A complex and dynamic semantic field underlies Ottoman discussions about establishing and negotiating difference in society – a field which comes into view once we ask about terms, metaphors and images at play in the Ottoman semantics relating to social difference and their respective connotations and genealogies. Exploring Ottoman ideas about tribes and tribal society in the late-Ottoman period, the paper zooms in on one pertinent example: The ongoing negotiation of what is perceived as civilized and modern and what, one the other hand, stands apart, being conceptionalized as different, backward or regressive. For empirical evidence, the paper cross-reads a series of six reports (layihas) dated between 1880 and 1919, which comment on the situation in Ottoman Iraq, Hicaz and Yemen. In these texts, Ottoman officials share their views on the social structure of tribal societies, along with their suggestions for reform and modernization. In their writings, authors engage with sociological and political theories then en vogue in Europe and apply relevant concepts and terminologies to examples in the Ottoman-imperial context. The paper inquires about their translations of key concepts, terms and ideas into Ottoman Turkish. Their translation choices and semantic decisions are read against the backdrop of previous discussions on socio-political order and the terminologies applied when talking about difference in society in the Ottoman realm. It will be argued that in their layihas, authors selectively re-activate and modify layers of existing Ottoman concepts, among them a?iret, kavm and kabilet, as well as introducing contemporary European ideas into the mix. Ottoman concepts of tribes and tribal society in the late-19th century are being read here as results of complex transcultural encounters and entanglements. The layiha series illustrates how processes of knowledge transfer in the late-Ottoman realm are not one-way streets, but multiply entangled and multidirectional. Ottoman approaches to engage with social realities and challenges in governing tribal societies drew on European ideas and terminologies, while also taking inspiration from previous discourses led in Ottoman-Turkish, Persian and Arabic. The layihas also serve as a springboard into attempts to customize and pluralize approaches from conceptual history (Koselleck et al.) to better suit the Ottoman case, exploring the late-19th century as a period of accelerated conceptual change in the discussions about social structure, as well as accommodating transcultural and multilingual perspectives.