the status of the six official languages and the actual usage in spoken communication in the

Department of General Assembly and Conference Management (DGACM) of the UN.

1. Introduction
Given the scenario that there are potential differences in the status of the six official languages,
this paper attempts to outline a research plan to check whether perceptions from United Nations
staff members about the status of official languages coincide with their actual usage. The
research attempts to choose one department (DGACM) of the UN and conduct a case study in
order to identify the status of the six official languages by first collecting perceptions from staff,
and then checking that the actual practice within DGACM aligns with staff members’ perceptions
of language status. The DGACM is mainly responsible for meeting services, language services, as
well as conference management, etc. This multilingual environment offers rich and relevant
context for exploring language status and actual language practice, which makes it a suitable
context for a/this case study. Studying the language-related practices in DGACM has broader
implications for language planning and policy development, within the UN and beyond. The
paper will first explain the research topic and two research questions. Then, the research design
will be extensively discussed in terms of the following aspects:, such as the choice of
methodology, data collection, and data analysis. Following that, the paper will conclude with a
brief overview of the entire proposed research.

2. Research Topic & Research Question.

Before the establishment of targeted research questions, the general research topic will be
specified. The official languages’ status differences and the actual usage of official languages will
be the main domain of investigation.
2.1 Research Topic
Staff members’ perceptions of the potential differences in the status of the six official
languages would be are identified first. Then the author compares and investigates the actual
usage of the six official languages within the DGACM in the UN. The language used within the UN
can be divided into two categories: written and spoken communication. This research only
focuses on spoken communication for the sake of optimizing the manageability of the research
scope.
2.2 Research Questions.
In accordance with the preceding abovementioned clarification of the research topic, the
following two research questions are hoped to be answered:
(1) What are the potential differences in the status of the six official languages from people’s
view?
(2) To what extent does the actual language usage in DGACM in terms of spoken
communication align with the staff’s perception of language status?
3. Research Design
In this paper, mixed methods will be employed to achieve the research goal. To compare the
actual language usage with the language status, the strategy of triangulation will be employed to
explore staff members’ perceptions about the potential status differences as well as the actual
language usage within DGACM. Both quantitative and qualitative methods will be employed to
collect data. The subjective perceptions about status and objective practice will be analyzed and
compared to identify potential differences.

3.1 Reasons for Choosing Case Study

Case study will be employed as the most suitable research methodology in this study. The
research goal is to check whether people’s subjective perception of the language status aligns
with the objective language practice within the workplace, which demands thick and in-depth
description and analysis to describe all aspects of the case. There are several strengths of case
study that help achieve the research goal.
Firstly, case study allows for the application of multiple methods in accordance with the
specific research needs and circumstances. It fosters the employment of a variety of sources of
data sources, which also promotes the validation of data through triangulation(Denscombe,
2017). The strategy of triangulation is about collecting multiple perspectives about the same
topic under investigation (Paltridge & Phakiti, 2015). The proposed research attempts to apply 3
data collection methods aiming to capture the actual complex language usage under scrutiny. The
details will be explained in the section of data collection & data analysis. Various data sources
contribute to a more in-depth understanding of the situation. Therefore, the case study
methodology enables the researcher to investigate the case from multiple perspectives and
employ triangulation to uphold data consistency.
Secondly, according to Denscombe (2017), the case study approach is well-suited to small-
scale research by focusing dedicated efforts on a solitary research site. This research method
characteristically underscores the depth of study instead of the breadth of study, it focuses on
the “particular” instead of the “general”. The main benefit of this approach is that concentrating
on specific instances allows the researcher to address the nuances and intricacies of complicated
social contexts. Particularly, this method provides researchers an opportunity to explore
relationships in a manner that is inaccessible to the survey approach. (Denscombe, 2017). (Duff,
2007)also claimed that case study contributes to detailed descriptions of the cases. By
conducting a case study within a department in the UN, the researcher can grapple with the case
more closely to examine whether the perception of status can be verified by actual usage.
Thirdly, case study is particularly appropriate where researchers have constrained control
over events. Since this approach is concerned with researching phenomena as they naturally
happen, researchers are not required to impose control or manipulate circumstances.
(Denscombe, 2017). The research context of this study is the workplace of the UN, the researcher
attempting to investigate the actual language use within this multilingual setting. The rich
contextualization of this methodology enables the researcher to uncover the potential
differences in language use in naturally occurring situations.

3.2 Reasons for not Choosing Action Research

Action research is not appropriate for the proposed research. This methodology is about
changing something and examining the influence of the change. It focuses on improvement
through multiple rounds of action and reflection(McKinley & Rose, 2020). Change is a key
characteristic of the concept of action research which involves transformations through problem-
solving. (Denscombe, 2017). However, in the previously mentioned two research questions, there
is neither a specific practical issue to be tackled nor a need for amelioration in the scenario. The
research goal is not to bring about change but to explore whether there are any disparities
between staff’s perception and actual usage of the official languages. Thus, it is not a suitable
option for this research.

