No puedes hablar ahora: Voice in an interpreter-mediated court meeting.

In interpreter-mediated encounters, one participant's contributions are multivoiced, other participants' contributions are collectively produced, as the interpreter mediates their words. It is interesting what mediation does to their voice, and even more relevant if participants speak in ways deviating from local norms. This paper offers a case study of an interpreter-mediated court meeting. I discuss how a courtroom interpreter handles the accused's contributions, what consequences the interpreter's choices have, and what it adds to our understanding of voice. I argue that speaking and being heard "in one's own terms" is not necessarily the most beneficial to less powerful institutional participants. • It is central for courtroom interpreters to represent the voice of lay participants. • Interpreters often choose to interpret for legal participants rather than lay participants when they speak simultaneously. • Interpreters standardize the linguistic contributions they mediate. • Standardization and normalization may help a participant being heard. • At the same time it may suppress the social voice of a participant. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]