# The Brothers Karamazov, The Schoolboy

Братья Карамазовы · Fyodor Dostoevsky · Book X — The Boys

Source: https://1732studios.com/books/karamazov/b10-c3. Data: https://1732studios.com/books/karamazov/b10-c3.json.


Но Коля уже не слушал.  
But Kolya was no longer listening.
> «уже не» + imperfective past: The imperfective past «слушал» views the listening as an ongoing state, and «уже не» («no longer») negates that continuing process: he was in the middle of not-listening. A perfective would name a single event; here Dostoevsky wants the standing condition.

Наконец-то он мог уйти.  
At last he could leave.
> «наконец-то» — at long last: The emphatic clitic «-то» fastened to «наконец» («finally») colours it with relief and impatience: not merely 'finally' but 'finally, thank goodness'. It signals Kolya's eagerness to be gone.
> «уйти» — prefixed perfective of motion: «уйти» (to leave, go away) is the perfective of «уходить», formed by the prefix у- on the motion verb «идти». After the modal «мог» it gives the single, completed act of departure Kolya is finally free to make.

Выйдя за ворота, он огляделся, передернул плечиками и, проговорив: «Мороз!», направился прямо по улице и потом направо по переулку к базарной площади.  
Once outside the gate, he glanced about, gave a little shrug of his shoulders, and, muttering "Frost!", set off straight down the street and then to the right along the lane toward the market square.
> «выйдя» — perfective gerund: «выйдя» is the past (perfective) деепричастие of «выйти»: 'having gone out'. It compresses a prior, completed action into one adverbial word sharing Kolya's subject, then the main clause unrolls his next moves.
> Chained gerunds in narration: «проговорив» ('having uttered') is a second perfective gerund stacked alongside «выйдя», a hallmark of literary Russian: several non-finite verb-adverbs hang off one finite verb («направился»), packing the sequence of small actions into a single flowing sentence.
> «плечики» — diminutive of «плечи»: The expressive diminutive of «плечи» ('shoulders'), instrumental «плечиками». It miniaturises the gesture to fit a boy's small frame and adds an affectionate, almost amused authorial tone toward Kolya's self-important shrug.
> Instrumental of the body part: «передёрнул плечиками» puts the shoulders in the instrumental — the means by which the shrug is performed. Russian regularly uses the instrumental for the body part one moves: пожать плечами, кивнуть головой, махнуть рукой.

Не доходя одного дома до площади, он остановился у ворот, вынул из кармашка свистульку и свистнул изо всей силы, как бы подавая условный знак.  
One house short of the square, he stopped at a gateway, drew a little whistle from his pocket, and blew on it with all his might, as though giving a prearranged signal.
> «не доходя» — negated present gerund: «не доходя» is the imperfective present gerund of «доходить» ('reaching'), negated: 'not (yet) reaching'. The genitive «одного дома» measures the gap — one house short of the square — a tidy, idiomatic spatial construction.
> «кармашек» — little pocket: Diminutive of «карман» ('pocket'), genitive after «из». The string of diminutives in this scene (плечики, кармашек, свистулька) keeps everything child-sized and endearing.
> «свистулька» — a toy whistle: A «свистулька» is a small whistle or whistling toy, often a clay folk pipe. The word itself, with its -улька suffix, sounds playful and small — fitting for a boy's secret signalling device.
> «изо всей силы» — with all one's might: A fixed idiom, 'with all (one's) strength'. Note the spelling «изо» rather than «из» — the vowel is inserted before the consonant cluster of «всей» for ease of pronunciation, as in «изо всех сил».
> «как бы» + gerund: 'as if': «как бы» ('as if, as though') with the imperfective gerund «подавая» frames the whistle as a simultaneous, pretend-purposeful act. «как бы» softens the assertion — the narrator only likens the blast to a prearranged signal.

Ему пришлось ждать не более минуты, из калитки вдруг выскочил к нему румяненький мальчик, лет одиннадцати, тоже одетый в теплое, чистенькое и даже щегольское пальтецо.  
He had to wait scarcely a minute before a rosy-cheeked boy of about eleven came darting out to him from the wicket gate, likewise dressed in a warm, neat, and even rather dapper little overcoat.
> «пришлось» — impersonal dative of obligation: The neuter, subjectless «пришлось» ('it fell to one, one had to') governs a dative experiencer «ему»: there is no nominative subject, the obligation simply happens to Kolya. A core Russian impersonal pattern.
> Genitive after «не более»: «минуты» is genitive singular governed by «не более» ('no more than'). Quantity expressions and comparison of amount pull the counted noun into the genitive.
> «лет одиннадцати» — approximate age by inversion: Putting the noun before the numeral — «лет одиннадцати» instead of «одиннадцати лет» — signals approximation: 'about eleven'. The genitive plural «лет» is the suppletive count-form of «год» used after five and above.
> «румяненький» — rosy-cheeked, doubly endearing: From «румяный» ('ruddy, rosy') with the affectionate -еньк- suffix. Together with «чистенькое» and «пальтецо» it bathes the boy in tender diminutives, the narrator's fond eye on a healthy child set against the dying Ilusha.
> «пальтецо» — a little overcoat: Diminutive of the borrowed «пальто» ('overcoat'). Unusually for a French loan, it accepts a Russian -ецо suffix here; «щегольское пальтецо» means a natty, dapper little coat — Smurov is well-dressed.

Это был мальчик Смуров, состоявший в приготовительном классе (тогда как Коля Красоткин был уже двумя классами выше), сын зажиточного чиновника и которому, кажется, не позволяли родители водиться с Красоткиным, как с известнейшим отчаянным шалуном, так что Смуров, очевидно, выскочил теперь украдкой.  
This was the boy Smurov, who was in the preparatory class (whereas Kolya Krassotkin was already two classes higher), the son of a well-off official, and whose parents, it seems, would not let him keep company with Krassotkin, known as the most notorious of reckless young rascals, so that Smurov had evidently slipped out now on the sly.
> «состоявший» — past active participle: «состоявший» is the past active participle of «состоять» ('to be a member of'), agreeing with «мальчик»: 'who was in...'. It replaces a который-clause and is a marker of dense literary style.
> Dative complement of «не позволяли»: «которому» is dative — the relative pronoun takes the case its own clause demands, here the person to whom permission is (not) given. «не позволяли водиться» = 'would not allow [him] to associate'.
> «водиться с» — to keep company with: Colloquial «водиться с кем» means to associate or hang around with someone (instrumental after «с»), often with a faint note of disapproval — exactly the parents' attitude toward the notorious Krassotkin.
> «отчаянный шалун» — a reckless scamp: «шалун» is an affectionate-pejorative word for a mischievous boy, a prankster; «отчаянный» ('desperate, reckless') intensifies it. The instrumental «известнейшим ... шалуном» follows «как» ('as'), and the superlative «известнейший» ('most notorious') is the bookish -ейший form.
> «украдкой» — stealthily: A frozen instrumental adverb (from the root of «красть», to steal) meaning 'by stealth, on the sly'. It tells us Smurov has disobeyed his parents to sneak out.

