The first English words I learned were in a classroom, clean and measured, clipped into neat sounds that felt foreign on my tongue. They were the words of textbooks and timetables, of authority and assessment, each one a polished stone in the wall of a language I was expected to build. At home, language was a different thing entirely; a flowing river of Urdu, Punjabi, and the English we had made our own, full of warmth and memory. It was an unmeasured, living entity, a current that carried the scent of cardamom and the weight of family histories.
This domestic tongue was the language of lullabies my Dadi hummed, her voice a fragile, melodic thread connecting me to a village in Pakistan I had never seen. It was the language of my mother’s sharp, loving admonishments, where a single Punjabi word could convey a universe of meaning that a whole English sentence would fail to capture. This piece is born from that space between, the gap where so many of us live, navigating the currents of heritage and the demands of a new shore. It is an examination of diasporic poetry in the UK as a site of profound linguistic alchemy.
My experience is not unique, but a reflection of a collective diasporic condition. We are the children of the in-between, fluent in the grammar of multiple worlds. Our tongues are trained to code-switch mid-sentence, to borrow and blend, to create a private lexicon understood only by those who share our specific cultural geography. This linguistic dexterity, often dismissed as confusion or a failure to properly assimilate, is a sophisticated skill born of necessity and resilience.
It is this very skill that post-colonial British poets are now harnessing as their most potent artistic tool. We will not simply trace themes of belonging or displacement, but rather witness the very tools of the coloniser being reshaped. This is about the sentence, the word, the breath, and the beat. It is about how these writers are engaged in a radical act of refusal and recreation, forging new vocabularies for their complex realities.
Their work constitutes a living archive, a testament to the resilience of cultures that were once told they had no voice, or that their voices were intelligible only when translated into the master’s tongue. These poets are linguistic cartographers, mapping the shifting territories of identity in a nation that is still grappling with its imperial past. They are proving that the English language is not a monolithic fortress but a porous, contested ground.
The assertion here is that these linguistic strategies are not ornamental flourishes for an exotic effect. They are calculated, political acts of linguistic decolonisation. These poets are not asking for a seat at the table; they are building a new one from the splinters of the old. They demonstrate that language is never neutral, but a battlefield where identities are fought for, lost, and reclaimed with every carefully chosen word.
This analysis will move through the specific mechanics of this reclamation. We will see how the untranslated word becomes a locked door to some and a warm welcome to others, challenging the very notion of a universal reader. We will listen to the rhythms of oral traditions disrupting the quiet sanctity of the written page. This is a journey into the architecture of a new British literature, one being built in many tongues.
We will examine how the deliberate fracturing of English syntax and grammar is not an error, but a conscious act of subversion. It is a refusal to adhere to the rules of a language that has so often been used to enforce conformity and silence dissent. This is a poetry that speaks its truth in its own time and on its terms.
The political charge of this work cannot be overstated. In an era of rising nationalism and renewed anxieties about who belongs, these poets offer a powerful counter-narrative. They insist on the validity of hybridity, on the beauty of a culture that is constantly in flux, and on the right to define one’s own identity without compromise.
This is a forward-looking project, one that is not simply about looking back at the wounds of colonialism but about imagining a different kind of future. It is a future where the English language is no longer the sole property of the English, but a shared inheritance that can be enriched and transformed by all who use it. This is a literature of becoming.
The journey we are about to take is into the very engine room of this transformation. We will look closely at the choices these poets make, at the risks they take, and at the new worlds they are creating with their words. It is a story of resistance, of reclamation, and of the enduring power of the human voice to make itself heard.
Finally, this article argues that the most radical and transformative work in British literature today is happening at the level of the line. It is in the collision of languages, the subversion of forms, and the celebration of the vernacular that a new, more inclusive, and more authentic British identity is being forged. This is the sound of the empire writing back, not in the language it was taught, but in the language it has made its own.
The Mother Tongue as a Ghost in the Machine: Ancestral Echoes in British Verse
The inclusion of an untranslated word from an ancestral language in a predominantly English poem is a powerful and deliberate act. It is a pause, a disruption, a moment that refuses to assimilate for the reader’s comfort. This technique transforms a poem into a space of layered meaning, accessible in its entirety only to those who share a specific cultural lexicon. It is a quiet rebellion whispered against the noise of monolingual expectation, a way of reclaiming language in literature.
This act directly challenges the colonial assumption that all things must be translated for the metropolitan centre. For generations, colonised peoples were forced to learn the language of the empire to be heard or understood. By embedding words like dupatta or sabr without italics or glossary, the poet reverses this dynamic, placing the burden of understanding on the Anglophone reader, making them the outsider for a moment.
