Invisible participants in a visual ecology: Visual space as a resource for organising video-mediated interpreting in hospital encounters

  • Jessica Pedersen Belisle Hansen University of Oslo
Keywords: visual ecologies, interactional space, video-mediated interaction, multimodality, interpreting, hospital interaction


This paper explores multilingual hospital encounters in which medical professionals and patients do not speak the same language, and where interpreting is facilitated through the use of video technology. The participants use video technology to create an interactional space for interpreting. While video technology affords the participants visual access to each other, and the participants may use embodied actions in interaction, participants in interaction do not necessarily organise their interactional space in ways that secure congruent views of each other. While the participants’ incongruent views of each other may cause problems in the organisation of interaction, the participants rarely discuss the visual setting. This article explores how the participants orient to the visual materiality of the setting and how they use the visual ecology they create, in and through the interaction, in order to achieve the multilingual activity of interpreting in hospital encounters. 



Angermeyer, P. S. (2007). ‘Speak English or what?’ Codeswitching and interpreter use in New York Small Claims Courts. International Journal of Speech Language and the Law, 14(1), 147. doi:10.1558/ijsll.v14i1.147

Arminen, I., Licoppe, C., & Spagnolli, A. (2016). Respecifying Mediated Interaction. Research on Language and Social Interaction: Orders of Interaction in Mediated Settings, 49(4), 290-309. doi:10.1080/08351813.2016.1234614

Balogh, K., & Hertog, D. (2012). AVIDICUS comparative studies - part II: Traditional, videoconference and remote interpreting in police interviews. In S. Braun & J. L. Taylor (Eds.), Videocoference and Remote Interpreting in Criminal Procedings (pp. 101-117). Antwerp/Cambridge: Intersentia.

Bolden, G. (2000). Toward Understanding Practices of Medical Interpreting: Interpreters' Involvement in History Taking. Discourse Studies, 2(4), 387-419. doi:10.1177/1461445600002004001

Bolden, G. (2018). Understanding interpreters' actions in context. Communication & Medicine, 15(2), 135-149. doi:

Braun, S., & Taylor, J. L. (2012). AVIDICUS Comparative Studies - part I: Traditional interpreting and remote interpreting in police interviews. In S. Braun & J. L. Taylor (Eds.), Videoconference and Remote Interpreting in Criminal Procedings (pp. 85-101). Antwerp/Cambridge: Intersentia.

Davitti, E. (2019). Methodological explorations of interpreter-mediated interaction: novel insights from multimodal analysis. Qualitative research : QR, 19(1), 7-29. doi:10.1177/1468794118761492

De Boe, E. (2020). Remote interpreting in healthcare settings. A comparative study on the influence of telephone and video link use on the quality of interpreter-mediated communication. (PhD). University of Antwerp,

Deppermann, A. (2013). Multimodal interaction from a conversation analytic perspective. Journal of Pragmatics, 46(1), 1-7. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2012.11.014

Det Kongelige Kunnskapsdepartement. (2019). Høring Forslag til lov om offentlige organers ansvar for av tolk mv. (tolkeloven). Retrieved from

Dourish, P., Adler, A., Bellotti, V., & Henderson, A. (1996). Your place or mine? Learning from long-term use of Audio-Video communication. Computer supported cooperative work, 5(1), 33-62. doi:10.1007/BF00141935

Gavioli, L., & Baraldi, C. (2011). Interpreter-mediated interaction in healthcare and legal settings: Talk organization, context and the achievement of intercultural communication. Interpreting : international journal of research and practice in interpreting, 13(2), 205-233. doi:10.1075/intp.13.2.03gav

Hansen, J. P. B. (2018). Tolking som felles aktivitet: Med lupe på kommunikative ståsted i tolkede sykehussamtaler. In H. Haualand, A.-L. Nilsson, & E. Raanes (Eds.), Tolking - språkarbeid og profesjonsutøvelse (pp. 123-142). Oslo: Gyldendal Akademisk.

Hansen, J. P. B., & Svennevig, J. (forth.). Creating space for interpreting within extended turns at talk. Manuscript in preparation.

Hazel, S., Mortensen, K., & Rasmussen, G. (2014). Introduction: A body of resources – CA studies of social conduct. Journal of Pragmatics, 65, 1-9. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2013.10.007

Heath, C., & Luff, P. (1993). Disembodied conduct: interactional asymmetries in video-mediated communication. In G. Button (Ed.), Technology in working order. Studies of Work, Interaction, and Technology (pp. 35-54). London: Routledge.

