Gosnell L. Yorke, Contributor

WHAT IS true mainly of the coastal regions of Africa and elsewhere in the world is also true of the Caribbean as a whole - including Jamaica. And that is: we have witnessed the not-yet-fully understood global linguistic phenomenon involving what scholars have called the "pidginisation" and, ultimately, the "creolisation" of the various languages of Europe and elsewhere - be it Dutch, English, French or Spanish in the case of the Caribbean. As we know, these four aforementioned languages were imperially imposed on our African ancestors who were forced, against their collective wills, to toil as slaves on several sugar plantations throughout the Caribbean; to work as hewers of wood and drawers of water.

Because our ancestors, by and large, were not allowed to live and work together in their ethnic groups (or tribes), they were not able to communicate with each other through the use of their mother tongues - be it Akan, Balanta, Igbo or Yoruba from West Africa or wherever. This situation not only helped to discourage our enslaved ancestors from plotting their escape from their masters' dehumanising treatment (or worse) but it also meant that our ancestors were forced to creatively adopt and adapt the language of their European masters as well. This created a complex situation in which the various European languages, serving as lexifier languages, were blended with the various African mother tongues to produce, over time, some new bona fide languages we now call Creoles (not dialects).

'Divide and rule'

That is, pidginisation and later creolisation were made inevitable by the slave masters' linguistic policy of 'divide and rule'. In sociolinguistic terms, the more powerful European 'High' or H language was brought into contact with the relatively powerless African 'Low' or L language. This accounts for the fact that the Caribbean is now one of the best places on the planet to study the creolisation of such European languages. For example, out of a total of about 80 Creoles spoken worldwide, about 30 of them are spoken right here in the Caribbean, alone.

And since the various Bible translation agencies in the Caribbean are driven by the defensible conviction that all 6,000 or so languages currently spoken in the world at large are equal, that English is only one of them, and that God does speak most compellingly to each of us in our mother tongue or heart language, the language in which we dream, it is not at all surprising that the Haitian Bible Society, the Bible Society of The Netherlands Antilles (based in Curaçao) and the Bible Society in the Eastern Caribbean (based in Barbados) have already translated and published, alone or in partnership with Wycliffe Bible Translators Caribbean, the complete Bible or at least the New Testament in some of the Caribbean creoles. In particular, we already have the complete Bible in both Haitian Creole and Papiamento (a Creole spoken in the Dutch Antilles); the New Testament with the Psalms in St Lucian and Dominican patwa; the New Testament in Sranan (a Creole spoken in Suriname), etc. In addition, there is ongoing Bible translation work in the Creoles spoken in the French Antilles, Belize, Guadeloupe and Martinique.

Ongoing work

In terms of Africa, for example, we already have the complete Bible in Crioulo (a Portuguese-based creole spoken in Guinea-Bissau in West Africa) and the New Testament in Seselwa, a creole spoken in The Seychelles which is located in the Indian Ocean. In addition, there is ongoing work in African creoles spoken in Cape Verde, a former Portuguese colony located in the Atlantic Ocean (out West) and in Mauritius, also located in the Indian Ocean (out east).

What I am saying, essentially, is that the ongoing translation of the Bible into Jamaican (patois) spearheaded by the Bible Society of the West Indies (based in Kingston) is really part of a much larger whole and must not be viewed as either novel or earth-shaking in its effects.

The truth is, it is part and parcel of a much larger whole. And much of what is being said for and against the ongoing Patois Bible project has either already played itself out elsewhere or is still doing so. For example, some have embraced the idea wholeheartedly as a positive development in that the affirmation or valorisation of one's creole or language by way of Bible translation helps to boost one's sense of self since the sacred Bible functions for many as a powerful life-enhancing text and that having it in one's heart language or mother tongue contributes substantially to one's own identity formation.

But then there are also others who have raised the concerns that the Creoles are sometimes too fluid in their writing systems or orthographies to allow meaningful writing and reading in them, while some have expressed the concern about the whole economics of it (it being such an expensive venture).

Academic concerns

Still others have raised concerns about the academics of it in that they assume that an emphasis on the creole in school will hamper the scholastic development of young people who ought to be taught to speak proper English, French, Spanish, Portuguese, or whatever, if they are to succeed as students and later, as professionals in life. And there is something to be said for that, of course.

On a larger scale and within the context of the Caribbean now in its post-colonial phase, a region known not as a Bible Belt per se (as is true of the Southern United States) but more so, perhaps, as a "Bible Basin" since we are also ardent lovers of the Word (the Bible) as well, such translations of the Bible should also be viewed, it seems to me, as a positive post-independent and post-colonial development as well. It is a way of asserting ourselves in the realm of language - especially in light of the unrelenting forces of globalisation.

The question for some is this: if this self-assertion or sustained drive towards self-determination has been done in the realm of music and, to a lesser extent, perhaps, in religion as well, for example, then why not in the realm of language too? Of course, the most productive language policy for the Caribbean might well be one in which the official languages of English, French, Spanish and Dutch and the various locally created Creoles are taught and mastered - producing a functional bilingualism among its speakers.

That is, in the case of Jamaica, it would and should not be either English or Jamaican but both. Incidentally, of the six official languages now spoken in the Caribbean, two of them are Creoles, namely, Haitian and Papiamento. The other four are those European ones already mentioned.

It is in this larger context in which we should place the ongoing discussion (and even debate) about the merits or demerits of the Bible Society of the West Indies translating the Bible into Jamaican (patois).

After all, Jesus himself is known to have spoken Aramaic, his own mother tongue, and not only Hebrew, the language of the Jewish Scriptures but (and if He did at all) also the two dominant languages of his day, namely, the commonly-spoken Greek which was made possible by the colonial exploits and exploitation of Alexander, the Great, who lived and died before His time or Latin, the official language of the conquering Romans-those who ruled the world when He both lived and died; when He uttered His life-changing words and performed His life-changing works.

And if Jesus showed no hesitation in embracing Aramaic, His mother tongue, in His conduct and conversation with others around Him, including when dying on the cross, then why should one hesitate do so in Jamaican-if that just happens to be one's mother tongue?

Dr Gosnell L. York, is professor of religion in the School of Religion and Theology at Northern Caribbean University (NCU) and a former translation consultant with the Africa Area of the United Bible Societies - the parent body of the Bible Society of the West Indies.