3.3 Reasons for not Choosing Experimental Method

Experimental method is conducted in a highly controlled environment, which is often used
to examine the effect of one variable on another (Denscombe, 2017). The research questions of
this research don’t consist of any variable that hypothetically influences another. In this study, the
research goal only focuses on whether staff members’ perceptions about language status align
with the actual usage in the workplace. The researcher doesn’t need to explore any causal
relationship that is typically generated among variables. By emphasizing control, experimental
methods may overlook the contextual factors that shape language dynamics in real-world
situations. Furthermore, imposing experimental interventions within the UN may raise ethical
concerns, while case study allows for a more ethical approach by observation without direct
interventions. Hence, this method is less suitable than case study to explore the two
aforementioned research questions previously mentioned.

3.4 Reasons for not Choosing Ethnography

Ethnography displays some resemblances with case study. These two qualitative research
methods can be used to study research subjects within context. Both methods involve a detailed
description of data. There are several reasons why ethnography is less suitable for this research.
Ethnography involves a very “thick description” by adopting an emic perspective. Compared with
case study, the boundary of ethnography is more flexible and it requires long-term immersion in
the research context and extensive fieldwork, which is much more time-consuming (McKinley &
Rose, 2020). In this research, the researcher attempts to investigate the actual usage of official
languages in terms of spoken workplace community, which is more specific and manageable.
Besides, ethnography focuses on sociocultural context and investigates people’s behaviors from a
cultural perspective (Nunan & Bailey, 2009). However, this research doesn’t involve any cultural
explanation. Moreover, compared with ethnography, case study may provide more flexibility in
access and permission.
4. Data Collection
For data collection, three methods will be applied accordingly. A questionnaire and
interview will be employed to collect staff members’ perceptions of potential differences in
language status. As for the investigation of actual usage, a questionnaire will be conducted first.
Then the method of observation will be applied. And post-observation interviews will be
arranged in the last phase.

4.1 Ethics
The following principles of ethics will be strictly followed throughout the research process:,
honesty, fairness, transparency, and no harm. Confidentiality and anonymity should also be
guaranteed. Participants have the right to make their own decisions and are allowed to withdraw
with no harmful consequence. The researcher should collect assent from both the UN and all
participants. An informed consent letter should be signed to clarify key aspects, like the
procedure and purpose of the research, data collection methods, how data will be used, what
participants need to do, whether they will be identifiable in the research report, etc.

4.2 Participants
All staff members from DGACM will be the target participants of the questionnaire survey.
According to their responses, the researcher could identify the sample to conduct further
interviews. The selection of participants for interviews should be based on the characteristics of
the specific work sector being studied. When investigating the actual usage, people who attend
meetings and conferences will be carefully observed. 3 target participants from among them will
be selected for post-observation interviews. There are several criteria to be followed, for
example, people who oversee meeting services, language services, or conference management.
People who have worked in this department for more than 6 months to ensure they are familiar
with the actual language usage. Five staff members from different hierarchical levels will be
interviewed for their perceptions about the language status. Ideally, one secretary, one director,
one senior staff, and two ordinary staff at the operational level. These representatives will be
selected according to their working experience, influence, and familiarity with the language
policy as well as the department workflow.

4.3 Questionnaire
There are many reasons for selecting questionnaire as the data collection method.
According to Dörnyei and Taguchi (2010), questionnaire survey is unprecedentedly efficient and
can uniquely help yield three types of data (factual, behavioral, and attitudinal). Researchers can
save a lot of time, effort, and financial resources to achieve quick data collection, data processing,
and data analysis. While all questionnaire data is self-reported, the accuracy and
comprehensiveness should be reconsidered. Some of the shortcomings of questionnaires can be
also moderated by a good design, for instance, if the questionnaire is overly lengthy or tedious,
participants are easy likely to develop fatigue. This situation can be avoided if researchers design
an appropriate length and verify the types of questions.
In this research, the questionnaire survey aims to collect people’s potential perceptions
about the language status and gain a brief understanding of the actual language usage within
DGACM. To save time and resources, we could combine the two research questions into one
questionnaire. But there are some key points to be considered. Firstly, it is of pivotal importance
to ensure logical coherence. Questions related to perceptions about language status differences
will be issued first, and then gradually transition to practical use aspects. Secondly, the length of
the questionnaire should be controlled within a reasonable length to avoid placing too much
burden on participants. Instructions and language should be straightforward and easily
comprehensible. Thirdly, questions should be designed rigorously to ensure that each question is
valuable for research purposes. Duplicate or conflicting questions should be avoided. When
applying scales to measure language status or practical usage, make sure scales are calibrated
and validated, or employ existing reliable and valid scales.