Этот Смуров, если не забыл читатель, был один из той группы мальчиков, которые два месяца тому назад кидали камнями через канаву в Илюшу и который рассказывал тогда про Илюшу Алеше Карамазову.  
This Smurov, if the reader has not forgotten, was one of that band of boys who two months earlier had thrown stones across the ditch at Ilusha, and the one who at the time had told Alyosha Karamazov about Ilusha.
> Inversion in the aside: The verb-before-subject order «не забыл читатель» is a mild literary inversion in this parenthetical aside to the reader; cases keep it unambiguous while the rhythm stays bookish.
> «кидали камнями» — instrumental of the thrown object: With «кидать»/«бросать» the thing thrown can stand in the instrumental — «кидали камнями» ('pelted with stones') — stressing the action of throwing rather than a single stone's trajectory. The relative «которые» agrees in number with the band of boys.
> «тому назад» — ago: The standard idiom for 'ago': a time span in the accusative plus «тому назад». «тому» is an old dative ('to that [point] back'), now fossilised; modern speech often drops «тому» and says simply «два месяца назад».

— Я вас уже целый час жду, Красоткин, — с решительным видом проговорил Смуров, и мальчики зашагали к площади.  
"I've been waiting a whole hour for you, Krassotkin," said Smurov with a resolute air, and the boys started off toward the square.
> Present tense for action still going on: Russian uses the present «жду» where English needs a perfect, 'I have been waiting'. An imperfective process begun in the past and continuing into now stays in the present: «целый час» ('a whole hour') is its accusative duration.
> «вас» — polite 'you' between boys: Smurov addresses the older Kolya with the formal «вы» («вас» is its accusative), not «ты», a small marker of the deference the younger boy owes — and Kolya's commanding status in their world.
> «за-» — inceptive perfective: «зашагали» is «шагать» ('to stride') with the prefix за-, which here means 'began to': the boys set off striding. This inceptive за- (заговорить, запеть) marks the onset of an action.

— Запоздал, — ответил Красоткин. — Есть обстоятельства.  
"I'm late," answered Krassotkin. "There are circumstances."
> «Есть обстоятельства» — there are circumstances: Kolya's clipped, self-important reply: «есть» ('there is/are') plus «обстоятельства» ('circumstances'). The vague gravity of the word is comic in a thirteen-year-old's mouth — a piece of Kolya's posing.

Тебя не выпорют, что ты со мной?  
Won't you get a thrashing for being out with me?
> «выпороть» — to flog: «выпорют» is the perfective future of «выпороть», 'to thrash/flog with a rod'. Corporal punishment of children was routine; the impersonal-feeling 'they' (no stated subject) means 'won't you get a whipping'.
> «что» = 'for the fact that': Here «что» introduces a causal clause, 'because/for being with me'. With «со мной» the verb of motion or being is gapped — colloquial compression typical of lively dialogue.

— Ну полноте, разве меня порют?  
"Come now, as if anyone thrashes me?"
> «полноте» — come now, enough: «полноте» is a fixed interjection (literally an imperative 'be full, stop'), 'come now, that's enough, don't be silly'. The -те marks the polite/plural addressee, matching the «вы» Smurov gets from Kolya here in mock-grandeur.
> «разве» — incredulous question: The particle «разве» frames a rhetorical, disbelieving question: 'as if anyone thrashes me!'. The imperfective present «порют» ('do [they] flog') states it as a habitual fact Kolya proudly denies.

И Перезвон с вами?  
And Perezvon's with you?

— И Перезвон!  
"Perezvon too!"

— Вы и его туда?  
"You're taking him there as well?"
> Verbless question: A purely elliptical question: the verb ('are taking') is gapped, leaving «Вы и его туда?» ('You — him too — there?'). «его» is accusative animate; «туда» is directional 'to there'. Such gapping is the natural texture of quick spoken exchange.

— И его туда.  
"Him as well."

— Ах, кабы Жучка!  
"Ah, if only it were Zhuchka!"
> «кабы» — folksy 'if only': «кабы» is a colloquial, slightly folk-poetic conditional 'if (only)', contracting «как бы». Standing alone as an exclamation it voices a wish: 'if only it were Zhuchka!'. It carries the irrealis force of «бы».

— Нельзя Жучку.  
"There can be no Zhuchka."
> «нельзя» + accusative, impersonal: «нельзя» ('it is not possible / not allowed') heads a subjectless impersonal clause; the verb is gapped and «Жучку» stands as its accusative object: 'No Zhuchka is possible'. «нельзя» is the negative counterpart to «можно».

Жучка не существует.  
Zhuchka does not exist.
> Negated «существовать»: «существует» ('exists') is negated with «не». Note that the subject «Жучка» stays nominative because the verb is the simple intransitive «существовать»; the genitive-of-negation would appear only with «нет» (as in «Жучки нет»).

Жучка исчезла во мраке неизвестности.  
Zhuchka has vanished into the darkness of the unknown.
> «исчезла» — perfective past, feminine: «исчезла» is the perfective past of «исчезнуть» ('to vanish'), with the feminine -ла agreeing with «Жучка». Perfective marks the disappearance as a single completed event.
> «во мраке неизвестности» — mock-grand diction: «мрак» ('gloom, darkness') is a bookish, elevated word, and «неизвестность» ('the unknown, obscurity') its abstract genitive complement. The lofty phrase, in a boy's mouth about a dog, is deliberately mock-solemn — pure Kolya.

— Ах, нельзя ли бы так, — приостановился вдруг Смуров, — ведь Илюша говорит, что Жучка тоже была лохматая и тоже такая же седая, дымчатая, как и Перезвон, — нельзя ли сказать, что это та самая Жучка и есть, он, может быть, и поверит?  
"Ah, couldn't we manage it this way," Smurov suddenly stopped short, "after all, Ilusha says that Zhuchka was shaggy too and just as gray and smoky-colored, like Perezvon — couldn't we say this is that very same Zhuchka? Maybe he'd even believe it?"
> «нельзя ли бы» — tentative proposal: A pile-up of softening particles: «нельзя» (impossible/not allowed), the interrogative «ли», and the irrealis «бы», together making a very hesitant, polite 'mightn't we possibly...?'. Smurov is floating a delicate suggestion.
> «ведь» — appealing to shared knowledge: The modal particle «ведь» ('after all, you know') leans on what both boys already know to make the case persuasive: 'after all, Ilusha says...'. It is a hallmark of the give-and-take of Dostoevsky's dialogue.
> «та самая» — that very same: The demonstrative «та» reinforced by «самая» ('the very, the selfsame') means 'that very same Zhuchka'. The deceit hinges precisely on identity — claiming this dog is the identical lost one.
> Emphatic «и есть»: «это та самая Жучка и есть» uses «и есть» as an emphatic affirmation — 'is precisely / is none other than'. The «и» here is not 'and' but an intensifier reinforcing the copula.