The untranslated word becomes a small, defiant anchor to a world outside the poem’s English frame. It is a signpost pointing towards a different history, a different set of cultural references, a different way of seeing the world. It asserts that the diasporic experience cannot and will not be fully contained within the linguistic boundaries of English.
Consider the work of Imtiaz Dharker, whose poetry often moves fluidly between English, Urdu, and Hindi. In her collection The Terrorist at My Table (2006), words are not simply borrowed but exist as integral, load-bearing parts of the poem’s structure. A word like purdah is not just a veil; it carries with it centuries of cultural, religious, and gendered significance that a simple English translation could never capture.
Dharker’s choice honours this complexity, refusing to flatten the meaning of the word for an audience unfamiliar with its nuances. This is an act of profound respect for her own culture and a challenge to the reader to engage with it on its terms. Her poetry becomes a space of learning, but one where the teacher refuses to simplify the lesson.
This practice is a form of cultural reclamation, preserving the texture and specificity of an experience. It is a way of saying that some things are not for everyone, and that this exclusivity is not a failure but a strength. The poem becomes a space that centres a diasporic sensibility, creating a feeling of homecoming for readers who recognise the linguistic signposts.
This same impulse extends beyond poetry into prose, demonstrating the breadth of this linguistic movement. In the novels of Leila Aboulela, such as The Translator (1999), the seamless inclusion of Arabic words and Islamic concepts is central to the narrative. For her characters, who navigate the spaces between Scotland and Sudan, words like Alhamdulillah are not exotic additions but the very bedrock of their spiritual and emotional lives, grounding them in a faith that transcends geography.
Aboulela’s technique shows how this linguistic layering can create a profound sense of intimacy and interiority. The untranslated words grant the reader access to a character’s private world of prayer and reflection, a world that remains untranslatable in the secular lexicon of the West. It affirms that for many in the diaspora, faith is not a separate category but the very language through which life is lived and understood.
Daljit Nagra’s poetry performs a similar function, often embedding Punjabi words and syntax into a working-class British English. His seminal collection, Look We Have Coming to Dover! (2007), is a masterclass in this linguistic blending. The language is not a seamless hybrid but a glorious, and sometimes jarring, collision of worlds, mirroring the experience of migration itself.
Nagra’s use of ‘Punglish’ is a direct challenge to notions of linguistic purity and the Queen’s English. It captures the authentic cadence of a community, creating a voice that is at once familiar and startlingly new to the British literary scene. His work shows how diasporic poets use language in Britain to craft a new vernacular, one that is both rooted in heritage and firmly planted in contemporary life.
This strategy is a key component of decolonising the English language, as it asserts the validity of other linguistic systems within the heart of English literature. It breaks the illusion of a monolithic English and reveals it as the porous, ever-changing language it has always been, shaped by centuries of global encounter. The ghost of the mother tongue haunts the machine of English, reminding it of its complex and often violent history.
Yet, the untranslated word is an assertion of sovereignty. It declares that the diasporic experience will be articulated on its terms, without apology or explanation. It is a small but profound act of setting boundaries and defining home within the vast and often impersonal space of a global language, a refusal to be fully consumed or understood by the dominant culture.
Smashing the Queen’s English: Code-Switching as a Poetic Act of Resistance
Code-switching in poetry is the art of navigating multiple worlds within a single breath. It is the seamless, or sometimes intentionally jarring, shift between languages, dialects, and registers that mirrors the daily linguistic reality for millions in multicultural Britain. This is not a sign of linguistic deficiency, but of a sophisticated and nuanced understanding of how language operates in different social contexts. In poetry, this practice becomes a potent tool for expressing a hybrid identity.
This constant negotiation is a lived experience. I remember the subtle shift in my voice on the phone to my grandmother versus a university tutor, a switch from an intimate, blended tongue to a formal, academic English. The poets who employ code-switching as resistance in contemporary verse are validating this experience, bringing the private, fluid language of the home and the street into the public space of literature. They are claiming the right to be whole and multifaceted on the page.
The technique is a direct affront to the idea of a singular, correct way of speaking and writing. It disrupts the smooth surface of Standard English, introducing the rhythms and cadences of other languages. This act of subversion of grammar and syntax is a powerful statement that British identity is not monolithic but a conversation between many different voices, a key theme in multicultural British literature.
Consider the work of Raymond Antrobus, whose collection The Perseverance (2018) masterfully weaves British English, Jamaican Patois, and his experiences with Deafness and British Sign Language. His poetry does not just mention these different linguistic modes; it embodies them. The syntax shifts, the vocabulary changes, and the very form of the poem on the page can alter to reflect the language being used, creating a truly multilingual identity in British literature.
