Examine: this is actually a reexamination, since it was already examined in verses 50 and 51 (compare verse 34). In some languages the beginning of the verse may be restructured to say “As soon as it has been washed, he must look at it again. If the mildew has not changed….”

Has not changed in color: it will be clearer in some languages to say “If it is still greenish or reddish” (verse 49).

You shall burn it in the fire: as in verse 52, in the fire may be omitted as redundant. But the construction of the other part is not the same. The pronoun you (singular) is used in this verse in place of “he” of verse 52. This pronoun may refer to the priest or to the owner of the object that is to be burned. Jerusalem Bible takes it to mean the same as verse 52 and translates with the passive “It must be destroyed by fire.” But New Jerusalem Bible reverts to the more literal “you will burn it.” But it is possible to say “the priest will cause it to be burned” (see verse 52). While most versions retain the second person pronoun, the referent is unclear in Good News Translation and Revised Standard Version alike. In verse 57, Good News Translation translates the same expression as referring to the owner of the object. This should also be done in this verse if using a passive (as in New American Bible, Jerusalem Bible, and New Jerusalem Bible) is not possible in the receptor language.

Leprous spot: the word translated “leprosy” elsewhere is not used here. This word in Hebrew literally means “a boring or eating out.” The translation “rot” is good (Good News Translation, New English Bible). Translators may also consider Moffatt‘s “it has eaten into the stuff.”

On the back or on the front: the Hebrew uses the same two words that are used to describe the two types of baldness in verse 42. But here the context is very different. New English Bible translates “on the right side or the wrong”; New Jerusalem Bible “on its inner side or on its outer side”; New International Version “one side or the other”; New Jerusalem Bible “through and through.” In the context of clothing it seems to make more sense to speak of “inside and outside.”

Quoted with permission from Péter-Contesse, René and Ellington, John. A Handbook on Leviticus. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1990. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .