Tag Archives: Khmer

Jenny Asks #5

Posted on by
2
Shirley came to see us off at the airport

Previously on our Jenny Asks series we addressed our location in PP and shopping, then our neighbourhood and church, then traffic and walking, then getting to school and what we eat. This post its on cultural miscommunication and friends.

Jenny: What’s an embarrassing cross cultural miscommunication you’ve had recently (mine was getting in the wrong tuk tuk but being convinced I was in the correct one)? 

Sam: I have cross-cultural miscommunication with my American friends on a weekly basis, ha! I haven’t had too many with Cambodians lately (that I’m aware of, ha). My two favourite mistakes were more to do with language. The first was 6 years ago when I told everyone for a week I was turning 45 (in Khmer this is “sae-sup bram”). I got SO MANY compliments on how young I look! Until my language helper said, in Khmer, oh I thought maybe you were only turning 37. To which I realised my mistake and corrected myself, that I was actually turning 35 (“sam-sup bram”). Whoops! 

The second mistake was when I was asking my helper how much she paid for something worth about $2.50 or 10,000 riel. Mid sentence I muddled the words for thousand (poan) and ten thousand (mern) and said “moan” which means chicken!!  

Jenny: Tell me about your friends. Where are they from? Why are they in Cambodia?  

Sam: We have friends from many places! A friend from Singapore who serves with OMF runs bible studies with many women, including a group of students from the university, and plans to equip Christians in a remote province. We have Danish friends who teach and equip vulnerable women at an NGO. We have several American friends connected to organizations that rescue and help reintegrate girls from sex slavery. A few people at church serve with SIL, or Wycliffe, with Bible translation work done for remote communities. We have other friends who serve at the Bible school, both Khmer and expat. We also know many people who teach at Hope, Logos or Asian Hope, the 3 Christian International schools near where we live. We know missionaries who use their religious freedom to share with people in Cambodia who would not get to hear about Jesus in their home country. The 2 families who live over the road from us have been in Cambodia for 20 years. Most people we meet come and go every 3 or so years. 

Missionary as … Collaborator co-creator

Posted on by
Reply

The last description in this series is Collaborator or Co-creator. These two descriptions capture mission as a joint work together between missionary and locals, as equals, where both parties play a role. Although technically not a picture, the overall sense of both of these is in the combining of two parties in partnership towards one goal. And while I’m not technically a linguist, it seems to me that the term collaborator gives the sense of labouring together. 

A further aspect of these descriptions is the feature of both parties bringing expertise to the table in order to make something new. In this way, both parties are essential and neither is enough on their own. This resonates when I think about teaching theology; I’m trying to bring theological ideas through English to Khmer. My theological ideas are not enough on their own and neither is Khmer enough on its own. But in the combination, there is a synergy in the process of coming together. Co-creator builds on this coming-together aspect but also points to the creative aspects of partnerships, a creativity that mirrors the Creator. Something new is created as we wrestle with theology from English to Khmer.

Missionary as … Resource

Posted on by
Reply

I’m currently trying to write an article on missiology about the role of resources in mission. One of the things I’m toying with is the idea of a missionary as a resource. Money is clearly a resource, language too is a resource. Surely the missionary is a resource too. In this framework, I ask what the role of external resources is in relation to internal (local) resources. 

This picture of a missionary as a resource echoes the coach picture, here, in terms of being a resourcer. However, characterising the missionary as a resource provides some passivity to the missionary role. That is, the resource is at the service of the local. They can use the resource in the way they think. Instead of it just being about what the missionary thinks is important, they allow themselves to be directed and used like a resource would be. They hand over power to someone else. This picture seems to empower the local while at the same time disempowering the missionary in a vulnerable way. Agency is located more with the local than the missionary. 

Even though missionaries may know a thing or two, their expertise in this metaphor are placed subordinately to the locals and directed towards goals that the missionaries themselves may not have thought of or thought important prior to being involved in mission. As a resource the missionary is put in the service of another rather than servicing their own goals.

I like the picture, because my arms display my unreadiness. When you are the resource, change comes not from a position of control, but from outside and we are less ready for it than when as the agent we try to make the change happen ourselves.

Missionary as … Goalie

Posted on by
Reply

This description, shared before, here, combines the sniper and coach in a different way. The goalie has special skills that the other players don’t. The missionary as goalie emphasizes that mission is done together as a body, as a team, not just as an advisor. They have an important role but they are generally not the ones kicking goals for the team. Their place is at the back, sort of behind the scenes in some sense. Yet being at the back they see things slightly differently from other players who are more in the midst. Good goalies will communicate what they see to the whole team. They provide helpful information, like a coach, yet as a player. Goalies have some special abilities that other players don’t. They can use their hands. However, their special abilities are limited to a small arena in comparison to the whole field. The goal square sets good limits on the goalie’s abilities to be contained and used for the right purposes.