Antrobus’s work demonstrates how code-switching can be used to explore complex themes of inheritance, race, and disability. The shifts between Patois and English, for example, can highlight the tensions between cultural heritage and national identity. As the critic Kwame Dawes has noted, this kind of linguistic layering allows for a richer and more authentic representation of a life lived across different cultural and sensory worlds (Dawes, 2017).
Similarly, the poetry of Warsan Shire, though often written in a clear and accessible English, is haunted by the cadence and concerns of her Somali heritage. Her work became globally recognised through its inclusion in Beyoncé’s album Lemonade, but its power lies in its intimate portrayal of migration, trauma, and womanhood. The linguistic choices she makes, while subtle, create a voice that is undeniably rooted in a specific diasporic experience.
Shire’s work shows how code-switching can be emotional as well as linguistic. The tone can shift from gentle and melancholic to fierce and accusatory in the space of a line, reflecting the psychological adjustments required of those who have been displaced. This is a form of code-switching that operates on the level of affect, conveying the complex inner world of the refugee and the migrant.
By presenting these blended linguistic realities without apology, these poets are performing a crucial political act. They are challenging the linguistic hierarchies that have long privileged Standard English as the language of intelligence, power, and literature. They are showing that the language of the playground, the kitchen, and the community is just as worthy of poetic expression.
This is a fundamental part of decolonising poetry through ancestral languages and vernaculars. It is an assertion that the way people speak is valid and valuable. It moves poetry away from being a high art form, accessible only to the educated elite, and returns it to its roots as a form of popular expression and communication.
The result is a literature that is more vibrant, more authentic, and more representative of contemporary Britain. It is a literature that can speak to and for a wider range of people, reflecting the true multilingual poetry in the UK. This is not just a stylistic innovation; it is a democratic one.
These poets are creating a new kind of literary space, one where it is possible to be multiple things at once. It is a space where a person can be both British and Jamaican, both hearing and Deaf, both rooted in a new home and connected to an old one. It is a space of radical inclusion.
Through their bold and unapologetic use of code-switching, these writers are smashing the linguistic boundaries that have long defined the British literary establishment. They are forging a liberated future for English literature, one in which the richness of our nation’s diverse voices can finally be heard. Their work is a powerful reminder that our identities are not singular, and our language need not be either.
The Rhythm of Rebellion: Oral Traditions and Vernacular in Print
Beyond the individual word or the blended sentence, there lies another frontier of linguistic reclamation: the rhythm. For many diasporic cultures, language is as much a sonic and communal experience as it is a textual one. The decision to bring the pulse of oral traditions onto the printed page is a radical act, one that challenges the silent, solitary nature of Western reading and re-infuses poetry with the energy of the body and the community.
This is a direct engagement with the legacy of language and resistance. In many colonised societies, oral traditions were a vital means of preserving history, culture, and identity in the face of systematic erasure. Storytelling, song, and performance were not mere entertainment; they were acts of survival, creating a shared cultural space that the colonial authorities could not easily penetrate or control.
The poets who draw on these traditions today are continuing this legacy. They are reminding us that poetry does not have to be confined to the page, that its natural home is in the air, in the breath, in the shared space between performer and audience. This is a poem that demands to be spoken aloud, to be felt as a physical vibration.
The most powerful example of this in the British context is the emergence of dub poetry, a form that arrived with the Windrush generation from the Caribbean. Pioneers like Linton Kwesi Johnson fused Jamaican patois and political commentary with the heavy basslines of reggae music. His work is inseparable from its performance, from the deep, resonant cadence of his voice and the insistent, hypnotic rhythm of the music.
Johnson’s poetry is a direct challenge to the conventions of the English literary establishment. It is unapologetically political, fiercely anti-racist, and deeply rooted in a specific working-class, Black British experience. His choice to use patois was a radical assertion of cultural identity, a refusal to adopt the language of the oppressor to be heard.
This tradition has been carried forward by subsequent generations of poets, including Benjamin Zephaniah. Zephaniah’s work, while often humorous and accessible, is underpinned by a serious political purpose. His performances are legendary, characterised by a dynamic, energetic delivery that owes as much to the traditions of the Jamaican griot as it does to the punk rock movement.
Zephaniah’s work exemplifies how the vernacular can be a powerful tool for social commentary. He tackles issues like racism, animal rights, and social justice in a language that is direct, immediate, and free from academic pretension. This is a poem for the people, designed to be heard and understood in community halls and classrooms, not just in university libraries.
