Leper, or leprosy

[Ronnmacc80]

How can you convey this concept in spanish?

I know these words are outdated in modern english, but still appear sometimes. They refer to someone who is badly scarred, crippled, maimed (by an accident or animal attack, etc).

Thanks

[Luna Azul]

How can you convey this concept in spanish?

I know these words are outdated in modern english, but still appear sometimes. They refer to someone who is badly scarred, crippled, maimed (by an accident or animal attack, etc).

Thanks

As far as I know, "leper" is "leproso", a person who has a terrible disease called "leprosy" (not leperacy).

By extension it's given to someone who is a social outcast.

In Spanish the normal word is "paria" (pariah), y cada país tiene su propio término para nombrar a este tipo de gente.

[aleCcowaN]

Leper ----> affected by leprosy ---> leproso
Leper ----> avoided by others because of a nasty or unhealthy appearance ---> leproso, sarnoso (mangy)
Leper ----> outcast; ostracized by others ----> paria
crippled, maimed --> lisiado, tullido
crippled (disabled) ---> minusválido, discapacitado motriz
scarred (pockmarks) ---> picado
in rags, dirty ---> roto, desastrado, desharrapado
"badly scarred, crippled, maimed (by an accident or animal attack, etc)"? ---> estar hecho una ruina, estar hecho un desastre, estar hecho una lástima

[Sancho Panther]

There's no such word as leperacy - it's leprosy, and in these enlightened times the use of the word leper is unacceptable, 'leprosy sufferer' is preferred.

[Perikles]

There's no such word as leperacy - it's leprosy, and in these enlightned times the use of the word leper is unacceptable, 'leprosy sufferer' is preferred.Sorry, I don't agree that has anything to do with enlightenment, it has to do with the opposite, a society obsessed by being politically correct on misconceived notions of correctness. So you can no longer call anything by its actual name. I don't subscribe to that. Somebody who suffers from leprosy is still a leper. [:mad:/rant]

[aleCcowaN]

I suppose Sancho said it ironically.

[Luna Azul]

Sorry, I don't agree that has anything to do with enlightenment, it has to do with the opposite, a society obsessed by being politically correct on misconceived notions of correctness. So you can no longer call anything by its actual name. I don't subscribe to that. Somebody who suffers from leprosy is still a leper. [:mad:/rant]

I couldn't agree more with you.

[AngelicaDeAlquezar]

This is the age of euphemisms, where some words that have acquired a pejorative charge are better omitted in some environments, so it's good to know that there are population sectors where some expressions are preferred. :)

[poli]

Leprosy(Hansen's disease) is rare these days in the western world, and it's curable with antibiotics. So someone with leprosy is no longer a dreaded incurable leper but rather someone suffering from leprosy. These days, in English,the word leper is a very old-fashioned word that you may hear in archaic bible stories. In contemporary English, it is used metaphorically like pariah dog, and I believe someone wrote earlier in this thread that lepro may be used that same way in Spanish.

[Sancho Panther]

Thank goodness for A.D.A. and poli's breath of intelligent thought, the others we have to assume will still be calling cerebral palsy sufferers "Spastics", Down's syndrome victims "Mongols" and patients with mental health problems "Lunatics".

The term "Leper" is pejorative and further stigmatises those unfortunate enough to be afflicted with it. The disease is mostly found in under-developed countries.

I am amazed that anyone would take the trouble to write in defence of such an ignorant, outdated and repugnant concept. The only feasible explanation I can conceive is linguistic or cultural differences.

I have sought confirmation from the "Oxford English Dictionary", probably the most respected authority on the language, here is their definition:-

"One affected with leprosy; a leprous person.The term is often avoided in medical use because of its connotations".

I have not supplied the link as it requires a paid subscription (or access via membership of a UK public library which I have), but I give you my solemn promise that that is the definition given (copied and pasted). There are other entries of no relevance to this topic.

