Acceptable Discord is a situation where multiple or boundless parties disagree on the definition of a word(s) that is essential to communicating or formulating the concept(s) being discussed. That is to say, the multiple or boundless parties basically understand two different meanings for the word, or they associate the word with different concepts. Such discord can lead to a linguistic dispute, a disagreement that arises if the parties involved disagree about the definition of a word or phrase. Consequently, their disagreement on these definitions explains why there is a dispute at all.

It is sometimes held that semantic disputes are not genuine disputes at all, but very often they are regarded as perfectly genuine, e.g., in philosophy. It is also sometimes held that when a semantic dispute arises, the focus of the debate should switch from the original thesis to the meaning of the terms of which there are different definitions (understandings, concepts, etc.). Semantic disputes can result in the logical fallacy of equivocation.

Any word or instance of communication that has its effectiveness reduced due to acceptable discord is said to be semantically loaded, i.e., the information has semantic content and is "propositionally structured," wherein implicit beliefs are tacit.