Exegesis:

ousa en rusei haimatos ‘being in a flow of blood,’ ‘had a hemorrhage.’

ousa ‘being’: the present participle describes a state begun in the past and still in effect in the present.

en ‘in’: describes the condition or state, the woman was in (cf. en pneumati akathartō ‘in an unclean spirit’ 1.23).

rusis (only here in Mark) haimatos (5.29; 14.24) ‘flow of blood,’ ‘hemorrhage.’

dōdeka etē ‘during twelve years’: the accusative case describes duration of time (cf. 2.19 hoson chronon ‘so [long] a time [as]’). It is not to be inferred that the woman had had an unchecked hemorrhage lasting twelve years: what is said is that she suffered from hemorrhage during these twelve years without being cured. In such condition she was ceremonially unclean (Lev. 15.25) as well as physically ill.

kai … pathousa … kai dapanēsasa … kai mēden ōphelētheisa alla … elthousa ‘and suffering … and spending … and not improving a bit but … getting (worse)’: all four aorist participles describe the condition of the woman during the twelve years.

polla (cf. 1.45) pathousa (8.31; 9.12) ‘suffering much.’

hupo pollōn iatrōn ‘under (the care of) many physicians,’ ‘at the hands of many physicians’ (iatros ‘physician’ cf. 2.17).

dapanēsasa ta par’ autēs panta ‘having spent all she had,’ ‘spent all her property.’

kai mēden ōphelētheisa ‘yet profiting nothing,’ ‘yet benefiting nothing.’

ōpheleō (7.11; 8.36) ‘profit,’ ‘benefit,’ ‘help’; in the passive, as here, ‘receive help,’ ‘be benefited’: the meaning here is ‘she didn’t improve….’

alla mallon (7.36; 9.42; 10.48; 15.11) ‘rather, on the contrary.’

eis to cheiron elthousa ‘she got worse,’ ‘her condition grew worse.’

eis ‘into’ expresses degree.

cheiron (cf. 2.21) ‘worse’: the comparative of kakos ‘bad.’

elthousa ‘coming (into a worse condition).’

Translation:

The Greek of verses 25 and 26 consists of a series of connected participial constructions which must usually be broken into several complete sentences. However, in order to introduce this woman it is often necessary to “locate” her with respect to the actual context, i.e. ‘a woman was there who….’

Flow of blood (or as in the King James Version “fountain of blood”) has frequently been badly translated. In one language the translator had employed a literal ‘fountain of blood,’ which people assumed was a miraculous source of blood which the woman had, apparently in her courtyard or somewhere on her property. However, the people could not understand why the woman would be so poor, since blood in that region was sold at a good price for use in preparing food. In another language the translation referred not to menstrual flow, but to blood coming from a wound, and to have had an open wound for twelve years seemed entirely incredible to the people. Accordingly, it must be made quite clear – though not vulgarly so – that this flow of blood refers to a menstrual disorder. Ways of speaking of this are varied: ‘for twelve years her water was running out,’ in which menstrual flow is always called ‘water’ in contrast to blood from a wound (Central Mazahua), ‘her month did not pass for twelve years’ (Tojolobal), ‘suffered month for twelve years’ (Chicahuaxtla Triqui), and ‘sickness of blood lasted twelve years’ (Eskimo). In Shilluk menstrual flow is always called ‘blood of the moon.’

Suffered much under many physicians is translatable in two different ways: (1) ‘suffered much while she was being treated by many doctors’ or (2) ‘many doctors who treated her caused her to suffer much.’

Spent may be equivalent to ‘had paid out’ or in some instances to ‘this cost her all that she had.’

The last clause may be rendered as ‘she did not get better; she got worse,’ or ‘rather than getting better, she got worse.’

Quoted with permission from Bratcher, Robert G. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on the Gospel of Mark. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1961. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .