I assume you're asking about enslaved Africans brought to the British colonies North America (which would eventually become the United States of America).

It's worth noting that European trafficking in enslaved Africans predated the modern nation-state. Some historians have argued that competition between European slave powers in the early modern period helped the nation-state take form, in terms of political theory and economic power. Portugal, the first European power to become involved in the transatlantic slave trade, developed the most influential model for teaching slaves European languages: the seasoning model.

If you've seen diagrams of the Triangle Trade, you might notice the "slaves to the Americas" arrow always points at the Caribbean region. Most of the enslaved Africans transported across the Atlantic Ocean were taken from Africa's "Slave Coast" to the Caribbean colonies. Preliminary acculturation-- including language acquisition-- took place there. England, Portugal, Spain, Holland, and Denmark all had claims to various islands in the Caribbean (and parts of Brazil). So, a "typical" early modern slave ship would be full of African people from different tribes, speaking different languages. (Slave ship captains tended to favor a linguistic & cultural mix, to keep slaves from organizing a revolt). Many of the slaves died during the transatlantic trip, the infamous "Middle Passage." Once they arrived in-- for example-- the British West Indies, they were sold. But, first, they underwent "seasoning": a forced acclimation to the New World's diet & ecology, minimal "job training" as a field hand, and a crash course in slave creole.

You read that right. Most enslaved Africans in the New World were taught versions of "creole" (mixed) European languages in Caribbean port. This was primarily an economic decision by the slaveholders or slave traders, who wanted seasoned slaves (who could be sold for higher prices) but didn't want to invest too much money into educating their slaves. After all, many (most) of the enslaved people in the early modern period stayed in the Caribbean and worked on cash crop plantations. Conditions on these plantations were incredibly harsh, nd the average life expectancy for enslaved Africans in the Caribbean (after surviving transportation) was 7 years. Slaveholders were keenly aware of this fact. Bartolome de las Casas' 1550 critique of the Spanish colonial planation system, and the papers of Simon Taylor, a wealthy British plantation owner in the 18th century, record the same bleak economic logic that governed Caribbean slaveholders: it was cheaper to work your existing force to death (by underfeeding and overworking them), and then buy new slaves every 7 years, than it was to properly maintain your workforce. (Caitlin Rosenthal's history of slave management practices shows that slaveholders developed this policy alongside quantitative management structures to maximize the plantation's profitability). So it didn't really matter to slaveholders if their field hands spoke broken Creole or perfect English-- as long as these hands could perform their jobs.

Most slaves in British North America-- before the Revolution-- were imported from the British West Indies. There were some exceptions, but generally, British colonists in North America purchased seasoned slaves who spoke at least a little English. The 13 colonies had vastly different approaches to slave labor. Imagine that you were an enslaved person in the British West Indies. You'd just completed your months of "seasoning" and acquired some creole (allowing you to speak with other slaves and the overseer) and minimal English. At this point, if you were sold to a slaveholder in Virginia, you'd end up on a plantation managed along somewhat gentler lines than a Caribbean one. There, you'd probably learn vernacular English from other slaves, perhaps a supervisor assigned to oversee your assimilation into the plantation culture. If you were sold to a private family in New England, you'd be treated like a permanent indentured servant, taught English and specialized skills, and (very likely) intensely "christianized." The christianization process could include reading and writing. (This was less & less likely as the eighteenth century wore on). In British colonial familial arrangements, you-- as an enslaved dependent-- would be managed by the mistress of the house. She would be responsible for your christianization and language acquisition. It was fairly common for enslaved people in New England to learn skilled trades (blacksmith, doctor, cartwright, etc), and even earn their own money through plying these trades.

Counterintuitively, the plantation model allowed for greater "preservation of cultural roots" than did the private family model. Also, last note on "americanization." Enslaved Africans were expected to change to meet the expectations of British, & later American, cultures-- but they were not fully assimilated into "America." No legal rights, no political rights, and as the eighteenth century turned into the nineteenth, racism coalesced into a scientific & social form. So, enslaved Africans were always socialized into being "Black," but not necessarily "American (citizens)."

Further reading:

Ira Berlin's landmark work, Many Thousands Gone -- survey of different forms of American slavery and how they changed over time

To directly answer your question about records, yes there are, although they are not common, generally don't represent the typical experience of enslaved Africans in the Americas as most enslaved people could not read or write, and could be heavily edited by the white presses that published them.

The most famous record is probably the autobiography of Olaudah Equiano. This autobiography is part of a genre known as "slave narratives" that were generally published as part of the abolitionist cause. While there is some controversy if he was actually born in West Africa or not, his autobiography describes his childhood in Benin, being kidnapped and sold into slavery, and his experiences in the Caribbean, Virginia, and England. Another very informative slave narrative, although one from a woman born in the US, is Harriet Jacob's "Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl"

Zora Neal Hurston interviewed one of the last survivors of the Clotilda, a slave ship that illegally brought Africans to Alabama in 1860 to be sold into slavery. It was the last slave ship to arrive in the United States. That interview with Oluale Kossola, who was born in Benin, took place in the 1930s. Her interviews were recently published in a book "Barracoon: The Story of the Last "Black Cargo"' and it is well worth a read.

There are also numerous archaeological studies looking at "Africanisms" on plantation contexts, although that is a controversial line of research now. Archaeology provides a way to look at the lives of the enslaved who were not able to learn to read and write. Theresa Singleton has a lot of good analysis of these questions from an archaeological perspective.