The central thesis of Uccelli's target article is a dire need to identify the causes of inequalities in literacy and language education from the fourth grade, and which pedagogies best eliminate them. Uccelli's quest for empirical, pedagogical, and theoretical insights to counter injustice, and to give voice to rather than silence students, is urgent and welcome. Effective redress of structural inequalities associated with language and literacy in formal education, however, cannot occur through a universalist worldview embedded in a northern episteme and in one language, English. It is time to turn to and learn from societies that hold pluriversal worldviews, predominantly beyond the Euro-North. My concern in this commentary is mostly with students who live in highly multilingual low-income countries of the South. It is also with those who migrate to high-income, less multilingual societies where challenges of diversity increase rather than resolve.

I argue that linguists and teachers need to understand the relationships among cognition and development of bilingual/multilingual capability and literacy; plural ways of knowing, believing, and being; and knowledge exchange and production. These relationships are invisibilized in a universalist northern-facing curriculum, pedagogy and assessment regime, and texts published only in English. English cannot reflect the epistemological, ontological, or cosmological nuances and pluralities expressed in the 7,000 or more language communities of the world, nor do its texts include extensive knowledge produced beyond English. Yet, there is much to be learned from the expertise in secular and faith-based bilingual and multilingual education and in languages and scripts that are neither English nor Latin. Scholars currently enjoying privileged access to academic publishing opportunities (in English), to elevated citation counts, and to generous research grants cannot afford to ignore studies in multilingualisms from Africa and South Asia much longer.

Yes, there is space for the horizontal practices of translanguaging that northern-facing scholarship seems to have discovered only recently in the to-ing and fro-ing between languages, especially in spoken discourse, familiar to all bilingual and multilingual peoples, and included in more familiarly known codemixing, codeswitching. However, some 2,000 years of formalized clerical and scholarly teaching in Africa and India show that pedagogical value in written translation between clearly identified languages is marked. This has also been evident in the last 120 years of research on bilingual/multilingual education in formal, informal, and nonformal schooling in these settings (Alidou et al., 2006; Heugh, 2023; Mohanty, 2018). To achieve equality of access to further education and career opportunities, students need vertical expertise in written translation in both their most well-known and used language and one used for purposes of wider (national or international) communication (Heugh, 2021).

Moreover, if we are serious about equality, we need to attend to the voices and agency of students, parents, and communities globally. Most of those who experience systemic marginalization are acutely aware of how the structural artifice and technologies of linguistic exclusion work. They already have the horizontal translanguaging expertise now ironically being acquired by northern-facing academics. What they desire and require is access to the same high-level academic language expertise that linguists enjoy. They know that this is the instrumental key that opens doors of exclusion. It means high-level capability in language differentiation for purposes of precision (e.g., for scientific, legal, safety, security, international spoken or signed, and written purposes). This can be achieved through purposeful, systematic use of translation (central to vertical translanguaging), together with pedagogies of voices. However, these need to be embedded in bilingual/multilingual education for most students globally (Heugh, 2011, 2021). Monolingual students in the Anglosphere risk being left behind as the center shifts from the Euro-North toward Asia and the South. So, the sooner educators return all students to additional language and bilingual/multilingual programs with strong academic and professional outcomes, the more swiftly parochial concerns of inequalities can be redirected to secure students’ futures in a rapidly changing world.

Uccelli is right, the field needs pedagogies of voices, not those of silence. Educators do need to address the gaps in literacy that silence many students, particularly those obliged to learn through a second or third language or dialect. The gaps, however, are more acute for students in postcolonial low-income countries. This means moving beyond the silencing of bilingual/multilingual expertise in and beyond the Euro-North (Ouane & Glanz, 2010; Mohanty, 2018; Heugh, 2023).

Unashamedly, the priority is bilingual and multilingual education that includes both (a) horizontal, convivial, and spoken use of multilingual practices that bridge and mediate information flows across languages and (b) systematic use of vertical practices of written translation and spoken or signed interpreting to achieve high levels of academic language proficiency (whether one calls this analytical or scientific language) for all students to achieve equality of access and outcomes. Anything less simply continues cycles of inequality.

