How to show the interpreter on screen? The normative organization of visual ecologies in multilingual courtrooms with video links

- Showing people on screen in video-mediated courtrooms are designed and treated as visual formulation of their participative statuses.
- Empirical data shows that it is expected that the interpreter should be on screen when minority language is spoken, by her or to her.
- Whenever possible the interpreter is expected to be shown not alone, but together with the person she is interpreting for.
- Interpreters are therefore visually treated as speakers (therefore allowing them some degree of authorship), albeit with a restricted speakership status, highlighting the fact that interpreters are also speaking for the sake of somebody else.

This paper discusses different aspects of participation in judicial settings which combine a reliance on video conferencing technology, to allow for remote defendants in prison, and the presence of interpreters in the courtroom, to interpret for the former when they do not speak the language of the court. In such a multimedia and multilingual courtroom setting, distinctive participation-related concerns emerge with respect to the face to face multilingual courtroom situation. Based on video recordings of naturally occurring courtroom activities, we discuss a relatively neglected issue regarding interpreters' visibility in video-mediated courtrooms, and show that the ways in which the interpreter is made visible enact relevant participation frames for him/her. The paper shows how the choice of video shots and where these are placed in sequences of talk-in-interaction displays the participants' view of the interpreter's role within a continuously evolving multimodal participation frame. While interpreters are usually shown in medium shots, and as much as possible not alone but together with the participants whose talk they are interpreting, there are times when the interpreter is made visible through a close shot. The paper discusses such a deviant case and explains how such a move is made relevant by an unusual configuration of footing in the talk to be interpreted.