Biblical Hebrew Forum

[ben.crick AT argonet.co.uk (Ben Crick)]

On Thu 27 May 99 (19:04:38), manstey AT portal.ca wrote:
>  1. NJB and NIV have "contagious" and "infectious" but is the disease
> necessarily contagious? Does nega` definitely imply this meaning,
> and/or is it clear from the context?

 Dear Matthew,

 NeGa` TsaRa`aT is a "sore" or "scar" of "leprosy". NeGa` is a wound or
 sore or symptomatic blemish. TsaRa`aT is Biblical leprosy; whether or not
 it is the same as Hansen's Disease is beside the point. Mycobacterium
 Leprae is present in large numbers in the nasal secretions of sufferers,
 and the disease seems to be passed to new victims by prolonged close
 physical contact. It is contagious, but not overly so.

 Symptoms take one of two forms: tuberculoid or lepromatous. Tuberculoid
 leprosy is benign and self-limiting; but lepromatous leprosy is always
 relentlessly progressive, and is similar to biblical leprosy.

> 2. Is "skin-disease" appropriate for tsara`at?  The translations
> software that will contain this term will be used in hundreds of different
> cultures, so nothing too specific will work, such as TWOT's "leucodermia
> and related diseases"!

 TsiR:`aH is a Hornet or similar large aggressive stinging insect (Exodus
 23:18, 30; Deuteronomy 7:20; Joshua 24:12). This word could be a derivative
 of TsaRa`aT. Maybe the sting of a Hornet raises a weal similar to a
 leprosy sore.

 Hansen's Disease is not a skin-disease; but the visible symptoms are
 initially perceived as skin-blemishes. "Dermatitis" and "leucodermia" are
 NOT appropriate translations. The main damage is to the nervous system,
 causing loss of sensation and lack of awareness of injury to the tissues.
 Hence the gross disfigurements and loss of fingers, toes, etc. by secondary
 mechanical damage and ulceration.

 The NEB and REB have "skin-disease" for Leprosy; but the word "skin-" is
 not included in TsaRa`aT.

> 3. Would something like "symptom of.a.skin-disease" be the best
> compromise between accuracy and understandability?  We prefer a
> word-for-word gloss wherever possible, so just "skin-disease" for the
> whole expression is less than ideal.

 Why not just use the word "leprosy"?  It is understood that biblical
 leprosy is not necessarily identical to Hansen's Disease; but The Leprosy
 Mission's physicians and surgeons find the Levitical "Law of the Leper"
 quite germane to the clinical problems they face in the field. My best
 suggestion would be "sore.of leprosy".

 HTH
 Ben
-- 
 Revd Ben Crick, BA CF
 <ben.crick AT argonet.co.uk>
 232 Canterbury Road, Birchington, Kent, CT7 9TD (UK)
 http://www.cnetwork.co.uk/crick.htm