Uccelli 的目标文章的中心论点是迫切需要找出四年级开始的识字和语言教育不平等的原因，以及哪些教学法最能消除它们。Uccelli 对实证、教学和理论见解的探索，以对抗不公正现象，并让学生发声而不是让他们沉默，这是紧迫且受欢迎的。然而，在正规教育中与语言和识字相关的结构性不平等的有效纠正，不可能通过植根于北方知识体系和一种语言（英语）的普世主义世界观来实现。现在是转向持有多元世界观的社会并向其学习的时候了，主要是在欧洲北部之外。在这篇评论中，我主要关注的是生活在高度多语种的南方低收入国家的学生。

我认为语言学家和教师需要了解双语/多语能力和读写能力的认知和发展之间的关系；了解、相信和存在的多种方式；知识交流和生产。这些关系在面向北方的普世课程、教学法和评估制度以及仅以英文出版的文本中是无形的。英语无法反映世界上 7,000 多个语言社区所表达的认识论、本体论或宇宙论的细微差别和多样性，其文本也不包含英语以外产生的广泛知识。然而，世俗和基于信仰的双语和多语教育以及非英语或拉丁语语言和文字的专业知识有很多值得学习的地方。

是的，面向北方的学术界似乎只是最近才在语言之间的来回交流中，特别是在所有双语和多语种人民都熟悉的口语话语中，发现了横向翻译的空间。更熟悉的代码混合，代码转换。然而，非洲和印度大约 2,000 年的正规化文书和学术教学表明，明确识别的语言之间的书面翻译的教学价值是显着的。这在过去 120 年的正规、非正规和非正规学校双语/多语教育研究中也很明显（Alidou 等人，2006 年；Heugh，2023 年；Mohanty，2018年）). 为了实现获得继续教育和职业机会的平等机会，学生需要在书面翻译方面的垂直专业知识，既要使用他们最熟悉和使用的语言，又要使用一种用于更广泛（国内或国际）交流的语言（Heugh，2021 年）。

此外，如果我们认真对待平等，我们就需要关注全球学生、家长和社区的声音和能动性。大多数经历过系统性边缘化的人都敏锐地意识到语言排斥的结构技巧和技术是如何运作的。具有讽刺意味的是，他们已经拥有横向翻译专业知识，现在正被面向北方的学者所掌握。他们渴望和需要的是获得语言学家所享有的同样高水平的学术语言专业知识。他们知道这是打开排斥之门的工具钥匙。它意味着为了精确目的（例如，为了科学、法律、安全、安全、国际口语或手语以及书面目的）而进行语言区分的高级能力。这可以通过有目的的、系统地使用翻译（从中心到垂直翻译），以及语音教学法。然而，这些需要融入全球大多数学生的双语/多语教育中（Heugh，2011 年、2021 年）。随着中心从欧洲北部转向亚洲和南部，英语圈的单语学生有可能被抛在后面。因此，教育工作者越早让所有学生接受额外的语言和双语/多语言课程，并取得良好的学术和专业成果，就能越迅速地改变对不平等的狭隘关注，以确保学生在瞬息万变的世界中的未来。

Uccelli 是对的，这个领域需要声音的教学法，而不是沉默的教学法。教育工作者确实需要解决导致许多学生沉默的识字差距，尤其是那些必须通过第二或第三语言或方言学习的学生。然而，对于后殖民低收入国家的学生来说，差距更为严重。这意味着要超越欧洲北部地区内外双语/多语言专业知识的沉默（Ouane & Glanz，2010 年；Mohanty，2018 年；Heugh，2023 年）。

毫不羞愧地，优先考虑的是双语和多语言教育，包括 (a) 横向、愉快和口头地使用多语言实践，以桥接和调解跨语言的信息流，以及 (b) 系统地使用书面翻译和口头或手语口译的垂直实践为所有学生实现高水平的学术语言能力（无论人们称之为分析语言还是科学语言），以实现机会和成果的平等。任何不足都会继续不平等的循环。