— Школьник, гнушайся лжи, это раз; даже для доброго дела, два.  
"Schoolboy, abhor a lie — that's one; and even for a good cause — that's two."
> «гнушайся» — imperative + genitive object: «гнушайся» is the imperative of the reflexive verb «гнушаться» ('to abhor, disdain'), which governs its object in the genitive — hence «лжи» (gen. of «ложь», lie). The -ся verb takes genitive, not accusative.
> «гнушаться» — a lofty, bookish verb: «гнушаться» ('to hold in abhorrence, scorn') is elevated, near-biblical in tone. Kolya's sententious 'Schoolboy, abhor a lie' apes the moralising voice of a textbook or sermon — comic self-importance.

А главное, надеюсь, ты там не объявлял ничего о моем приходе.  
And above all, I trust you announced nothing there about my coming.
> Negative concord: «не ... ничего» is Russian's obligatory double negation: the ни-word «ничего» ('nothing') co-occurs with «не» on the verb, two negatives making one. «ничего» is genitive, the natural object case under negation.
> «приход» — arrival, coming: «приход» (prepositional «о приходе») is the verbal noun of «прийти», 'arrival, coming'. The same word also means a church parish — context fixes the sense here as Kolya's visit.

— Боже сохрани, я ведь понимаю же.  
"God forbid, I do understand, of course."
> Double particle «ведь ... же»: Smurov stacks two modal particles: «ведь» ('after all') and «же' (insistent emphasis), both reinforcing his protest that of course he understands. Such particle-clustering is the very texture of spoken Russian.

Но Перезвоном его не утешишь, — вздохнул Смуров. — Знаешь что: отец этот, капитан, мочалка-то, говорил нам, что сегодня щеночка ему принесет, настоящего меделянского, с черным носом; он думает, что этим утешит Илюшу, только вряд ли?  
But you won't comfort him with Perezvon," Smurov sighed. "You know what: that father, the captain, the old wisp of a man, told us he'd bring him a puppy today, a real Medelyan breed, with a black nose; he thinks he'll comfort Ilusha that way, only it's hardly likely, is it?
> Generalised 2nd-person + instrumental of means: «не утешишь» ('you won't comfort') is a generic 'you' — no specific subject, meaning 'one cannot'. «Перезвоном» is the instrumental of means: the dog is the instrument with which comfort is (not) given.
> «мочалка» — a wisp of a man: A «мочалка» is literally a loofah/bast washcloth; applied to the broken captain it means a frayed, limp, pitiful creature — a cruelly affectionate nickname. The clitic «-то» flags him as the known topic ('that, you know,...').
> «щеночек» — a wee puppy: Double-diminutive of «щенок» ('puppy'): «щеночек», accusative animate «щеночка». The tender suffix matches the captain's hope of consoling his dying son with so small a gift.
> «вряд ли» — hardly, scarcely: «вряд ли» ('hardly, unlikely') contains a fossilised «ли»; it casts doubt on the preceding hope. Tagged with rising '?', it invites Kolya's agreement: 'but it's hardly likely, eh?'.

— А каков он сам, Илюша-то?  
"And how is he himself, Ilusha?"
> Topical clitic «-то»: The hyphenated «-то» on «Илюша» marks him as the known topic the question circles back to: 'and as for Ilusha himself, how is he?'. This is the topic-emphasising «-то», distinct from the indefinite «кто-то».
> «каков» — interrogative short form: «каков» is the short, predicative form of «какой» ('what is he like, how is he'). It exists only as a predicate (каков, какова, каково, каковы) and asks after a state rather than a quality — apt for asking how a sick boy is doing.

— Ах, плох, плох!  
"Ah, bad, bad!"
> «плох» — short adjective predicate: «плох» is the masculine short form of «плохой» ('bad'). Used predicatively of a person's health it means 'in a bad way, gravely ill'. The short form's flavour of a current, absolute state suits the grim verdict on Ilusha.

Я думаю, у него чахотка.  
I think he has consumption.
> «у него» — Russian 'have': Russian expresses possession with «у» + genitive plus «есть» (often unstated): «у него чахотка» = 'he has consumption', literally 'at him [there is] consumption'. The thing possessed is the grammatical subject in the nominative.

Он весь в памяти, только так дышит-дышит, нехорошо он дышит.  
He's quite clear in his mind, only he breathes so — breathes and breathes — he breathes badly.
> Reduplicated verb for drawn-out action: Repeating the imperfective present «дышит-дышит» ('breathes-and-breathes') iconically draws out the labouring, continuous effort. Such reduplication intensifies the durative sense of the imperfective.
> «в памяти» — clear in mind, conscious: The idiom «быть в памяти» means to be conscious and lucid (as opposed to delirious); «весь в памяти» = 'fully clear-headed'. It reassures that the dying boy still knows what is happening — which makes it sadder.

Намедни попросил, чтоб его поводили, обули его в сапожки, пошел было, да и валится.  
The other day he asked to be walked about; they put his little boots on him, he tried to walk, and down he goes.
> «намедни» — the other day: «намедни» is a colloquial, slightly old-fashioned adverb for 'the other day, recently' (from 'on these [days]'). It flavours Smurov's narration with everyday provincial speech.
> «чтоб» + past = reported request: After «попросил» ('asked'), «чтоб(ы)» takes the past-form verb «поводили» to express the willed content of the request: he asked that they walk him about. «чтобы» always governs this irrealis past, never an indicative.
> «было» — the aborted-action particle: The particle «было» after a perfective past marks an action begun but cut short: «пошёл было» = 'he set off but...'. The contrast with the present «валится» ('and down he goes') makes the collapse vivid and immediate.
> «сапожки» — little boots: Diminutive plural of «сапоги» ('boots'). The tender form, recurring through this passage, keeps Ilusha child-sized and pitiable; «обули» is the perfective 'they shod / put boots on him'.

«Ах, говорит, я говорил тебе, папа, что у меня дурные сапожки, прежние, в них и прежде было неловко ходить».  
"Ah," says he, "I told you, papa, that my boots are bad, the old ones, they were uncomfortable to walk in before too."
> «говорит» — narrative quotative present: Dropped into reported speech, «говорит» ('says') is the historic/quotative present used to relay someone's words vividly: 'I told you, says he, ...'. It is unmarked for tense and frames the embedded quotation.
> «неловко» — awkward, uncomfortable: «неловко» as an impersonal predicate here means physically awkward/uncomfortable (the boots were hard to walk in); elsewhere it means socially awkward or embarrassed. «прежде» ('before, formerly') is a bookish synonym of «раньше».

Это он думал, что он от сапожек с ног валится, а он просто от слабости.  
He fancied it was the boots that made his legs give way, when really it was simply weakness.
> «от» + genitive of cause: «от» with the genitive «сапожек» (and «от слабости») expresses cause: his legs give way 'from the boots' / 'from weakness'. «от» is one of Russian's chief ways of naming the involuntary cause of a state.