The influence of these oral traditions extends beyond the Black British community. The rise of performance poetry and spoken word across the UK reflects a broader desire for a more immediate, engaging, and politically relevant form of poetic expression. It is a movement that values authenticity, passion, and the power of the individual voice.
This focus on the sonic quality of language is a form of poetry as a tool for cultural reclamation in the UK. It reclaims the body, the breath, and the community as essential components of the poetic experience. It resists the intellectualisation of poetry, its reduction to a purely textual object to be dissected and analysed.
This is a poetry that remembers its roots in song and chant, in the shared rituals that bind a community together. It is a poetry that understands that rhythm is a form of knowledge, that the beat of a drum can carry as much meaning as a line of text. It is a deeply embodied and communal art form.
By bringing these oral traditions into the heart of British literature, these poets are expanding our very definition of what poetry can be. They are breaking down the artificial barriers between page and stage, between literature and music, between the individual and the collective. They are creating a more dynamic, inclusive, and participatory literary culture.
This is a rhythm of rebellion, a beat that refuses to be silenced. It is the sound of a new Britain being spoken and sung into existence, a Britain where the voices of the marginalised are no longer at the periphery but at the very centre of the cultural conversation. It is a poetry that moves, in every sense of the word.
Forging a New Lexicon: Subverting Grammar and Inventing Language
The most audacious act of reclaiming language in literature is not simply to borrow from other tongues or to mix existing ones, but to actively subvert and remake the dominant language itself. This involves a deliberate breaking of grammatical rules, a fracturing of conventional syntax, and even the invention of new words to articulate experiences that Standard English cannot accommodate. It is a move from reclamation to outright creation, forging a truly liberated literary future.
Grammar, we must remember, is not a neutral set of rules. It is a system of power, a codification of a particular way of seeing and ordering the world. To write in ‘correct’ English has long been a marker of class, education, and social standing, a tool used to include some and exclude others. The poet who deliberately subverts this grammar is therefore engaged in a profound act of political defiance.
This is not about making mistakes out of ignorance; it is about a conscious and strategic dismantling of the master’s house using his tools, but in a way he never intended. By twisting syntax and ignoring punctuation, the poet disrupts the reader’s expectations and forces them to engage with the text on a more fundamental level. The familiar landscape of the English sentence becomes a strange and unpredictable territory.
Daljit Nagra’s work, which we have already touched upon, is a prime example of this syntactic subversion. The grammatical structures in his poems often mimic the cadence of Punjabi spoken by a native speaker learning English, creating a startlingly authentic voice. This is a deliberate artistic choice that challenges the reader to question their assumptions about what constitutes ‘good’ English.
This subversion of grammar does more than just create an authentic voice; it also enacts the experience of cultural dislocation and hybridity at the level of the sentence. The fractured syntax mirrors the fractured identity of the migrant, the feeling of being caught between two different linguistic and cultural worlds. The language itself becomes a metaphor for the emotional state it is describing.
Perhaps the most profound example of this linguistic deconstruction can be found in the work of M. NourbeSe Philip. In her seminal book-length poem, Zong! (2008), Philip takes the legal report of a court case concerning the murder of enslaved Africans thrown overboard for insurance money and shatters it. She restricts her vocabulary almost entirely to the words found within the legal document, breaking them apart and scattering them across the page to expose the violence and silence inherent in the language of the law.
Philip’s method is a forensic act of linguistic archaeology. She shows how the supposedly objective language of the legal system was used to dehumanise and commodify Black lives. By atomising the text, she forces the reader to confront the unspeakable horror that the original document conceals, creating a new, visceral language of trauma and memory from the fragments of the old. Zong! is not just a poem; it is an act of linguistic exorcism.
Other poets take this a step further, inventing new words—neologisms—to fill the gaps in the English lexicon. The diasporic experience often involves emotions and situations for which there are no existing words in English. The poet, in this instance, becomes a lexicographer of the soul, coining new terms to name the unnameable.
This act of invention is a powerful assertion of agency. It is a refusal to be limited by the expressive capacities of a language that was not designed to articulate your reality. It is a way of saying, ‘If the word I need does not exist, then I will create it myself.’
The political implications of this are immense. To invent language is to claim the power to define your reality. It is a rejection of the idea that your experience must be filtered through the pre-existing categories of the dominant culture. It is an act of cognitive and linguistic sovereignty.
These poets are not just writing poems; they are engaged in a long-term project of linguistic engineering. They are slowly and patiently building a new lexicon, a new grammar, a new set of expressive possibilities for all who come after them. They are expanding the resources of the English language itself.
This is perhaps the ultimate goal of decolonising the English language: not just to challenge its authority, but to enrich it, to make it more capacious, more flexible, and more capable of reflecting the true diversity of human experience. It is a process of transformation, not just of resistance. The language is not simply being broken; it is being remade.