Jefferson, G. (1979). A technique for inviting laughter and its subsequent acceptance / declination. In G. Psathas (Ed.), Everyday language: Studies in ethnomethodology. New York: Irvington.

Li, S. (2015). Nine Types of Turn-taking in Interpreter-mediated GP Consultations. Applied Linguistics Review, 6(1), 73-96. doi:10.1515/applirev-2015-0004

Li, S., Gerwing, J., Krystallidou, D., Rowlands, A., Cox, A., & Pype, P. (2017). Interaction—A missing piece of the jigsaw in interpreter-mediated medical consultation models. Patient Education and Counseling, 100(9), 1769-1771. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2017.04.021

Licoppe, C., Luff, P., Heath, C., Kuzuoka, H., Yamashita, N., & Tuncer, S. (2017). Showing Objects: Holding and Manipulating Artefacts in Video-mediated Collaborative Settings. In CHI '17: Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Vol. 2017-, pp. 5295-5306).

Licoppe, C., & Verdier, M. (2013). Interpreting, video communication and the sequential reshaping of institutional talk in the bilingual and distributed courtroom. The international journal of speech, language and the law, 20(2), 247. doi:10.1558/ijsll.v20i2.247

Licoppe, C., Verdier, M., & Veyrier, C.-A. (2018). Voice, Power, and Turn-Taking in Multilingual, Consequtively Interpreted Courtroom Proceedings with Video Links. In J. Napier, R. Skinner, & S. Braun (Eds.), Here or There : Research on interpreting via video link (pp. 299-322). Washington DC: Gallaudet University Press.

Licoppe, C., & Veyrier, C.-A. (2017). How to show the interpreter on screen? The normative organization of visual ecologies in multilingual courtrooms with video links. Journal of Pragmatics, 107, 147-164. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2016.09.012

Luff, P., Heath, C., Kuzuoka, H., Hindmarsh, J., Yamazaki, K., & Oyama, S. (2003). Fractured Ecologies: Creating Environments for Collaboration. Human-Computer Interaction: Talking About Things in Mediated Conversations, 18(1-2), 51-84. doi:10.1207/S15327051HCI1812_3

Meeuwesen, L., Twilt, S., ten Thije, J. D., & Harmsen, H. (2010). “Ne diyor?” (What does she say?): Informal interpreting in general practice. Patient Educ Couns, 81(2), 198-203. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2009.10.005

Mondada, L. (2007). Operating Together through Videoconference: Members' Procedures for Accomplishing a Common Space of Action. In S. Hester & D. Francis (Eds.), Orders of Ordinary Action. Respecifying Sociological Knowledge (pp. 51-68). London: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.

Mondada, L. (2014). The local constitution of multimodal resources for social interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 65, 137-156. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2014.04.004

NOU 2014:8. (2014). Tolking i offentlig sektor. Et spørsmål om rettssikkerhet og likeverd. Oslo: Barne-, likestillings- og inkluderingsdepartementet Retrieved from

Paananen, J., & Majlesi, A. R. (2018). Patient-centered interaction in interpreted primary care consultations. Journal of Pragmatics, 138, 98-118. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2018.10.003

Pappas, Y., & Seale, C. (2010). The physical examination in telecardiology and televascular consultations: A study using conversation analysis. Patient Education and Counseling, 81(1), 113-118. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2010.01.005

Rintel, E. (2010). Conversational management of network trouble perturbations in personal videoconferencing. In ACM International Conference Proceeding Series (pp. 304-311): ACM.

Schegloff, E. A. (2007). Sequence organization in interaction (Vol. vol. 1). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Schegloff, E. A., Jefferson, G., & Sacks, H. (1977). The Preference for Self-Correction in the Organization of Repair in Conversation. Language, 53(2), 361-382. doi:10.2307/413107

Schutz, A. (1953). Common-Sense and Scientific Interpretation of Human Action. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 14(1), 1-38. doi:10.2307/2104013

Skaaden, H. (2001). On-Screen Interpreting. Paper presented at the 18th International Symposium on Human Factors in Telecommunication Bergen.

Skaaden, H. (2013). Den topartiske tolken : lærebok i tolking. Oslo: Universitetsforl.

Streeck, J. (2009). Forward-Gesturing. Discourse Processes: Projection and Anticipation in Embodied Interaction, 46(2-3), 161-179. doi:10.1080/01638530902728793

Wadensjö, C. (1998). Interpreting as interaction. London: Longman.

How to Cite
Hansen, J. (2020). Invisible participants in a visual ecology: Visual space as a resource for organising video-mediated interpreting in hospital encounters. Social Interaction. Video-Based Studies of Human Sociality, 3(3).