Недели не проживет.  
He won't last out the week.
> Genitive of negation: «недели не проживёт»: Under negation the object «неделя» shifts to genitive «недели»: 'he won't live out a week'. Fronting it before «не проживёт» throws grim emphasis on the span he won't reach. «проживёт» is perfective future.

Герценштубе ездит.  
Herzenstube comes round.
> «ездит» — multidirectional motion verb: «ездит» is the multidirectional member of the «ехать/ездить» pair, used for repeated round trips: the doctor 'comes round' regularly. The unidirectional «едет» would mean a single journey in progress.

Теперь они опять богаты, у них много денег.  
Now they're well off again; they have plenty of money.
> «много» + genitive plural: Quantity word «много» ('much, many') governs the genitive: «денег» is the genitive plural of «деньги» (a plurale tantum, 'money'). The whole expresses 'they have a lot of money' via the «у них» possessive frame.

— Шельмы.  
"Swindlers."
> «шельма» — rogue, scoundrel: «шельма» (from German Schelm) is an expressive term of abuse, 'rogue, scoundrel, swindler', here nominative plural «шельмы». Kolya's curt one-word verdict on the doctors is pure swagger.

— Кто шельмы?  
"Who are swindlers?"

— Доктора, и вся медицинская сволочь, говоря вообще, и, уж, разумеется, в частности.  
"The doctors, and the whole medical rabble, speaking generally — and, of course, in particular too."
> «сволочь» — rabble, scum: «сволочь» is a strong collective term of contempt, 'scum, rabble' (originally 'that which is dragged together, refuse'). «вся медицинская сволочь» = 'the whole medical rabble' — Kolya's nihilist bravado against the doctors.
> «уж» — intensifying particle: The particle «уж» (a worn-down «уже») here merely intensifies, 'why, of course, to be sure'. Set among «говоря вообще ... в частности» it lends Kolya's pronouncement a mock-rhetorical, lecturing cadence.

Я отрицаю медицину.  
I reject medicine.
> Imperfective present as a stance: «отрицаю» ('I reject/deny') is imperfective present, stating a standing position rather than a single act. The bald declarative, subject pronoun «я» kept for emphasis, is Kolya striking the pose of a young freethinker.

Бесполезное учреждение.  
A useless institution.
> «учреждение» — institution: «учреждение» ('institution, establishment') is a weighty, abstract noun; calling medicine a 'useless institution' in clipped verbless apposition is Kolya parroting radical journalese — comic in its grandiosity.

Я, впрочем, всё это исследую.  
I am, however, looking into all of this.
> «всё это» as accusative object: «всё это» ('all this') is the neuter accusative object of «исследую» ('I am investigating'). The imperfective present marks an ongoing inquiry; «впрочем» ('however, by the way') softens the bravado with a knowing aside.

Что это у вас там за сентиментальности, однако, завелись?  
But what is this sentimentality, anyway, that you've taken up over there?
> «завелись» — middle -ся with «за-»: «завелись» is the perfective reflexive of «завестись» ('to spring up, take root, get started'), here middle/intransitive: 'what sentimentalities have started up'. The -ся marks the change of state with no external agent.
> «что за» — what sort of: The split frame «что ... за + noun» means 'what kind of', often with a dismissive edge: 'what's this sentimentality you've got going?'. «однако» ('however, though') adds a note of challenge.

Вы там всем классом, кажется, пребываете?  
The whole class is hanging about there, it seems?
> «всем классом» — instrumental of manner: «всем классом» ('as a whole class, all together') is an instrumental of collective manner — the way Russian says 'do something as a group' (всей семьёй, всем миром). «пребываете» is a bookish verb, 'abide, hang about'.

— Не всем, а так человек десять наших ходит туда, всегда, всякий день.  
"Not the whole class, but a dozen or so of our fellows go there, always, every single day."
> Approximation by inversion: «человек десять»: Reversing noun and numeral, «человек десять» (instead of «десять человек»), signals 'about ten, some ten'. «человек» is the special genitive-plural-equivalent count form used after numbers.
> «ходит» — habitual multidirectional motion: «ходит» (multidirectional «ходить») with «всегда, всякий день» ('always, every day') names a repeated round trip — the daily visits to Ilusha. The unidirectional «идёт» could not carry this habitual sense.

Это ничего.  
It's nothing.
> «Это ничего» — that's all right: A common idiom: «ничего» (literally 'nothing') used predicatively means 'it's all right, never mind, no matter'. Here Smurov shrugs off the size of the gathering: 'it's nothing, it's fine'.

— Удивляет меня во всем этом роль Алексея Карамазова: брата его завтра или послезавтра судят за такое преступление, а у него столько времени на сентиментальничанье с мальчиками!  
"What surprises me in all of this is the part Alexei Karamazov plays: his brother is to be tried tomorrow or the day after for such a crime, and yet he has so much time for getting sentimental with little boys!"
> Inverted subject for focus: The verb «удивляет» ('surprises') opens the sentence, the real subject «роль» ('the role') trailing after — an inversion that throws the weight onto what surprises Kolya. «меня» is the accusative experiencer of «удивлять».
> Impersonal 'they' + accusative: «судят» ('they are trying [him]') is a subjectless 3rd-plural — the generalised authorities — with the animate accusative «брата». Russian uses this agentless 'they' where English reaches for a passive ('he is being tried').
> «сентиментальничанье» — getting sentimental: A scornful verbal noun coined from «сентиментальничать» ('to behave sentimentally, gush'). The bulky -ничанье ending makes the word itself sound mocking — Kolya's contempt baked into the morphology.

— Совсем тут никакого нет сентиментальничанья.  
"There's no sentimentality about it at all."
> «нет» + genitive, with «никакого»: Negated existential «нет» demands the genitive «сентиментальничанья», and the negative adjective «никакого» ('no ... whatever') agrees with it — reinforced by «совсем» ('not at all'). A textbook genitive of negation under «нет».

Сам же вот идешь теперь с Илюшей мириться.  
Why, you're going to make peace with Ilusha yourself, right now.
> «сам же» — emphatic 'you yourself': «сам» ('[your]self') is sharpened by the insistent particle «же»: 'why, you yourself are going...'. The combination presses a contradiction back on Kolya — he condemns the others yet is doing the same.
> «мириться с» — reflexive 'make peace': «мириться» (reflexive -ся, imperfective of «помириться») means 'to reconcile, make peace' and governs «с» + instrumental for the other party. The -ся here is reciprocal-middle: making peace is mutual.

— Мириться?  
"Make peace?"

Смешное выражение.  
A ridiculous expression.
> Zero-copula nominative: A verbless present-tense judgement: 'a ridiculous expression'. With no copula in the present, both noun «выражение» and adjective «смешное» stay nominative — Kolya curtly dismissing Smurov's word «мириться».