Merriam Webster Thesaurus

leper

noun
Definition of LEPER

one who is cast out or rejected by society <a convicted child molester who is treated as a leper wherever he goes>Synonyms castaway (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/castaway), castoff (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/castoff), leper (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/leper), offscouring (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/offscouring), pariah (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pariah), reject (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/reject)
Related Words untouchable (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/untouchable); outsider (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/outsider); deportee (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/deportee), exile (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/exile)
Near Antonyms insider (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/insider)

I have consulted more than half a dozen online dictionaries, all without exception define leper as a; sufferer of leprosy and b; social outcast, outsider. Ergo leper is not an acceptable word to describe those who have the misfortune to suffer from leprosy.

I shall not dignify any further counter arguments with a response.

[Perikles]

I am amazed that anyone would take the trouble to write in defence of such an ignorant, outdated and repugnant concept. The only feasible explanation I can conceive is linguistic or cultural differences.And I'm really amazed at the trouble taken in the response. I perceive the difference to be one of technical accuracy.

I have consulted more than half a dozen online dictionaries, all without exception define leper as a; sufferer of leprosy ....So leper can be correct, then, as I said.

...and b; social outcast, outsider. Ergo leper is not an acceptable word to describe those who have the misfortune to suffer from leprosy.....Not usually, no. An insult or pejorative connotation is invariably recognized within a context, where it is (probably) clear if an insult is intended or not. It simpy does not follow that a word is automatically intended as an insult, even in a case like this one where it is commonly used metaphorically as one.

...I shall not dignify any further counter arguments with a response.Oh dear, then my post will just have to remain undignified.

[undignified RANT] To be honest, I feel quite strongly about a principle here, not particularly about the above word in question. I'm fed up with constant 'corrections' to the language because of inappropriate sensitivities and misunderstandings about how words are used. There are extremely few words which are automatically unacceptable, because the overtones of a word depend on the context and intention of the speaker. For example, I used to use the word immigrant if ever I needed to describe exactly what it means. Now it seems that the word has become unacceptable, so you have to call them migrants. No doubt in a decade or two, that will become prejorative, and we will have to call them grants or ants or nts. They are still immigrants, and always will be. I'm not, I'm an emigrant. Or inmigrante.

[/RANT] :)

[aleCcowaN]

Yes, the word "leper" stigmatizes the poor chap (or chap-a, if she is a lady, don't be disrespectful) and abracadabra vanishes the coin. The German Democratic Republic was clearly a democratic society, although evil blokes trying to disparage* and discredit it dared to call it one-party tyranny. If so, it had been called the "German One-party Tyranny", those obnoxious sons and daughters of the unknown soldier! What about calling an as* a de-enhanced jerk? That term stigmatizes an universal and essential piece of bodywork which is becoming increasingly multifunction in these ages and is the target of gazes and soon a mandatory developed source of pleasure when rubbed.

About this "debate", if there really can be one, it all reminds me this thread (http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=169560), where dauda98's post #18 says it all. Attributing the value of social-spellbound to plain and direct words is just another pathetical byproduct of this power-to-the-shepherds-of-the-lame societies in which a she-mother**cker takes offense of not being called father**ckette, no matter she insists she is an actor.


*now, it is "disparage"

[Perikles]

it all remembers:bad: me this thread (http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=169560), where dauda98's post #18 says it all. Thanks for the link. And hey - it reminds you of .... :)

[aleCcowaN]

Thanks for the link. And hey - it reminds you of .... :)
Got it! Thanks.

Pasaron ya cinco años desde ese hilo y parece que las cosas se han puesto peor y no mejor. Espero que el monstruo de la "corrección política" jamás prospere en estas tierras, aunque muchas mentes débiles ya han sido colonizadas culturalmente y hay intentos de aplicarla que se pueden atestiguar en esos ridículos "compañeros y compañeras", "ciudadanos y ciudadanas" y "no digas que es piojoso de alguien que tiene piojos mes tras mes, año tras año" (creo que "pediculoso" lo haría ver peor) y otras porquerías que se oyen. El resultado de tanta corrección política es gente que ahora siente orgullo porque tiene chinches en su cama cuando ni sus padres ni sus abuelos ni sus bisabuelos las conocieron.

Que más quisiera yo que visitar los EE.UU y que todos me llamen nigger siendo yo de ojos celestes y teniendo cicatrices por las quemaduras de sol antes de que la pantalla solar grado 110 fuera de uso habitual; o white trash, o redneck. Ya sabré yo cuándo sentirme ofendido y cuándo halagado, como cualquier mayor de 18 años.

