Translating results without translating away uncertainty

Multilingual return of results must preserve the relationship between evidence and claim, not merely reproduce sentence structure. This practice essay compares research-governance sources with W3C accessibility guidance through a fictional seasonal-observation case in which an ambiguous denominator changes the apparent conclusion. It examines qualified translation, technical review, terminology, counts, missing records, chart explanation, confidentiality, and synchronised corrections across written and spoken formats. The discussion distinguishes accessibility from translation quality and separates review roles from endorsement. No actual translations, community consultations, or reader evaluations are reported. The essay rejects treating English as automatically authoritative and offers responsibilities for outside institutions without prescribing a universal Indigenous format. Its central implication is to resource multilingual return as part of evidential integrity throughout a project's lifetime.