MoreThan Words

UNICEF’s Response to Language Barriers

in Rohingya Refugee Camps
 This is one of a series of case studies based on UNICEF-supported communication, community engagement
and accountability activities as part of the larger humanitarian response to the Rohingya refugee crisis in
Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh, from September 2017 to December 2019.

Editing: Rain Barrel Communications – Saudamini Siegrist, Brigitte Stark-Merklein and Robert Cohen
Design: Azad/Drik

The opinions expressed in this case study are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the policies
or views of UNICEF. Extracts from this case study may be freely reproduced provided that due
acknowledgement is given to the source and to UNICEF.

© United Nations Children’s Fund, July 2020

This
UNICEFis one of a series of case studies based on UNICEF-supported communication, community engagement
Bangladesh
This
and is one of a series
accountability of case
activities studies
asRoad based
part of the on UNICEF-supported
larger communication,
humanitarian response community
to the Rohingya refugee engagement
crisis in
BSLaccountability
and Office Complex, 1 Minto
activities as part of the larger humanitarian response to the Rohingya refugee crisis in
Cox’s Bazar,
DhakaBazar, Bangladesh,
1000,Bangladesh, from September 2017 to December
Bangladesh from September 2017 to December 2019. 2019.
Cox’s
2 Author:
INFORMATIONDr.
AND Hakan Ergül
FEEDBACK CENTRES

Editing: Rain Barrel Communications – Saudamini Siegrist, Brigitte Stark-Merklein and Robert Cohen
Editing: Rain
Design: Barrel Communications – Saudamini Siegrist, Brigitte Stark-Merklein and Robert Cohen
Azad/Drik
Design: Azad/Drik
The opinions expressed in this case study are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the policies
Theviews
or opinions expressed
of UNICEF in thisfrom
. Extracts casethis
study are
case those
study of the
may authorreproduced
be freely and do notprovided
necessarily
thatreflect
due the policies
or views of UNICEF. Extracts from this case study
acknowledgement is given to the source and to UNICEF. may be freely reproduced provided that due
acknowledgement is given to the source and to UNICEF.
© United Nations Children’s Fund, July 2020
© United Nations Children’s Fund, July 2020
UNICEF Bangladesh
UNICEF
BSL Bangladesh
Office Complex, 1 Minto Road
Dhaka 1000,Complex,
BSL Office 1 Minto Road
Bangladesh
Dhaka 1000, Bangladesh
22 INFORMATION AND FEEDBACK CENTRES
INFORMATION AND FEEDBACK CENTRES
More Than Words
UNICEF’s Response to Language Barriers
in Rohingya Refugee Camps

UNICEF’s Response to Language Barriers in

Rohingya Refugee Camps 1
 Acknowledgements

The stories, lessons learned and UNICEF Bangladesh team,

recommendations included in this case study
exemplify the efforts of many people and
partners who have worked, and continue to
work, tirelessly to ensure quality, scale and
effectiveness of the crisis response. UNICEF
Bangladesh is especially thankful for the
generous contributions of our donors, who made
the success of the interventions described in this
case study possible.
Donors:
including surge support:
Abdelkader Musse, Edouard Beigbeder, Jean
Metenier, Naqib Safi, Sara Bordas Eddy, Shairose
Mawji, Sheema Sengupta, Tomoo Hozumi, Veera
Mendonca, Viviane Van Steirteghem.
Section chiefs, Cox’s Bazar team leads and staff
of health, nutrition, WASH, child protection,
education, CAP and SPEAR sections as well as
gender and field services.

UNICEF wishes to express its sincere gratitude to
the Governments of Canada, Germany (through
KFW Development Bank), Japan, the United
Kingdom, the United States of America (US
Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration),
as well as the European Union for their generous
contributions to this critical response.
C4D team: Aarunima Bhatnagar, Ataul Gani
Osmani, Mohammad Alamgir, Farid Alam,
Mousumi Tripura, Naureen Naqvi, Neha Kapil,
Parveen Azam, Paryss Kouta, Shohley Sharmin,
Yasmin Khan.

Partners:
Translators without Borders: Ben Noble, Irene
Scott.

With special thanks to the CwC Working Group

and the Information Hub Sub-Working Group
members for their support to the information
hubs programme activities in the camps and host
communities.

