The paper analyses the disagreement pragmeme as a culture-bound notion (Mey 2016a, 2016b, 2001) in political interview discourse. The research was based on 262 allopracts in 50 English and Serbian interviews conducted with 30 politicians. The types, frequencies and cultural distinctions of the disagreement allopracts were observed in relation to the single and multiple dispute profiles (van Eemeren, Houtlosser and Henkemans 2007). The starting assumption that the disagreement pragmeme would be realised in the language of English and Serbian-speaking politicians in culture-specific ways was confirmed by the empirical analysis of the types and frequencies of the disagreement allopracts. Namely, the analysis showed that, although the allopracts in both the English and Serbian sub-corpora were characterised by weak, rather than strong degrees of strength, differences appeared between the ways in which the English and Serbian interviewees expressed their disagreement. Specifically, the Serbian sub-corpus is characterised by more frequent disagreement in general, strong disagreement and counterclaims. Finally, the research results support Mey’s idea that pragmatic acts and pragmemes should not only be discussed in relation to illocutionary acts, but they should also be examined with regard to the sociocultural embeddedness of language use.