[poli]

You guys are getting all bent out of shape over a word whose meaning
changed nearly eighty years ago. Once upon a time Hansen's disease
was dreaded and incurable. Victims of the ailment, also known a leprosy,
were sent off the leper colonies. There was shame involved. Lepers
were untouchable.

The word leper connoted a permanent condition which included a one- way street of isolation, painful disfurgment and slow undignified death. This all changed with modern medicine. Today people with this disease temporarily suffer a condition that is cured with a course of antibiotics. They are no more lepers than people with bacterial pneumonia are pneumers (this is not a word).

Language morphs. To use leper in the old sense requires a histiroric
perspective, because leprosy is just not a issue outside of very
impoverished extremely tropical regions, and, even there, they are cured.

The new meaning as written before has a social context. Outcasts.
are metaphically social lepers. AIDS sufferers in the 1980's were the new
lepers. The old meaning is still valid but only in historical contexts.

This is not a question of political correctness. It is a question of correct
word usage.

[pjt33]

[undignified RANT] To be honest, I feel quite strongly about a principle here, not particularly about the above word in question. I'm fed up with constant 'corrections' to the language because of inappropriate sensitivities and misunderstandings about how words are used. There are extremely few words which are automatically unacceptable, because the overtones of a word depend on the context and intention of the speaker. For example, I used to use the word immigrant if ever I needed to describe exactly what it means. Now it seems that the word has become unacceptable, so you have to call them migrants. No doubt in a decade or two, that will become prejorative, and we will have to call them grants or ants or nts. They are still immigrants, and always will be. I'm not, I'm an emigrant. Or inmigrante.

[/RANT] :)
I haven't come across the imposition of "migrant". It's rather unfortunate, because to me it carries across connotations from its usage in ornithology and suggests an annual or biennial migration.

[Perikles]

Language morphs. The old meaning is still valid but only in historical contexts.....

This is not a question of political correctness. It is a question of correct word usage.I agree absolutely with that last statement. Let us not forget that language does not morph at equal rates in all cultures, especially with a language so widespread as English. I don't agree that the meaning is always only valid in a historical context, even though it might be for some.

I haven't come across the imposition of "migrant". It's rather unfortunate, because to me it carries across connotations from its usage in ornithology and suggests an annual or biennial migration.It is indeed unfortunate, because it distorts language for the sake of political correctness, and is misleading apart from being annoying.

[poli]

In the United States the term migrants refers to migrant workers or rather
migrant farm workers. They travel around this enormous country harvesting whatever fruit may be in season. It's a hard life. They often are immigrants, but certainly not all immigrants are migrants. We still differenciate between the words.

[aleCcowaN]

Soy leproso (http://www.soyleproso.com/home.php)¡Grande Niuls! (or was it Ñuls? :thinking:)

Very different of "estar leproso" or "estar tuberculoso". What a funny thing that political correctness in Spanish ignores any division between "ser" and "estar". How would squirrelly grammar deal with this?

I don't think the matter is if ignorant people -at least 50% of people in any society, any time- discriminates by using "leper" in the context of health. They'll probably do, becoming agitated any time a known leper gets in their vicinity. They are just told "tiene la enfermedad de Hansen, pero en unas semanas va a estar curado". The matter is if the 5% more educated, keen, foresighted or whatever, is doing it. Obviously, it is easier to elevate a vulgarity to the category of social rule than educate the masses.

It was in one of The Simpsons' Houses of Terror that a Moe-zombie said something like "we prefer to be called active dead" on behalf of his fellow zombies. That says it all. It's the same way of thinking that makes people not to die but to pass or to be gone. I'd prefer to believe in Santa. It's just one sole naive approach to reality instead of thousands, and it only distorts my cognition about how a chimney works.

[Perikles]

In the United States the term migrants refers to migrant workers or rather
migrant farm workers. They travel around this enormous country harvesting whatever fruit may be in season. It's a hard life. .Well, this is the point I'm making. Your term 'migrant' describes how they are, as it should be. But then some politically correct moron decides that in the UK, the word 'immigrant' is insulting (why? because ironically, they themselves foster that prejudice), and that 'migrant' is not, so 'migrant' replaces it, and the language becomes fuzzy.