are left with two realistic possibilities: "of" or "about". Of these two, "about" is more specific. "Of" allows one to interpret in two ways: 1) it can mean "about"; or 2) it can mean "by". If, therefore, we are uncertain as to the original intent, our safest course is to translate it in a way that gives it the broadest sense.
In this case, "of" is the best option, as the KJV has it.
In the scroll of “Job” (Ιωβ) known in Hebrew as Iyov (אִיּֽוֹב) - Chapter 42 : verse 7, the phrase “Elay” אֵלַי in Hebrew is translated “to-Me” in English (although the JPS uses “about-Me”) [https://www.sefaria.org/Job.42.7?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en]
If the singular masculine Speaker had spoken in 2nd person, we would read : Elekha ( אֵלֶיךָ ) = “to-you”.
If the singular masculine Speaker had spoken in 3rd person, we would read : Elav ( אֵלָיו ) = “to-him”
But the Hebrew proclamation אֵלַי in Iyov 42:7 is first person singular (hinting to the reader that YHVH is masculine) by stating אֵלַי “Elay” , else the phrase would be in first person feminine אֵלַי “Elay”. - Wait.. What?? In Hebrew “Elay” אֵלַי means either “to-Me” [masculine or feminine]?- That’s interesting.
Yet the Hebrew “Elay” causes prepositional disagreements when reading The Tanakh in English, so let’s ask the Septuagint who offers the Greek interpretation μου “of-Me”. [https://www.blueletterbible.org/lxx/job/42/1/t_conc_478007]
Since the Septuagint is the answer to all Biblical Hermeneutic questions, then אֵלַי “Elay” in Hebrew should mean “of-Me” (based on the Greek interpretation) although אֵלַי literally translates “to-Me” (based on the Hebrew).