Я, впрочем, никому не позволяю анализировать мои поступки.  
I allow no one, by the way, to analyze my actions.
> Negative concord with dative «никому»: «никому» (dative of «никто', 'to no one') co-occurs with «не позволяю» — the obligatory double negative. «позволять» takes a dative person plus an infinitive: 'I allow no one to analyse'.
> «поступок» — a deed, an act: «поступок» (plural «поступки») is a deliberate action seen as a moral deed, weightier than a mere «действие». Kolya's grand 'analyse my actions' fits his pose as a man of principle.

— А как Илюша будет тебе рад!  
"And how glad Ilusha will be to see you!"
> «рад» + dative: The short adjective «рад» ('glad') predicates a feeling and takes a dative for what one is glad of/about: «тебе рад» = 'glad of you, glad to see you'. The exclamatory «как» ('how') intensifies it.

Он и не воображает, что ты придешь.  
He doesn't even imagine you'll come.
> «что» + perfective future: «что» reports a plain fact-clause after «воображает» ('imagines'); inside it «придёшь» is the perfective future of «прийти» ('you will come'). Contrast «чтобы», which would force the irrealis past instead.

Почему, почему ты так долго не хотел идти? — воскликнул вдруг с жаром Смуров.  
Why, why did you hold out so long against coming?" Smurov suddenly cried out with feeling.
> Imperfective of refusal: «не хотел идти»: «не хотел идти» ('did not want to go') pairs the imperfective past «хотел» with the imperfective infinitive «идти», naming a sustained reluctance over time, underscored by «так долго» ('so long').
> «с жаром» — instrumental of manner: «с жаром» (literally 'with heat/ardour', instrumental after «с») is an adverbial of manner: 'with feeling, fervently'. Such «с + instrumental» manner phrases (с трудом, с улыбкой) are a staple of narrative description.

— Милый мальчик, это мое дело, а не твое.  
"My dear boy, that's my affair, not yours."
> Contrastive «а не»: «а не» pivots between the two possessives — 'my affair, and not yours'. The conjunction «а» here marks a clean contrast/correction, distinct from additive «и» or oppositional «но».

Я иду сам по себе, потому что такова моя воля, а вас всех притащил туда Алексей Карамазов, значит, разница.  
I'm going of my own accord, because such is my will, whereas all of you were dragged there by Alexei Karamazov — so there's a difference.
> «сам по себе» — of my own accord: The idiom «сам по себе» means 'by oneself, of one's own accord, independently'. Kolya insists his visit springs from his own will, not from following the crowd — a key point of his pride.
> «такова» — short form of «таков»: «такова» is the feminine short predicative form of «таков» ('such'), agreeing with «воля» ('will'): 'such is my will'. The solemn «такова + nominative» construction is rhetorically elevated, fitting Kolya's grandiloquence.
> Inversion: object before subject: «вас всех притащил ... Алексей Карамазов» fronts the object «вас всех» ('all of you') before the verb and subject — cases keep roles clear while the order spotlights who was dragged. «притащил» is a vivid perfective, 'lugged, hauled'.

И почем ты знаешь, я, может, вовсе не мириться иду?  
And how do you know — maybe I'm not going to make peace at all?
> «почём знаешь» — how do you know: «почём» (colloquial, lit. 'at what price') in «почём ты знаешь» idiomatically means 'how do you know, how can you tell'. It is a folksy, conversational variant of «откуда ты знаешь».
> «может» — dropped 'maybe': «может» here is short for «может быть» ('maybe, perhaps'), an inserted modal word. «вовсе не» ('not at all') emphatically negates «мириться», which is fronted before «иду» for contrastive focus.

Глупое выражение.  
A stupid expression.
> Adjective–noun agreement, zero copula: Like «Смешное выражение» earlier, a verbless nominative verdict: «глупое» agrees with neuter «выражение» in gender, number, and case. Kolya keeps batting away Smurov's vocabulary with curt one-line dismissals.

— Вовсе не Карамазов, совсем не он.  
"It wasn't Karamazov at all, not him in the least."
> Doubled emphatic negation: «вовсе не» and «совсем не» are two intensifiers of denial ('not at all, not in the least'), stacked for force. Each negates a nominative predicate noun/pronoun — Smurov flatly clearing Karamazov of responsibility.

Просто наши сами туда стали ходить, конечно сперва с Карамазовым.  
Our fellows simply began going there on their own — though with Karamazov at first, of course.
> «стали» + imperfective infinitive: «стали ходить» ('began to go') is the perfective «стать» ('to start') plus the imperfective infinitive «ходить» — the standard way to mark the onset of a habitual, repeated activity. «наши» ('our [fellows]') is a substantivised possessive.

И ничего такого не было, никаких глупостей.  
And there was nothing of that sort, no foolishness.
> Genitive of negation, doubled: Both negated existentials take the genitive: «ничего такого не было» ('there was nothing of the sort') and «никаких глупостей» (gen. pl. of «глупость»). The ни-words ride the single «не было», negative concord throughout.

Сначала один, потом другой.  
First one, then another.
> Verbless ellipsis: A clipped, copula-free fragment typical of excited spoken narration: «один… другой» («one… the other») stand bare in the nominative with the verb left to be supplied from context. The pairing «сначала… потом» («first… then») carries the whole temporal logic.

Отец был ужасно нам рад.  
The father was terribly glad of us.
> «рад» governs the dative: The short adjective «рад» («glad») takes the person one is glad of in the dative: «нам рад» = «glad of us». The dative here marks the object of feeling, not an indirect object.

Ты знаешь, он просто с ума сойдет, коль умрет Илюша.  
You know, he'll simply go out of his mind if Ilusha dies.
> Perfective future of a fixed idiom: «сойдёт» is the perfective («сойти») conjugated as a simple future: «he'll go [right out of] his mind». The set phrase «сойти с ума» (literally «come down off one's mind») uses the genitive «ума» after «с».
> «коль» — folksy conditional «if»: «коль» (a clipped, colloquial form of «коли») is an old conditional conjunction = «if/when». The perfective «умрёт» in the future sets up the hypothetical: «if Ilusha [should] die».

Он видит, что Илюша умрет.  
He can see that Ilusha is going to die.
> «что» reporting a fact: «видит, что…» («sees that…») uses the subordinator «что» to report a plain fact — contrast «чтобы», which would signal a willed or hypothetical outcome. Here «умрёт» (perfective future) lends the bleak certainty: not «may die» but «is going to die».

А нам-то как рад, что мы с Илюшей помирились.  
And how glad he is of us, that we made it up with Ilusha.
> Emphatic clitic «-то»: The hyphenated «-то» here is not the indefinite suffix but the topic-emphasizing clitic: «нам-то» foregrounds «us» — «and as for us, how glad he is». It marks a known referent the speaker wants to stress.
> «мы с Илюшей» — inclusive 'we with': «мы с Илюшей» literally «we with Ilusha» is the standard Russian way to say «Ilusha and I». The reflexive «-ся» verb «помириться» («to make up, be reconciled») is reciprocal: the two reconciled with each other.

