Abstract
<jats:p>The purpose of the article is to explore the hermeneutic nature of negation in J. Heller’s “Catch-22”, observing similarities and differences in the frequency and functions of types of negation in the Lancaster-Oslo-Bergen (LOB) corpus and in the Brown corpus, electronic collections of British and American fiction. The actual data used in the study is formed from the following corpus: 1) the digitized version of the novel “Catch-22” (171,235 words); 2) the fiction sections in the LOB and Brown buildings (58,000 words each). Based on the sample, negative constructions are classified according to various discursive functions. The analysis of the discursive functions of negative constructions was carried out manually based on a sample from the novel “Catch-22” (20,071 words) and the Brown corpus (20,421 words). When classifying statements with negative semantics in terms of their discursive functions, we adhered to the point of view that these statements are marked by polarity, i.e. they have one of the forms of non-affixed (syntactic) negation. Denial includes two traditionally distinct categories describing non-existence and refutation. These functions have the general pragmatic property of challenging / rejecting statements that have been explicitly actualized in the context of communicative interaction or expressing refuted assumptions or expectations. It has been established that the most significant differences in the subtypes of the negation category are found in the implementation of narrative reversals of propositions (no examples of this subtype were recorded in the sample from the Brown corpus). This allowed us to determine that the narrative reversal of propositions characterizes the category of negation exclusively in the text of the novel “Catch-22”. It is concluded that the most important aspect of the functioning of this category in the novel “Catch-22” is that it is a discursive phenomenon, i.e. it cannot be optimally interpreted without taking into account the contextual factor (previous and subsequent statements).</jats:p>