Is there a sign for that? Media, American Sign Language interpretation, and the paradox of visibility

Abstract

In the transitions between English and American Sign Language (ASL), linguistic and cultural translations are made visible through the embodied actions of interpreters. Recent years have seen a spike in attention to ASL interpreters, with mainstream media publishing stories on Lydia Callis and Holly Maniatty, among others. The very visibility of ASL interpretation poses a challenge to the invisibility of media access and the place of disability and difference in the public sphere, showing alternative arrangements of language, bodies, mediated communication, and public engagement. Yet, simultaneously, such visibility is not entirely progressive: the gendered and racialized spectacularization of ASL interpretation by hearing audiences allows it to remain exoticized even as it is briefly made part of public discourse. The double-bind of visibility means that appearances of ASL in the public sphere may not increase inclusion, but may in fact reinforce hierarchies of language, ability, and access.

Keywords:

• cultural values
• gender
• interpreting
• sign language
• disability studies

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes on contributor

Elizabeth Ellcessor is an Assistant Professor of Cinema and Media Studies at Indiana University, Bloomington. Her research focuses on digital media, disability, media access, and the public.

Notes

1. On the always-cultural nature of translation, see Buden, Nowotny, Simon, Bery, & Cronin (2009). For discussion of linguistic and cultural translation in news media, see Conway (2011).

2. The language of ‘equivalent access’ and ‘effective communication’ is drawn from the Americans with Disabilities Act (1990), which has structured many physical and mediated forms of access and accommodation in the United States.

3. US laws, including the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and the 21st Century Communication and Video Accessibility Act (2010), require the closed captioning of entertainment and news television content as a primary means of providing access to d/Deaf and hard-of-hearing audiences. ASL is rarely used for media access, making its required appearance during a time of emergency one of the rare moments in which real-time interpreting is shown on mainstream television. This national context is quite different from those of many European countries, in which news interpreting is not uncommon, and digital television allows individuals to choose whether to watch with or without a visible interpreter. See, for instance, Neves (2007).

4. On the political and professional demands of interpreting, particularly in cases in which there is a significant power differential between groups, see Bahadır (2010).