The paper discusses some pragmalinguistic features of argumentation in English. It is mentioned that although some language units (phonetic, morphological, syntactical) are context-based, the lexical ones can serve as argumentative strategies even out of context. However, it is stated that the pragmatic purpose of certain linguistic means with a negative argumentative meaning (e.g. conjunction but) becomes clear only in the context. The evaluative and qualifying role of operators in argumentation (e.g. author's modality or implicit positive assessment) is also highlighted in the article. Since the process of argumentation is aimed at either on the proof of truth (alethic modality), or on conviction of prompting a person to an action (action modality), modality is represented as another important element of argumentation. Besides, some features of different syntactical constructions in pragmatic structure of Argumentative Discourse (AD) are touched upon. Since the linguistic content of AD takes place in the orientation of rhetorical framework, rhetorical techniques are considered its structural component. In the paper, the role of topoi is also discussed for effectiveness of achieving the goal of argumentative message. To our mind, the paper can force ways through appropriate theoretical frameworks for future AD and linguistic argumentative analysis.