2 MORE THAN WORDS

Contents

Acknowledgements 2
Abbreviations 4
Introduction 5
Background 5
UNICEF response to language barriers 7
Rapid language assessment 8
Information hubs assessment 8
Lessons learned and way forward 11
Endnotes 12

Figures
Excerpts from an online glossary of health terms in seven languages spoken in
Figure 1 9
Rohingya refugee camps
Figure 2 Online glossary of numbers in seven languages spoken in Rohingya refugee camps 10

UNICEF’s Response to Language Barriers in

Rohingya Refugee Camps 3
 Abbreviations

AAP Accountability to Affected Populations

BITA Bangladesh Institute of Theatre Arts

BRAC Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee

CAP Communication, Advocacy and Partnerships

C4D Communication for Development

CCP Johns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs

CMV Community Mobilization Volunteers

CwC Communication with Communities

DRR Disaster Risk Reduction

IEC International Education Centre

IFC Information and Feedback Centre

ISCG Inter Sector Coordination Group

SIM subscriber Ientification Module

SPEAR Social Policy, Evaluation, Analytics and Research

UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund

WASH Water, Sanitation and Hygiene

4 MORE THAN WORDS

Introduction
The onset of the Rohingya refugee crisis in
August 2017 irrevocably changed the present and
the future of hundreds of thousands of children,
women and men from the Rohingya community
and introduced the entire Cox’s Bazar district,
one of the poorest areas in Bangladesh, to an
unprecedented crisis and a new social reality.
The situation was so dire that a month later, on
20 September 2017, UNICEF activated a Level
3 emergency response1 – the highest level of
alarm.2 Together with the Government and other
humanitarian partners, UNICEF immediately
responded to provide life-saving assistance and
protection to the newly arrived Rohingya children
and their families, also taking a lead role in
health; nutrition; water, sanitation and hygiene
(WASH); child protection; and education – areas
that are fundamental to the survival, protection
and wellbeing of the refugee community.
UNICEF also played a strong supporting role
in communication for development (C4D)
interventions as well as community engagement
and accountability to the affected population.
Background
The Rohingya refugee crisis is a multi-faceted,
complex phenomenon that presents grave threats
to the life, health and security of an estimated
915,000 people,3 more than half of them
children,4 living in the camps across Bangladesh’s
Cox’s Bazar district. The cross-national and
political nature of the crisis further complicates
the situation. When the refugees arrived from
their native Myanmar, they were surrounded by a
world of legal, cultural and financial barriers, and
faced with the many needs and vulnerabilities
specific to the location in which they were
resettled. The Rohingya community struggled to
gain access to basic information and services and
to restore dignity in their lives.
One of the most urgent priorities after the
onset of the crisis was to establish two-
way communication between aid workers of
humanitarian agencies present in Cox’s Bazar and
the refugees. Effective communication, however,
requires more than the exchange of information.
It must be clear, concise and accessible to all
parties. It needs to be carefully crafted to the
unique needs of different vulnerable groups
within the community (including boys and girls,
women, people with disabilities and those who
are illiterate), and it must be persuasive and
culturally sensitive to the values and customs of
the affected population.
Humanitarian assistance cannot succeed
without using the language used by the refugee
communities. But language is not a neutral
vehicle, it is a powerful instrument that names
and defines the world, giving meaning to all that
people do. It is, as well, one of the few stable
components of the Rohingya personal identity, a
link that bonds them to the cultural, religious and
social origins they were forced to leave behind
in Myanmar. At least 95 per cent of the refugees
in Cox’s Bazar identify Rohingya as their primary
language at home.5 Despite multiple languages
simultaneously spoken in the refugee camps (i.e.,
Bangla, Burmese, Chittagonian [or Chatgaya],
Rohingya and English), Rohingya remains the
spoken language that refugees understand and
prefer.6
UNICEF’s Response to Language Barriers in
Rohingya Refugee Camps 5
 Rohingya language

The Rohingya language is the mother tongue and primary language of communication for
the refugee population in Cox’s Bazar. The Rohingya language is an oral language without
a standardized written script. Chatgaya, the dialect spoken by the people of Chittagong in
Bangladesh, is closely related to Rohingya but there are significant differences in accent
and vocabulary, which constitutes a risk of confusion between the two languages. The main
difference between Chittagonian (or Chatgaya) and Rohingya is the source of the words they
borrow from other languages. Chittagonian borrows from standard Bengali, while Rohingya
borrows from Burmese, Arabic, Farsi and Urdu.