Илюша о тебе спрашивал, ничего больше не прибавил.  
Ilusha asked about you, but added nothing more.
> «спрашивать о» + prepositional: «спрашивать о ком-то» («to ask about someone») governs the prepositional after «о»: «о тебе» = «about you». The imperfective «спрашивал» reads as a single completed act here in casual narration.
> Negative concord: «ничего… не прибавил» pairs the negative pronoun «ничего» (genitive of «ничто») with the obligatory «не» on the verb — Russian's double negation, where two negatives still make one negation: «added nothing».

Спросит и замолчит.  
He'll ask and then fall silent.
> Perfective future for habit: Two perfective futures, «спросит» and «замолчит», describe not one future event but a recurring pattern: «he'll ask and then fall silent [each time]». Russian regularly uses the perfective future this way for a typical, repeated sequence.

А отец с ума сойдет или повесится.  
And the father will go out of his mind or hang himself.
> Reflexive «-ся» as true reflexive: «повесится» (from «повеситься») turns «повесить» («to hang [something]») back on the subject: «hang himself». The «-ся» here is genuinely reflexive — the action falls on the doer.

Он ведь и прежде держал себя как помешанный.  
Even before this he carried himself like a man half-crazed.
> The appeal particle «ведь»: «ведь» invokes shared knowledge — «after all, you know» — softening the assertion into something the listener is invited to grant. Untranslatable by a single word, it is part of the texture of Dostoevsky's dialogue.
> «держать себя» + reflexive pronoun: «держать себя» («to carry/conduct oneself») uses the full reflexive pronoun «себя» as object — distinct from the bound clitic «-ся». «как помешанный» («like one deranged») compares with a past passive participle used adjectivally.

Знаешь, он благородный человек, и тогда вышла ошибка.  
You know, he's an honorable man, and what happened then was a mistake.
> Comment-final word order: «вышла ошибка» («a mistake came about») places the verb before its nominative subject «ошибка», which lands last as the new, stressed information. «выйти» here means «to turn out, result», an idiomatic intransitive use.
> «благородный» — noble/honorable: «благородный» means «of noble character, honorable» and also literally «of noble birth». In Kolya's mouth it carries the high moral charge the word still held in 19th-century usage.

Всё этот отцеубийца виноват, что избил его тогда.  
It's all the fault of that parricide, who beat him that time.
> «отцеубийца» — parricide: A compound of «отец» («father») + «убийца» («killer»): one who murders his father — a word that resonates through the whole novel. The reference is to the wrongly accused Dmitri Karamazov.
> «что» as causal relative: «виноват… что избил» uses «что» loosely to mean «in that / because he beat» — a colloquial relative-causal link tying the blame to the deed. «избил» is perfective: a thorough, completed beating.

— А все-таки Карамазов для меня загадка.  
"And all the same, Karamazov is a riddle to me."
> Zero-copula present: «Карамазов… загадка» («Karamazov [is] a riddle») has no verb 'to be' — the present-tense copula is simply absent in Russian, so the nominative subject and nominative predicate stand side by side. «для меня» = «for/to me».
> Contrastive «а» + «всё-таки»: Opening with «а» («and/but», the mild contrastive hinge) plus «всё-таки» («all the same, nevertheless») signals a shift of topic and a concession — Kolya turning the conversation back to Alyosha.

Я мог бы и давно с ним познакомиться, но я в иных случаях люблю быть гордым.  
I could have made his acquaintance long ago, but in certain cases I like to keep my pride.
> Conditional with «бы»: «мог бы» — past-tense «мог» plus the irrealis particle «бы» — builds the conditional: «I could have…». «бы» leans on «мог» as the first stressed word, the characteristic position of the mobile particle.
> Instrumental of the predicate: After «быть» the predicate adjective «гордый» takes the instrumental «гордым»: «to be proud». With the infinitive «быть», the instrumental complement is the norm, framing the state as one assumed or maintained.

Притом я составил о нем некоторое мнение, которое надо еще проверить и разъяснить.  
Besides, I have formed a certain opinion of him that still needs to be tested and clarified.
> Relative «который» in the accusative: «которое» agrees with neuter «мнение» in gender/number but takes its own case from its role in the clause — here the object of «проверить». The impersonal «надо» («one must») then governs the infinitives.
> «притом» — besides, moreover: A bookish connective meaning «besides, what's more», stitching Kolya's reasoning together. It marks the addition of a further, weightier consideration.

Коля важно примолк; Смуров тоже.  
Kolya fell importantly silent; Smurov did too.
> Manner adverb + perfective onset: «важно» («importantly, with self-importance») modifies «примолк» (perfective «примолкнуть», «to fall silent for a while»). The prefix «при-» gives a sense of momentary, slight silence — Kolya posing.

Смуров, разумеется, благоговел пред Колей Красоткиным и не смел и думать равняться с ним.  
Smurov, of course, stood in awe of Kolya Krassotkin and would not have dared so much as to think of putting himself on a level with him.
> «благоговеть пред» + instrumental: «благоговеть» («to stand in awe, revere») governs «пред» (a bookish variant of «перед») plus the instrumental «Колей». The verb belongs to an elevated register, faintly comic over a schoolboy's hero-worship.
> «и» as 'even' before the infinitive: «не смел и думать» = «would not even dare to think» — here «и» functions as an emphatic «even». A chain of infinitives («думать равняться») piles the deference up: not even daring to think of measuring himself against Kolya.

Теперь же был ужасно заинтересован, потому что Коля объяснил, что идет «сам по себе», и была тут, стало быть, непременно какая-то загадка в том, что Коля вдруг вздумал теперь и именно сегодня идти.  
Now, though, he was terribly intrigued, because Kolya had explained that he was going "of his own accord," so there had to be, of course, some riddle in why Kolya had suddenly taken it into his head to go now, and this very day.
> «сам по себе» — of one's own accord: The set phrase «сам по себе» (intensifier «сам» + «по» + reflexive «себе») means «on his own, of his own accord, by himself». «идёт» is the unidirectional motion verb «идти» — going, now, on a single trajectory.
> «стало быть» — fossilized 'therefore': A frozen parenthetical, «стало быть» («so, therefore, consequently»), literally «it has come to be» — an inferential connector flavoring the narration with conversational reasoning.
> «вздумать» + infinitive: «вздумать» («to take it into one's head [suddenly]») governs the infinitive «идти». The perfective stresses the abrupt impulse, reinforced by «вдруг» («suddenly») and the insistent «именно сегодня» («this very day»).