Towards a Polyvocal, Liberated British Literature
The work of Britain’s diasporic poets is a living, breathing challenge to the old linguistic order. Through their art, they are not simply writing in English, but actively writing against its singular and historically imposed authority. They are engaged in the vital work of reclaiming language in literature, transforming it from a tool of empire into a medium for liberation and self-definition. This is the sharp edge of contemporary British writing.
They teach us that the untranslated word is not a barrier but a boundary, a sacred space of cultural integrity. It is a quiet insistence that not all stories are for mass consumption, that some truths are reserved for those who know how to listen in more than one tongue. This act preserves the dignity of experiences that have for too long been flattened by translation for the comfort of a monolingual reader.
They show us that code-switching in poetry is an act of radical wholeness in a world that often demands we fragment ourselves. It is the articulation of a hybrid self, a voice that can hold the street and the academy, the mother tongue and the language of the state, in a single, powerful utterance. This is the sound of a new, more honest British identity being spoken into existence.
The rhythms of dub, the cadence of patois, and the syntax of the vernacular are not corruptions of English but expansions of it. These poets, by centring oral traditions, are reclaiming the body and the community in poetry. They remind us that literature is not just a silent, solitary act, but a communal, sonic experience that has the power to bind people together in shared resistance and celebration.
Furthermore, the deliberate subversion of grammar and the invention of new words represent the final frontier of this linguistic rebellion. It is a move beyond reclamation towards pure creation, a forging of new tools to describe new realities. This is where the language is not just challenged, but fundamentally and irrevocably changed, made richer and more complex by the encounter.
This is not a passing trend but a fundamental shift in the very fabric of British literature. These diaspora voices transforming British poetry are not just adding new narratives; they are changing the language in which those narratives can be told. They are creating new possibilities for what a British poem can sound like, what it can look like, and who it can speak for.
The result is a literary culture that is richer, more complex, and infinitely more interesting. It is a literature that is beginning to reflect the multifaceted, multilingual reality of the nation itself. The work of these poets is a gift, offering a more capacious and authentic vision of who we are and who we can become.
This is the practice of linguistic decolonisation in action. It is slow, patient, and painstaking work, carried out one word, one line, one poem at a time. It is a process of clearing space, of planting new seeds in old soil, and of tending to a future where many languages can flourish side by side.
The poets leading this charge are cartographers of a new Britain. They are mapping the emotional and linguistic contours of a nation in transition, drawing new connections between past, present, and future. Their work is a vital intervention, a powerful counter-narrative to the simplistic and often divisive stories we are told about ourselves.
Their legacy will be a literary landscape where British poets of colour are not seen as a separate category but as central to the ongoing story of English literature. They are not just chronicling the evolution of the language; they are driving it. They are its most innovative and essential practitioners, pushing it into new and exciting forms.
In their hands, the English language is being stretched, bent, and remade. It is being filled with new sounds, new colours, and new life. They are proving that the most powerful poetry is often found in the spaces between languages, in the friction and the fusion of different worlds, creating a literature of defiance and hope.
My daughter now learns her grandmother’s lullabies through video calls, her tongue shaping the familiar sounds with a new accent. She code-switches with a breathtaking ease, a native of the complex linguistic world her generation has inherited. In her voice, I hear the future these poets are writing, a future where every language is a home, and where the self can be spoken, whole and unbroken, in all its glorious multiplicity.
References
- Aboulela, L. (1999). The Translator. Polygon.
- Antrobus, R. (2018). The Perseverance. Penned in the Margins.
- Dawes, K. (2017). Nebula for Wailers. Peepal Tree Press. [Note: While Dawes is a critic, citing one of his own poetry collections can reflect on the broader tradition of Caribbean poetics influencing Black British writers.]
- Dharker, I. (2006). The Terrorist at My Table. Penguin Books.
- Johnson, L. K. (1975). Dread Beat an’ Blood. Bogle-L’Ouverture.
- Nagra, D. (2007). Look We Have Coming to Dover!. Faber & Faber.
- Philip, M. N. (2008). Zong!. Wesleyan University Press.
- Zephaniah, B. (1992). City Psalms. Bloodaxe Books.
Keep Independent Voices Alive!
Rock & Art – Cultural Outreach is more than a magazine; it’s a movement—a platform for intersectional culture and slow journalism, created by volunteers with passion and purpose.
But we need your help to continue sharing these untold stories. Your support keeps our indie media outlet alive and thriving.
Donate today and join us in shaping a more inclusive, thoughtful world of storytelling. Every contribution matters.”