Only through the language of the community,
which takes into consideration the meaning,
cultural codes and connotations of daily life, can
its members cope with the challenges they face.
Only in their own language can they access and
fully comprehend life-saving information, find
answers to their concerns and feel respected.
Language heals and saves lives, but if used
inappropriately, it also injures.
Early assessments emphasized the importance of
direct face-to-face communication7 with Rohingya
refugees. This was prioritized because three
quarters of the refugee population could not read
or write and depended on oral communication to
access life-saving information and basic services
in the camps.8 Initially, there was insufficient
capacity to communicate in Rohingya, which
complicated and delayed the dissemination of
information.9,10 The politicized nature of language
in the camps also increased the vulnerability of
the refugees, as government restrictions were
blocking them from learning Bangla, the local
language, or attending formal state schools, as
part of the government’s reluctance to allow
their long-term integration. Not knowing the local
language aggravated the sense of marginalization
in the camps, where programmes could not be
officially broadcast in Rohingya and access to SIM
cards11 and mobile phone services12 is restricted.
Findings from assessments conducted two years
after the onset of the crisis provided evidence for
the persistence of the language barrier. Despite
the strenuous efforts and considerable progress
achieved by both the refugee community and
humanitarian agencies, language remained and
continues to remain a serious barrier between
the Rohingya people and aid workers. About 40
per cent of Rohingya refugees say they cannot
communicate with aid providers and many cannot
use complaint boxes to voice their concerns
because, in some cases, the instructions are
provided only in written English.13 As a result,
Rohingya refugees may be confused and
discouraged while they continue to seek access
to accurate information and knowledge about
essential issues in their everyday lives.14 The
language barrier has specific and serious impacts
on Rohingya children, often leaving them without
the needed care and services.

6 MORE THAN WORDS

UNICEF response to language barriers

Addressing the language barrier in the Rohingya
refugee camps is necessary to improve access to
life-saving messages and to strengthen long-term
resilience. Therefore, UNICEF and its partners
have implemented a number of initiatives in the
Cox’s Bazar camps. These efforts are in line with
the UNICEF 2018–2021 Strategic Plan, which
emphasizes an integrated approach to improve
the delivery of faster, more effective and at-scale
responses for children and their families trapped
in humanitarian emergencies, and to increase
the organization’s accountability to the affected
population.15

Religious sensitivities

The Rohingya community places great value in religion, which serves as a core component of
their identity. The Rohingya practice of Islam includes specific norms and taboos, some of which
are linked to gender. For example, sacred places such as mosques or graveyards are off limits
to women at all times. Menstruation and childbirth are seen as ‘impure’ and so it is forbidden to
discuss these topics, or issues related to sanitation, near a mosque.
Extracted from a guidance for WASH developed by Translators without Borders, with partial
support from UNICEF.

Gender divide
Although Rohingya, Bangla and Chittagonian have much in common, certain gender and
reproductive health-related words are not consistent across the three languages. For example,
in Bangla, the word for pregnant is gorbhobothi; in Chittagonian, it is fuathi; and in Rohingya, it
is hamil. The word for menstruation in Rohingya (haiz) is also markedly different from Bangla/
Chittagonian (maashik).
Extracted from a guidance for WASH developed by Translators without Borders, with partial
support from UNICEF.

Breastfeeding taboos
The Rohingya community has a number of taboos and practices associated with breastfeeding.
Colostrum, sometimes known as first milk, is the highly nutritious breastmilk produced right after
giving birth. Rohingya speakers call it ãda dud, which means ‘sticky milk’. There is a perception
in the Rohingya community that this milk is dirty and physically and spiritually damaging to the
newborn. Therefore, many new mothers discard the colostrum until the mother‘s milk (bukor
dud) comes in. In place of colostrum, Rohingya sometimes give honey, sugar solution and
mustard oil to infants just after birth (called prelacteal feed). They believe this helps clear the
baby’s throat and stomach.
Extracted from a nutrition guidance prepared by Translators without Borders, with support from UNICEF.

