> LGTM, except that it should take the foreign-status object as well,
> surely.  That will give an indication of which localization catalogue to
> look in.

I thought it would be a closure which carries around the relevant parts
of the lexical environment where the status object was made. This is
more general than taking the object as an argument since there may be
information you want to keep in the closure but is not useful to publish
as part of the object itself.