When I think about theology in relation to mission the role of the goalie resonates in this regard. Missionaries can provide a wealth of information particularly in relation to theology that comes from the world-wide church. Like the goalie they provide a point of view that assists the other players as they create and apply theology. Yet they are not the ones who see theology develop (score goals). That is done by other players, by the teamwork of the whole team, goalie included but not goalie exclusively. In preventing goals, maybe this is a good metaphor for preventing heresies or problems from occurring. Yet in reality this is a normal part of missionary work. We help and yet even in our helping we create problems, hopefully unintentionally.

The goal square for me feels like Phnom Penh Bible School (PPBS). In that square I can jump around and use my hands. Outside PPBS, I’m not only limited to my feet, but the goal remains unguarded. Thus expeditions out of the square should be well calculated and brief as I focus on my main role.

Missionary as … Coach

Posted on by
1
My height advantage didn’t help at all

Although as a player in the picture above, my size makes me stick out in a similar way to the coach who is wearing different clothes to the team.

I wrote about a missionary being like a coach previously, here. I like the coach picture because it shows that a missionary plays a different role to locals in the game of mission. They are a support role, they are not the players. They are advisory only. They can help before in preparation. They can help after in debrief and recovery. During the game they can only assist, they cannot control or take over (generally speaking and with slightly differing degrees depending on the sport). Instead of the focus being on the coach, the action is focussed on the players and their resources rather than what the coach can do. Whether the coach sits in the box or on the sideline, they stand outside the play. Even though they stand closer than the crowd, they are not as close as the players.

If the bridge metaphor shows how a missionary connects to cultures in their person, and the sniper metaphor shows the timeline of a missionary career as well as their target, the coach metaphor explores the outsided-ness that a coach has despite being close to the game; there is both proximity and distance. Next week I start to mix metaphors as I explore the missionary as a player, the goalie.

Missionary as … Sniper

Posted on by
1

The picture of a sniper resonates with my experience of being a missionary particularly as it relates to timeline and target. On numerous recountings, I have described a former missionary’s perspective on mission to me, as we chatted at CMS Summer School one year. He said to me in the first term, learn the language and don’t kill anyone (other versions are stay married or make a friend). Second term, you can make a list of all that needs addressing. Third term, you can address the first item on that list only. Over roughly 10 years, this is a rough sketch of the missionary timeline and target.

To me the above timeline and target matches the picture of a sniper as one part of the way an army wins a war. Snipers have a key expertise. They can take out a small target from a long way away. In terms of mission service, aiming for taking out a target in the third term of service echoes this ability. It echoes the waiting and watching, basically just the time involved in this task; mission work is time intensive. Patience is required; is demanded.

The sniper pic also echoes needing a good vantage point; it takes time to learn a new culture and be able to start to speak into it. Even though I know Khmer culture more now than when I first came, I’m less inclined to offer strong pronouncements about what Khmer Christians should do; my vantage point has shown me all the things that I don’t know about Khmer culture. A wise missionary said it was easiest to teach a book of the Bible, harder to teach doctrine and even harder to teach practical ministry subjects cross-culturally. Each step requires more and more cultural knowledge to do well.

Finally, the sniper metaphor highlights a sniper’s weakness. If the enemy gets in close they are at a disadvantage in hand to hand. While a sniper is specialised, their speciality is a liability when it comes to other activities. A weakness of mine at the moment is that I struggle to understand conversations between Khmer speakers that don’t involve me. This weakness reminds us that a sniper is only one part of an army. They won’t win the war, but they play an important part. Their specialist equipment speaks to the skills they bring that are ultra good at one thing and not great at others.

As I think about timeline and target in our context: First term learn Khmer (though, never finish learning). Second term begin teaching in Khmer and later give leadership a go. Third term becomes a culmination of the first two terms: improving teaching in Khmer as I lead in various capacities. This hopefully gives you a sense of my sniper technique in terms of target and timeline.

Missionary as … Series

Posted on by
Reply

I used the photo above in our first year in Cambodia, here, in a blog series about settling in to a new country. It was meant to illustrate all the decisions that missionaries need to make when they first arrive. It was part of a time when I was working out Cambodia as a place. Growing in my knowledge of Cambodia as a place also means growing in my knowledge of my place in Cambodia. That is, part of getting to know a location is knowing our place in that location. This series is about that; our place in this location, Cambodia.

Over the years I have been toying with different descriptions that capture our experience as missionaries here. Some of these, like the Bridge description, here, I have been fiddling with since before we even arrived in Cambodia. Others I have found helpful as I reflect on being on location, here. Hopefully they provide helpful insights into our experience crossing cultures in ministry. In sharing them I seek to both further consolidate my thinking on these mission images, while at the same time providing a sense of what we do and why we do it this way. Hope you find these helpful. Would love to hear your thoughts and create some interaction around these pictures of mission.