Они шли по базарной площади, на которой на этот раз стояло много приезжих возов и было много пригнанной птицы.  
They were walking across the market square, where this time there stood a great many carts that had come in from out of town, and a great deal of poultry brought to market.
> «на которой» — relative in the prepositional: «на которой» agrees with feminine «площади» but takes the prepositional after «на» (location): «on which there stood…». The quantifier «много» then forces the genitive plural «возов» and a neuter singular verb «стояло».
> «много» + genitive plural: Quantity words like «много» («many») govern the genitive plural: «много возов» («many carts»), «много птицы» (collective genitive singular). The verb stays impersonal-neuter («стояло», «было»).
> «воз» — cart/wagonload: A «воз» is a peasant's cart or its load, brought in from the surrounding villages. «приезжих» («having come [from elsewhere]») marks them as out-of-town carts gathered for the market.

Городские бабы торговали под своими навесами бубликами, нитками и проч.  
The townswomen were selling bread rings, thread, and the like under their awnings.
> «бабы» — peasant women: «баба» is a plain, earthy word for a peasant or common woman — neither polite nor abusive, just unliterary. «Городские бабы» are the town's market-women selling under their stalls.
> «бублик» — boiled bread ring: A «бублик» is a dense, ring-shaped roll, boiled then baked (like a bagel), a staple of the Russian market. It stands here in the instrumental «бубликами» after «торговать» («to trade in»).
> «торговать» + instrumental of goods: «торговать» («to trade, deal in») governs the instrumental for the goods sold: «бубликами, нитками» («in bread rings, thread»). «и проч.» abbreviates «и прочее» («and the like»).

Такие воскресные съезды, наивно называются у нас в городке ярмарками, и таких ярмарок бывает много в году.  
Such Sunday gatherings are naively called fairs in our little town, and there are many such fairs in the course of the year.
> Instrumental as naming complement: «называться» («to be called») takes the name in the instrumental: «называются ярмарками» («are called fairs»). The «-ся» here gives a passive/middle sense — they get called fairs by the townsfolk.
> Genitive with «много» and habitual «бывает»: «много» governs genitive plural «ярмарок», and «бывает» (iterative of «быть») states a recurring fact: «there happen to be many such fairs». The fronted «таких ярмарок» is the topic; «много» the comment.

Перезвон бежал в веселейшем настроении духа, уклоняясь беспрестанно направо и налево где-нибудь что-нибудь понюхать.  
Perezvon ran along in the merriest of spirits, forever veering off to the right and the left to sniff at something or other somewhere.
> Imperfective gerund «деепричастие»: «уклоняясь» («veering off») is an imperfective present gerund in «-ясь», naming an action simultaneous with the main verb «бежал»: the dog ran along, all the while veering aside. The gerund shares the subject (Perezvon) and is a hallmark of literary narration.
> Bookish superlative in «-ейш-»: «веселейшем» is the synthetic superlative of «весёлый» («merry»), formed with the suffix «-ейш-»: «in the merriest of moods». This one-word superlative belongs to elevated, literary style rather than ordinary speech.
> «Перезвон» — the dog's name: Kolya's dog is named «Перезвон» — «the pealing/chiming of bells». The grand, sonorous name (and the boy's training of the animal) is part of Kolya's self-dramatizing character.

Встречаясь с другими собачонками, с необыкновенною охотой с ними обнюхивался по всем собачьим правилам.  
Meeting other little dogs, he sniffed them over with extraordinary eagerness, by all the canine rules.
> Gerund opening the sentence: «Встречаясь» (imperfective gerund of «встречаться», «to meet [each other]») fronts the clause to set the attendant circumstance: «meeting other dogs…». Its «-ся» is reciprocal, and «с» governs the instrumental «собачонками».
> «собачонка» — expressive diminutive: From «собака» («dog») via the slightly dismissive-affectionate suffix «-онк-»: «little dogs, mutts». The suffix colors them as small and unremarkable, fond rather than scornful.
> «по» + dative of rule: «по» governs the dative «правилам»: «according to all the canine rules». «по» in this distributive/normative sense regularly takes the dative.

— Я люблю наблюдать реализм, Смуров, — заговорил вдруг Коля. — Заметил ты, как собаки встречаются и обнюхиваются?  
"I like to observe realism, Smurov," Kolya suddenly began. "Have you noticed how dogs meet and sniff one another over?"
> Inverted yes/no question: Fronting the verb before the pronoun — «Заметил ты…?» («Have you noticed…?») — is a slightly bookish, emphatic way to pose a yes/no question, in place of plain rising intonation on «Ты заметил?».
> Reciprocal «-ся»: «обнюхиваться» («to sniff one another all over») is a reciprocal «-ся» verb — the dogs do it to each other. The prefix «об-» adds the sense of sniffing thoroughly, all around.

Тут какой-то общий у них закон природы.  
There's some common law of nature among them here.
> «-то» indefinite vs «у них» possession: «какой-то» («some [unknown] sort of») uses the indefinite suffix «-то» for a specific-but-unidentified thing. «у них» («among/with them») is the «у» + genitive of possession, here «there is some law among them».

— Да, какой-то смешной.  
"Yes, some sort of funny one."
> Elliptical agreement: Smurov's reply «какой-то смешной» («some sort of funny [one]») drops the noun «закон» but keeps masculine agreement on the adjectives, which point back to it. «какой-то» again marks the vague, unspecified quality.

— То есть не смешной, это ты неправильно.  
"It isn't funny — there you're wrong."
> Clipped predicate ellipsis: «это ты неправильно» = «there you're [saying it] wrong» — a verbless rebuke with the verb («говоришь/сказал») understood. «То есть» («that is, I mean») opens the correction.

В природе ничего нет смешного, как бы там ни казалось человеку с его предрассудками.  
There is nothing funny in nature, however it may seem so to a man with his prejudices.
> Genitive of negation with «нет»: Negated existence with «нет» forces the genitive: «ничего… смешного» («nothing funny»). Both the negative pronoun «ничего» and its modifier «смешного» stand in the genitive, the obligatory case after «нет».
> Concessive «как ни» + «бы»: «как бы… ни казалось» («however it might seem») is the concessive construction with «ни» plus the irrealis «бы»: 'no matter how it may appear'. The «казаться» («to seem») takes the dative experiencer «человеку».

Если бы собаки могли рассуждать и критиковать, то наверно бы нашли столько же для себя смешного, если не гораздо больше, в социальных отношениях между собою людей, их повелителей, — если не гораздо больше; это я повторяю потому, что я твердо уверен, что глупостей у нас гораздо больше.  
If dogs could reason and criticize, they would surely find just as much to laugh at — if not a great deal more — in the social relations among men, their masters, if not a great deal more; this I repeat because I am firmly convinced that there is far more foolishness among us.
> Counterfactual conditional: The full irrealis frame: «если бы» + past «могли» in the protasis, «нашли бы» (past + «бы») in the apodosis — «if dogs could…, they would find…». Both halves use the past form with «бы», Russia's single way to mark the contrary-to-fact.
> Reflexive «себя» + partitive genitive: «нашли… для себя смешного» = «would find [much] for themselves that is funny»; «себя» refers back to the dogs (the clause's subject), and «смешного» is a partitive genitive after the quantity «столько же» («just as much»).
> Comparative + genitive of the compared mass: «больше глупостей» («more foolishness») pairs the comparative «больше» with the genitive plural «глупостей»; «гораздо» («far, much») intensifies it. «у нас» = «among us [humans]».