UNICEF’s Response to Language Barriers in

Rohingya Refugee Camps 7
 Given the scale of the refugee crisis and the
complexity of the local context, humanitarian
actors have been struggling to meet the
increasing demand for interpretation and
language services in the camps. In order to
step up the response, UNICEF established a
partnership in November 2017, three months after
the onset of the crisis, with Translators without
Borders, an international non-governmental
organization that provides translation services for
humanitarian agencies.
Rapid language assessment
With support from a number of partners including
UNICEF, Translators without Borders carried out
a language assessment (‘Rohingya Zuban’)16 in
Cox’s Bazar refugee camps in November 2017.
The findings from the assessment were in line
with previous reports on language barriers in
the camps, noting that among new arrivals, only
17 per cent of males and 6 per cent of females
were able to read and understand basic Burmese
text. The Rohingya population and the frontline
humanitarian workers regularly encounter serious
difficulties in understanding and translating the
technical jargon of the humanitarian response,
especially in the areas of protection, WASH,
nutrition and health. The assessment shows that
comprehension improves dramatically when
participants are given a simple picture with a
key message. Based on data collected from
qualitative fieldwork, the assessment made a
number of suggestions for overcoming language
barriers in the camps. These include more
support and resources for interpreters; more
efforts to translate humanitarian terminology
into Rohingya, using simple and accessible
humanitarian terminology; multilingual glossaries,
information and education materials and training
contents, developed and made available for all
humanitarian workers across sectors; and more
efforts devoted to production of audio-visual
materials for key messages.
8 MORE THAN WORDS
Information hubs assessment
To help disseminate life-saving messages on
health, nutrition, WASH, child protection and
other areas, and to provide on-site referral for
services in the camps, UNICEF and partners
established several information and feedback
centres (IFCs) across Cox’s Bazar. In addition to
these services, the IFCs receive and respond to
community feedback and complaints.
Because of the core function that IFCs perform,
it was important to assess their impact on
the overall response. Therefore, UNICEF, in
partnership with Translators without Borders,
conducted a field assessment of 12 IFCs across
the camps.17 The assessment provided valuable
information and insights into the language
barriers, as well as documentation of best
practices in communication and information
management. The findings revealed the success
of the information hubs in delivering life-saving
information and serving as a hub for the refugee
community to voice their concerns and give
feedback on the humanitarian assistance provided
in the camps. The findings further suggested that
miscommunication related to language barriers
is still present in the camps, undermining the
information and services provided.
Initiatives supported by UNICEF and partners in
response to the language barriers include the
following:
• 2018 – Rohingya language guides for
education, nutrition and WASH, and a
Rohingya language fact sheet18 in English and
Bangla.
• June 2018 – An online multilingual glossary/
word bank of WASH, which has since been
expanded to include 150 health terms
focusing on disability and inclusion, and
200 new terms to help with the challenges
 that can arise during discussions on gender
(see Figure 1 and Figure 2 for examples of
health terms and numbers in five languages),
prepared by Translators without Borders and
partially funded by UNICEF and Oxfam.
• 2019 – Information Hubs Assessment: The
• Initial training for interpreters.
• 2019 – Rohingya adaptation/dubbing of Meena
educational cartoons.
• 2019 – UNICEF U-report:19 Recommendations
on how it works and how it could be improved
technically, how it could be better linked to
some of the work of health, WASH and other
areas.
study aimed at identifying language and
related communication challenges in the
information hubs managed by UNICEF’s
partners as part of the Cox’s Bazar’s response.

Figure 1. Excerpts from an online glossary of health terms in seven

languages spoken in Rohingya refugee camps

TWB Glossary for Bangladesh

Source: Translators without Borders, see <https://glossaries.translatorswb.org/bangladesh/

UNICEF’s Response to Language Barriers in

Rohingya Refugee Camps 9
 Figure 2. Online glossary of numbers in seven languages spoken
in Rohingya refugee camps

TWB Glossary for Bangladesh

Source: Translators without Borders, see <https://glossaries.translatorswb.org/bangladesh/

10 MORE THAN WORDS

Lessons learned and way forward

• Closer coordination between UNICEF and • From a language and communication

partners specializing in language assessment perspective, while there have been
and translation would help identify and improvements in the services information
prioritize steps to address language barriers hubs are providing, language challenges
and better respond to the needs and are still impacting the effectiveness of the
vulnerabilities of the affected population. services.
This should include a system to ensure that
interpreters and trainers have a balanced
workload and that internal assessments and
ongoing monitoring in the field can be done
easily.

• Gender- and age-disaggregated data on

language capacity and use in the Rohingya
community is urgently needed.

• A participatory ethnographic inquiry is needed,

with a specific focus on refugees’ perception
of the linguistic obstacles they face in their
everyday life in the camps – especially the
most disadvantaged, including girls, young
mothers, people with disabilities and the
elderly – and how to tackle them.

• When volunteers are not available to assist,

host community IFC staff and Rohingya
community members report difficulties
understanding each other at times. Translators
without Borders’ 2018 comprehension
study showed that one in three (36 per
cent) Rohingya people cannot understand
a basic sentence in spoken Chittagonian.
Field observations from Translators
without Borders confirmed this linguistic
disconnect, witnessing complaints that were
misunderstood and at times misinterpreted by
Chittagonian-speaking IFC staff.

UNICEF’s Response to Language Barriers in

Rohingya Refugee Camps 11
 Endnotes

1
United Nations Children’s Fund, ‘Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee Crisis in
Bangladesh’, Volume 1, UNICEF, New York, November 2018, p. 15, <www.unicef.org/evaldatabase/files/
UNICEF-Rohingya_Response_Evaluation_VOLUME_I-2018-003.pdf>, accessed 17 December 2019.

