Letter of the Day | Patois is not the problem

THE EDITOR, Madam:

I write in response to Shakey Williams’ letter, ‘The Patois Hypocrisy’ published on May 19, which was triggered by MP Nekeisha Burchell’s decision to speak Patois in Gordon House. His argument regurgitates a familiar, but flawed claim: that valorising Jamaican Patois somehow threatens English, literacy, or Jamaica’s competitiveness.

First, no serious advocate of Jamaican language rights is arguing that English should be abolished or marginalized. What many of us support is bilingualism and biliteracy, the ability of Jamaicans to function confidently in both Jamaican Creole and Standard Jamaican English. No one disputes that English remains important for international communication, academia, diplomacy, and formal writing. However, recognizing Jamaican Creole in Parliament or other public spaces does not weaken English.

Mr Williams also argues that many defending MP Burchell spoke Standard English during television interviews, as though this somehow disproves the value of Patois. But Jamaicans routinely move between Creole and Standard English depending on audience and context. 

Third, opposition to using Jamaican Creole as a medium of instruction is equally misguided. Research across the world, including UNESCO’s long-standing advocacy for mother-tongue education, shows that children learn additional languages more effectively when educators build upon the language students already speak. Jamaica’s literacy crisis did not emerge because children know Patois; many children enter school speaking Patois, but are taught as though they already fully command Standard English.

Mr Williams also invokes the notion of ‘proper English’, but no such objective category exists. Drawing on scholars, such as Nelson Flores and Jonathan Rosa's raciolinguistics perspective, as well as Braj Kachru’s framework of World Englishes, it is important to recognize that educated Jamaicans typically speak ‘Standard Jamaican English’, not prestige British or American varieties. Unfortunately, many of us speaking English often face subtle ridicule and discrimination because of the sound and rhythm of the English that proceeds from our mouths. Language hierarchies remain deeply entangled with race, coloniality, and power.

Finally, Mr Williams’ competitiveness argument ignores linguistic reality. People already know that much of daily business, especially among small businesspeople is conducted in Patois. People bargain, market products, sell and build customer relationships daily in Patois, the language most natural to them.

Decolonizing Parliament does not mean replacing every proceeding with pure Patois. It means recognizing that the language spoken by the majority of Jamaicans is fully capable of carrying serious political thought and national debate. I salute Burchell for making a likkle ‘good trouble’ while doing the people’s business in the voice of the Jamaican massive.

D. MICHAEL BRITTON 

Brooklyn, New York