Post-arrival #10: When the Khmer language is hard for Cambodians

Posted on by
Reply

This is my earliest recorded language mistake, after a month on location, now immortalised. I was trying to say ‘I like to ride a bike’. I ended up saying the equivalent of ‘they like wide-ing bic-eze’.

One movie my family loves is The Terminal.Tom Hanks plays a guy stranded in an airport without any English. As he learns English he is able to interact with a love interest (Katherine Zeta-Jones). In a hilarious moment, his hours of practicing asking her out with the phrase, ‘Would you like a bite to eat?’, comes out ‘Eat to bite’. Learning a second language is hard. But our own languages are hard too. And Khmer is hard for Cambodians too.

I was trying to use a Khmer word in class. I had written it up on the board so that it wasn’t just my pronunciation that they were stumbling over. My Khmer students didn’t understand. The word had been translated by another lecturer, so I wasn’t 100% sure why this word had been used. I knew another word that conveyed the meaning of my English word, so I used that instead.

There were a few things happening in this situation. The first is that this shows where I am starting to get up to in my Khmer language (following on from my recent language update). As I teach, we are wrestling together (the students and myself and other lecturers) about the best Khmer words to use. There is a normal and not-normal aspect to this situation. Because Khmer is their language not mine, my immediate reaction is to question whether I’ve got it right. This is a good reaction, but not a normal reaction. If I was working in English, I wouldn’t have that same questioning (though maybe I should). So the first thing that happens is I question whether the word I’ve used is right or not.

Second, this situation illustrates an important part of the Christian journey for every Christian regardless of language. In English and Khmer, growing in our faith means growing in our Christian vocabulary, understanding new words that help us learn about God and ourselves. So becoming and growing as a Christian has a learning-a-new-language component to it too. Just like if we were a doctor we would need to learn all the technical terms for sickness and such. In my head I wonder whether this situation is one of these moments, a chance for the students to learn some new vocab for their faith.

Third, this situation also illustrates an aspect of the Khmer language. There are two language modes, royal language and street language. Royal language are terms that you would use in relation to the king or divinity or a monk, but you wouldn’t use them in relation to an average person. They tend to be more academic and used seldomly in regular life. The second mode is general language used more in common conversation and even academic situations outside of those specific examples above. The particular wrestle is when to use royal language for Jesus and when not to. It can help to highlight his divinity. But it can also distance his humanity from ours when different words are used to describe him and for us. This is an interesting discussion that I have with my students. At present I just go for the both/and approach. Both terms have their importance. So sometimes when my students don’t understand it’s because the language is tricky and unfamiliar, even for them.

Post-arrival #9: Teaching in Khmer: then and now

Posted on by
2
My favourite Intro to the Bible overview that I was taught by Dr Bill Salier.

I recently made a trip to a provincial town, Battambang. I think it’s the second or third largest city in Cambodia. There, representing PPBS, I was teaching Education by Extension (EE), a way to bring theological education to places in Cambodia that have less resources and opportunities to receive training in theology. 

My teaching program content was very similar to a one hour lesson that I did four years ago to residents from a province not far from Battambang, Koh Kong as they visited with a good friend of mine, Dr Jeff Hogue. See here for that post. The differences are shocking! That first time I taught for one hour. This time I taught for 18 hours in 3 days. That time I spoke in Khmer maybe 20-40% of the time. This time basically 100% Khmer. Then I had a missionary friend use the main concepts that I was trying to communicate and use his Khmer to get the points across. This time I had a Khmer lecturer give me tips (like that I should not say that the Israelites wanted to have sex with a king). Last time I had little interaction with individual students. This time we laughed when I said map instead of promised land, or when I couldn’t get my mouth around a fairly standard word. That time I couldn’t explain beyond the basics. This time I could talk about the nature of covenants, use the word for ‘important themes’ to show literary devices particularly in the Old Testament and convey the abstract ideas like the benefit of understanding context using the illustration of sight and touch as two ways to learn things.

I found out just recently that one of the things my missionary friend back then was impressed by was how little Khmer I had and yet I was giving it a go. Now I see the fruit of years of language learning. For those who are currently language learning (of which I still am), keep at it. It gets easier. And it’s so encouraging looking back.

Post-arrival #8: Read my lips

Posted on by
2

When someone makes kissy lips at you in Cambodia, they’re not flirting, it’s not a romantic gesture, they’re pointing. This could get you into lots of trouble if you assume that a young girl is making a move. Actually, it’s rude to point with your finger, so Cambodians pucker up and lift their head slightly back in the direction they want you to look. They’re pointing with their mouth. This is not just a female thing, I’ve seen male Khmers do it too. It’s one of those cultural things that no-one has really said anything about. Just 6 years down the track this is one of those ongoing learning culture things. Feels nice to pick up this cultural gesture now and very useful to be aware of when I’m talking to female Khmers.