This report examines the meaning of ‘intercultural dialogue’, considering both practical implications of the phrasing adopted and underlying value and compositional implications. It draws upon the meanings of the phrases adopted in the six official languages in the UNGA Resolution 62/90. This report also examines the now powerful notion that there must be civilizational parties to the dialogue. Finally, it notes an oft-ignored thread of discussion at the theoretical and high political level, in which the groupings need not be fixed and distinct. This report submits that when the meaning of ‘intercultural dialogue’ is left unclear, hidden borderings can remain under-examined, and underlying value and compositional judgments unexposed. Further, the report argues that, through the linguistic differences in the definition of the dialogue itself, a potential problem to be encountered in the functioning of the initiative can be perceived.