Writing Jamaican Creole is different from English

THE EDITOR, Madam:

It is understandable why anyone would prefer the Patois version written by Miss Lou and other forerunners in the field. It is a familiar way of penning the words that conveniently meets our usual expectations. it is a more casual way of writing which is, unfortunately, referred to as the ‘chacka-chacka’ way, or writing Patois.

It is ungracious comment, however, in light of Miss Lou’s almost single-handed effort to defy the establishment and the elitist posture of the day to secure the native tongue in printed form. Without her linguistic revolutionary role, there would hardly be any foundation on which the language could evolve.

Notwithstanding that niggle, however, formalising the Jamaican Creole is a forward-thinking move and a positive development. For example, opposers of Patois often complain that it is broken English. The formally written Patois is one way of discrediting that view. The way standard Patois is constructed is so very unlike English that you would hardly need to confuse the two or do a swap in cases of uncertainty – the lines separating then are clear and distinct. It may even explain the frustration some have in reading formal Jamaican Creole – because it’s not just some makeshift words attempting to mimic English in a substandard way.

Maybe an hint in appreciating the way standard Patois is written, is not to read it as if you were trying to make sense of every single word, but to catch first the line of though, and then all unfamiliar words start making sense. It is a language worth looking into.

HOMER SYLVESTER