This article, a reply to William Gage's "Uncommonly Taught Languages" (ED 042 163), takes issue with Gage's assertion that "there is no generally recognized source of guidance for determining needs and priorities for the allocation of the scarce resources in the uncommonly taught languages, but...that a number of useful tools of access for many languages had nevertheless accidentally surfaced." The author of the present article, who is Chief of the Language and Area Research Section of the Institute of International Studies of the U.S. Office of Education, believes, to the contrary, that a great deal has been achieved since the passing of the National Defense Act in 1958 and that "most of that portion financed by the Office of Education has come about more by design that by accident, and the trend of recent years has clearly been to target in ever more sharply on priority needs in the language field." The author then proceeds to comment on and respond to specific points in Gage's article, stressing thoughout the role of the Office of Education in such activities as the preparation of a data-base for the uncommonly taught languages and the sponsoring of overseas language training centers. Newly developing trends in the field are also discussed. (FWB)