2
For United Nations procedures applied in different levels of emergencies, see United Nations Office for
the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, ‘System-Wide Level 3 (L3) Responses’, <www.unocha.org/
where-we-work/current-emergencies>, accessed 14 March 2019.

3
This figure includes 34,917 previously registered refugees from Myanmar in Kutupalong refugee camp
and Nayapara refugee camp. See <https://data2.unhcr.org/en/situations/myanmar_refugees>.

4
United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, ‘Rohingya Refugees Response – Bangladesh:
Population factsheet’, UNHCR, 30 September 2019, <https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/
download/71790>, accessed 28 January 2020.

5
Internews, ‘Information Needs Assessment: Rohingya and host communities – January–April
2019, Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh’, Internews, p. 11, <www.humanitarianresponse.info/sites/www.
humanitarianresponse.info/files/documents/files/in_bd_ina_cxb2019.pdf>, accessed 7 January 2020.

6
Translators without Borders, ‘The Language Lesson: What we have learned from communicating with
Rohingya refugees’, TWB, November 2018, p. 10, <https://translatorswithoutborders.org/wp-content/
uploads/2018/12/TWB_Bangladesh_Comprehension_Study_Nov2018.pdf>.

7
Bailey, Nicola, et al., ‘How Effective is Communication in the Rohingya Refugee Response? An
evaluation of the common service for community’, BBC Media Action, September 2018, <www.bbc.
co.uk/mediaaction/publications-and-resources/research/reports/asia/bangladesh/rohingya-response>,
accessed 17 March 2019.

8
Innovations for Poverty Action, ‘Current Level of Knowledge, Attitudes, Practices and Behaviours
(KAPB) of the Rohingya Refugees and Host Community in Cox’s Bazar: A report on findings from the
baseline survey’, IPA, 2018, <https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/4._h_c4d_kapb_
baseline_survey_full_report_final_ipa_oct_15_18_0.pdf>, submitted to UNICEF 15 October 2018.

9
Iacucci, Anahi Ayala, et al., ‘Information Needs Assessment: Cox’s Bazar’, Internews, November 2017,
<https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/Internews_Coxs_Bazar_Publication_web.pdf>,
accessed 11 March 2019.

10
Translators without Borders, ‘Rohingya Zuban: Rapid assessment of language barriers
in the Rohingya refugee response’, 2017, <www.arcgis.com/apps/Cascade/index.
html?appid=683a58b07dba4db189297061b4f8cd40>, accessed 10 March 2019.

12 MORE THAN WORDS

11
United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, ‘Connectivity for Refugees: Displaced
& Disconnected’, UNHCR, 2019, p. 24, <https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/
resources/1556029681.UNHCR%20GSMA%20Displaced%20%26%20Disconnected%20-%20
Connectivity%20for%20Refugees%20-%20web.pdf>, accessed 6 January 2020.

12
Inter Sector Coordination Group, ‘Quick Facts: Mobile phone policy for Rohingya – Potential operational
impacts’, ISCG, 10 September 2019, received from the Communicating with Communities Working
Group via e-mail.

13
Loy, Irwin, ‘A Novel Approach to Reach Rohingya Refugees: Speak Rohingya’, The New Humanitarian,
29 May 2019, <www.thenewhumanitarian.org/news/2019/05/29/novel-approach-reach-rohingya-
refugees-speak-rohingya>, accessed 2 August 2019.

14
‘Information Needs Assessment: Rohingya and host communities, January–April 2019’, , pp. 30–31.

15
United Nations Children’s Fund, ‘UNICEF Strategic Plan 2018–2021 – Executive Summary’, UNICEF,
New York, January 2018, p. 22, <www.unicef.org/publications/files/UNICEF_Strategic_Plan_2018-2021.
pdf>, accessed 7 January 2020.

16
In Rohingya, zuban means language. For more details on the assessment, see ‘Rohingya Zuban: A
Rapid assessment’.

17
Translators without Borders, ‘Information Hubs Assessment Report May 2019’.

18
Translators without Borders, ‘Updated TWB Glossary for Bangladesh Includes Gender, Disability, and
Inclusion’, TWB, 26 November 2018, <https://translatorswithoutborders.org/updated-twb-glossary-for-
bangladesh-includes-gender-disability-and-inclusion>, accessed 27 July 2019.

19
Interview with Translators without Borders staff, Cox’s Bazar, 12 February 2019.

UNICEF’s Response to Language Barriers in

Rohingya Refugee Camps 13
UNICEF’s Response to Language Barriers in
Rohingya Refugee Camps 15
16 MORE THAN WORDS