Cathar, You quote..
5.2.1.2.1 The air-ground radiotelephony communications shall be conducted in the language normally used by the station on the ground or in the English language.
This is my exact point. If the ground is talking in Swahili and, let's face it, not many people speak it, why does this ruling exist if it is blatantly obvious that it will cause confusion?
It seems to me that it should be one language only and no other. Make it French, make it any language you like, but to carte blanche the issue by accepting two (or a myriad of choices) seems madness to me and I'm only a passenger!
If you meet a native in the jungle and you cannot converse then you adopt sign language. If you are lining up at CDG and you cannot understand ATC doesn't this ring alarm bells?
Perhaps I am being over anxious here but I find it very difficult to comprehend why any safety conscious organisation should issue 5.2.1.2.1. One agreed language by definition provides clear and concise comms so why compromise the matter by accepting anything less?