(Flushing from the compliments) ita, as it is a quote, I think I'd leave it, but I'm not sure how I'd tell her whole story, if she was a main character.

I think there are a couple spelling methods angling for standardisation, but I'm not sure it's been accepted that there's even a need to preserve the form in written word (the assumption being that most people who speak patois a) shouldn't b) are illiterate, I assume).

I think maybe I'd change the "mi" to "me",

I can see that -- I don't think it would overly break the reading of it, except "mi" is used to mean "my" or "I" in that passage, and that might be misleading.

and assuming waan is want, I'd change it to wan' or even to want.

The presence of the "t" would just be wrong. He's not saying a "t," and he would be someone else if he were. "Wan'" could work, although it might take a Jamaican a second to work out what was going on.

I'd change "di" to "de".

Why? It's not pronounced that way, and it's not that much closer to the word it means, to my eye.

Mostly, I wouldn't write it, because I'm incapable.

Which is perfectly fair.

I'm not sure how I'd tell her whole story, if she was a main character.

I feel a need to trawl Jamaican fiction now, and see the ways it's being done, for various markets.

Dialect is way the hell tricky; the problem with writing it down, if it's a dialect or patois you're really familiar with personally, is that cognitively dissonant split between you (author you) knowing how it sounds, and how it's going to get to the brain of the reader with no articulation as a signpost.

So I'm with Cindy; if a given word in a particular dialect or patois has the same pronunciation as the end reader's language, spell it in a way the reader will mentally interpret.

Short form, "mi" would probably be better as "me", assuming it's pronounced that way. Also, I'd remove the excess letters (caan), because the English language reader is mentally primed to see that as a typo, not a word. And there goes your best shot at holding their attention.

"mi" would probably be better as "me", assuming it's pronounced that way

It's shorter than "me."

Also, I'd remove the excess letters (caan), because the English language reader is mentally primed to see that as a typo

That's a very good point -- but if you've set up with alternate spelling, haven't you altered their expectations? Risky, though.

My main exposure to Jamaican patois were two brief visits and then a nice stint at Dolby in London. I seem to remember the "mi" sound as being closer to "mih" or "meh" with the long e, but it was a long time ago.

If I'm reading that passage out in accent, the "mi" is terribly short, almost swallowed by the word that follows it. And the word itself isn't in a stressed position anywhere in it.

the "mi" is terribly short, almost swallowed by the word that follows it.

Maybe just m', then? At least for when it means "my."

Maybe just m', then? At least for when it means "my."

Hil's got a very good suggestion there, and a good point: differentiating between the "me" and "my" as written, somehow.

And keep it as "mi" when it means "I"? It's pronounced the same whether it means "me," "I," or "my," pretty much.

Keep in mind with the following, I'm not saying I'm right. I'm just providing the rationale behind the answers I already provided, and those were provided with an assumption that the bulk of the readership would be English speakers who aren't too familiar with Patois. If I were writing for a Jamaican readership (and had any knowledge of Patois--which I don't), I would spell it the way a Jamaican would expect to see it spelled (if there is such a thing).

I can see that -- I don't think it would overly break the reading of it, except "mi" is used to mean "my" or "I" in that passage, and that might be misleading.

In other English dialects (some regions of England, as well as Ireland and Scotland), people say "me" as the first person possessive pronoun, that's why I'd go with "me" (assuming the vowel sound where you have "mi" is closer to a long "e" than to a long "i"). Sometimes, English speakers who use "me" in place of "my" say the word in a way that sounds closer to "may" (although shortened), but I'd still write "me".

I'd change "di" to "de".

Why? It's not pronounced that way, and it's not that much closer to the word it means, to my eye.

"De" is closer in spelling to "the" than is "di".

Also, I'd remove the excess letters (caan), because the English language reader is mentally primed to see that as a typo

That's a very good point -- but if you've set up with alternate spelling, haven't you altered their expectations? Risky, though.

Probably, but I'd want to get across that there were differences, without making it stick out. Um, let me see if I can give an example that explains better than that explanation. If I were writing a rural Southerner, I am not going to spell the word "pen" as "pin" just because the Southerner pronounces P-E-N as though it were a homophone to P-I-N (did I mean homonym--whatever, as if it sounded as though it were spelled the same as 'pin'). In his dialogue passages, I will probably spell "forgetting" as "forgettin'", but I won't spell it as "forgittin'".

That said, do Patois speakers consider Patois to be an English dialect, or its own language?