The field of argumentative studies in the modern era has attracted increasing attention,

becoming a central focus in contemporary research. This interest has manifested through

a quantitative and qualitative accumulation of books and studies that have addressed

argumentation through analysis and theorisation. As a result of this cognitive momentum,

multiple theories of argumentation have emerged, laying the foundations of this pragmatic

field. Among the most prominent of these theories are those of Toulmin, Perelman, and

Tyteca, as well as the approaches of Ducrot. These theorists have worked to establish the

features of this discipline and to define its operational concepts, thereby contributing to

the formation of an independent epistemological identity for argumentative studies. If the

subject of argumentation for Perelman lies in the study of the techniques of discourse to

lead the receiver to acceptance and submission, thus constituting a logical phenomenon

aimed at achieving persuasion, Ducrot, by contrast, considers argumentation a linguistic

phenomenon concerned with the study of linguistic means and thus linked to the structure

of utterances and discourse. Argumentative factors are considered one of these linguistic

elements and components that realise the argumentative function of language, as

highlighted in Ducrot’s theory. In this paper, we seek to demonstrate the importance of

argumentative factors in discourse and their role in persuading the receiver and achieving

the speaker’s intentions.