When exploring employee’s perception of language status, ranking questions can be used to
ask participants to rank the six languages based on perceived status. Likert scale questions can
help measure the extent of agreement or disagreement with statements about language status.
As for questions about actual language use, the behavioral questions will be designed in different
types, such as multiple choice, open-ended questions, semantic differential, and Likert questions.
These questions will be used to find out which languages staff members speak in the workplace,
the frequency of usage, as well as potential differences between the 6 languages in the actual
usage.
In order to strengthen the internal reliability, the questionnaire will be refined through
carrying out a pilot investigation to test its effectiveness. Two sample groups from other
departments in the UN will be selected to receive a pilot test. Their feedback will be collected to
revise the questionnaire accordingly.

4.4 Observation
Through field observation and recording, more direct practical application data can be
collected. The researcher will document the use and treatment of the 6 official languages
through direct observation. 20 conferences will be video recorded for further transcription and
analysis. The following aspects of data will be collected, such as the use of translation or
interpretation services, the proportion or frequency of the 6 official languages used in
conferences, the roles and positions of the speakers, instances, and frequency of language
switching, etc. This can help the researcher to design questions to further explore the reason
behind it, which could be asked in the post-observation interviews.

4.5 Interviews
Based on the data about language status from the questionnaire, semi-structured or
structured interviews will be conducted to have in-depth conversations with staff member
representatives. 5 staff representatives from different hierarchical levels will be further invited to
freely state their opinions and experiences about the status of official languages. More detailed
and in-depth information will be collected to help the researcher understand staff members’
perceptions and evaluation of language status.
After each target recorded meeting, post-observation interviews will be conducted directly.
Three participants will be interviewed to collect the following data, for instance, language
preferences, reasons for language switching, language challenges and barriers in actual usage,
language support and resources, views on language diversity and equality, etc. Through in-depth
interviews, further insight can be gained into the differences in the actual usage of official
languages.

5. Data analysis
5.1 Questionnaire
Before data analysis, the researcher will screen the data collected from questionnaires
prudentially to ensure accuracy and consistency. Data about people’s perception of official
language status and that of actual language usage will be processed and analyzed separately for
further comparison. T-tests can be used to compare and check whether there is any difference
exists. Descriptive statistical methods will be used to calculate the frequency, percentage, mean,
and median, which allows the researcher to get a general understanding of staff members’ views
about potential disparities of different official languages. More complex data can be processed by
SPSS.

5.2 observation
The observation notes and the video recordings will be reviewed thoroughly to gain a more
comprehensive understanding of the spoken context where the 6 official languages are used. To
achieve internal reliability, a coder will be applied. When analyzing the actual usage of each
official language in meetings, data like the frequency of each official language, the average time
of use, and the number of language switches will be summarized utilizing descriptive statistical
methods. T-tests or ANOVA can be used to identify the significance of disparities of different
speaker roles or meeting issues.

5.3 interviews
Since the qualitative data from the interview transcripts can be very complex, the researcher
should read and review the transcript carefully to identify key themes. Then each important
theme or insight will be coded to simplify the data and facilitate analysis. With the help of a
coding system, the researcher can integrate data by linking various themes and perspectives to
corresponding codes. There are some useful analysis tools to help manage and analyze the
interview data, such as nvivo, maxqda, and atlas.ti, etc. When there is a contradiction between
previous questionnaire data and the observation data, then the researcher will further explore
the underlying reason by asking the respondents to justify it. Through systematic and
comprehensive analysis of the interview transcripts, the researcher can gain a deeper insight into
the actual usage of various official languages in conferences as well as the potential differences in
official language status.

6. conclusion and discussion

This research depicts a case study within DGACM to investigate whether the actual usage in
meetings of different official languages aligns with staff’s perception of the language status. Both
quantitative and qualitative data are collected to enhance the reliability and validity of the study.
It is hoped that the results can help further studies to explore possible causes and solutions of
different official languages status, to promote equal treatment and practical application of official
languages.

References
Denscombe, M. (2017). EBOOK: The good research guide: For small-scale social research projects.
McGraw-Hill Education (UK).
Dörnyei, Z., & Taguchi, T. (2010). Questionnaires in second language research construction,
administration, and processing (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Duff, P. A. (2007). Second Language Acquisition Research Series: Case Study Research in Applied
Linguistics. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Incorporated.
McKinley, J., & Rose, H. (2020). The Routledge handbook of research methods in applied linguistics.
Routledge.
Nunan, D., & Bailey, K. (2009). Exploring second language classroom research a comprehensive guide.
Heinle.
Paltridge, B., & Phakiti, A. (2015). Research methods in applied linguistics: A practical resource.
Bloomsbury Publishing.