Это мысль Ракитина, мысль замечательная.  
That's a thought of Rakitin's, a remarkable thought.
> Genitive of possession: «мысль Ракитина» («Rakitin's thought») uses the bare genitive of the name to show possession. Russian needs no «of»: the genitive ending alone does the work.

Я социалист, Смуров.  
I am a socialist, Smurov.
> Zero-copula identification: «Я социалист» («I [am] a socialist») — present-tense identity needs no verb, and the predicate noun «социалист» stays in the nominative beside the subject «я».

— А что такое социалист? — спросил Смуров.  
"And what is a socialist?" asked Smurov.
> «что такое» — what is…?: «что такое X?» is the fixed frame for asking a definition: «what is a socialist?». «такое» (neuter «такой») reinforces «что» without adding lexical meaning.

— Это коли все равны, у всех одно общее имение, нет браков, а религия и все законы как кому угодно, ну и там всё остальное.  
"It's when everyone is equal, everyone holds property in common, there are no marriages, and religion and all the laws are as each one pleases — well, and all the rest of it."
> Colloquial «коли» = «when/if»: Kolya defines by «Это коли…» («it's when…»), using the folksy conditional-temporal «коли». «все равны» uses the short adjective «равны» («[are] equal») as predicate — the short form is the predicative one.
> Dative experiencer with «угодно»: «как кому угодно» («as it pleases anyone, as each one pleases») is an impersonal construction: «угодно» («pleasing») takes the dative «кому». No nominative subject — the person stands in the dative.
> «имение» — estate/property: «имение» means landed property or an estate; «одно общее имение» («one common estate/property») renders the socialist ideal of held-in-common ownership in the vocabulary of a landowning society.

Ты еще не дорос до этого, тебе рано.  
You haven't grown up to this yet; it's too soon for you.
> «дорасти до» + genitive: «дорасти до» («to grow up to, reach the level of») governs «до» + genitive «этого». The perfective «дорос» (past) negated says he hasn't yet reached it.
> Dative-subject impersonal: «тебе рано» («it's too early for you») has no nominative subject: the experiencer «тебе» stands in the dative and the predicate is the invariable «рано» («[too] early»). A core Russian impersonal pattern.

Холодно, однако.  
Cold, though.
> Impersonal «холодно» + «однако»: «Холодно» is an impersonal predicate of state — «[it's] cold» — with no subject at all. «однако» («however, though») trails as an afterthought adverb, a favorite hedge of Kolya's.

— Да. Двенадцать градусов.  
"Yes. Twelve degrees."

Давеча отец смотрел на термометре.  
Just now father looked at the thermometer.
> «давеча» — a while ago: «давеча» is a colloquial, now-archaic adverb for «a little while ago, just now / earlier today». It belongs to homely, everyday speech and dates the dialogue.
> Imperfective for a single past act: «смотрел» (imperfective past) reports Father's looking at the thermometer as a simple past event in casual narration. Here «на термометре» («at the thermometer») takes the prepositional of location.

— И заметил ты, Смуров, что в средние зимы, если градусов пятнадцать или даже восемнадцать, то кажется не так холодно, как например теперь, в начале зимы, когда вдруг нечаянно ударит мороз, как теперь, в двенадцать градусов, да еще когда снегу мало.  
"And have you noticed, Smurov, that in midwinter, if it's fifteen degrees or even eighteen, it doesn't seem as cold as, for instance, now, at the start of winter, when a frost suddenly strikes unexpectedly, as it has now, twelve degrees, and on top of that when there's little snow."
> Perfective future for the sudden event: «ударит мороз» («a frost strikes») uses the perfective future «ударит» of a sudden, momentary onset, reinforced by «вдруг» («suddenly») and «нечаянно» («unexpectedly»). The verb «ударить» («to strike») is vividly applied to the cold.
> Partitive genitive «снегу»: «снегу» is the old partitive genitive in «-у» (beside «снега»): «[there is] little snow». «мало» («little, few») governs the genitive, and «-у» is the period flavor surviving in a handful of mass nouns.
> Approximation by inversion: Putting the noun before the numeral — «градусов пятнадцать» instead of «пятнадцать градусов» — signals approximation: «around fifteen degrees». The genitive plural «градусов» is governed by the numeral.

Это значит, люди еще не привыкли.  
It means people aren't used to it yet.
> «это значит» + reflexive «привыкнуть»: «это значит» («that means») introduces the inference. «привыкли» (perfective «привыкнуть», «to grow accustomed») negated says people «aren't used to it yet»; «привыкнуть к» normally governs «к» + dative, here understood.

У людей всё привычка, во всем, даже в государственных и в политических отношениях.  
With people it's all habit, in everything, even in state and political relations.
> Zero-copula generalization: «У людей всё привычка» («with people it's all habit») has no verb; «у людей» (у + genitive) frames the possessor-domain, and «привычка» («habit») stands as the verbless predicate of «всё» («everything»).
> Adjective agreement in the prepositional: «в… отношениях» («in… relations») puts the plural noun and both adjectives in the prepositional after «в» (location/domain). «государственных… политических» agree fully with «отношениях» in case and number.

Привычка — главный двигатель.  
Habit is the chief driving force.
> Dash for the missing copula: «Привычка — главный двигатель» («Habit [is] the chief mover») — the dash stands in for the absent present-tense «to be», a common convention when both subject and predicate are nouns in the nominative.

Какой смешной, однако, мужик.  
What a funny peasant, though.
> Exclamatory «какой»: «Какой… мужик!» («What a… peasant!») uses «какой» exclamatively, agreeing with masculine «мужик». «смешной» («funny») and the interjected «однако» («though») frame the wry observation.

Коля указал на рослого мужика в тулупе, с добродушною физиономией, который у своего воза похлопывал от холода ладонями в рукавицах.  
Kolya pointed to a strapping peasant in a sheepskin coat, with a good-natured face, who was slapping his mittened hands together against the cold beside his cart.
> «указать на» + animate accusative: «указать на» («to point at») governs the accusative; with animate masculine «мужика», the accusative borrows the genitive ending («мужика», not «мужик»). The adjective «рослого» («strapping, tall») follows the animate accusative form.
> Relative «который» + iterative imperfective: «который… похлопывал» («who was slapping») opens a relative clause agreeing with «мужик» (masc. nom.). The imperfective «похлопывал», with its «-ыва-» suffix, conveys repeated, ongoing slapping against the cold.

Длинная русая борода его вся заиндевела от мороза.  
His long, light-brown beard was all rimed white with frost.
> «заиндеветь» — to be rimed with frost: «заиндевела» (perfective «заиндеветь», from «иней», hoarfrost) means «became covered in hoarfrost». The «за-» prefix marks the onset of the state — the beard whitened over with rime.
> «русый» — light/dusty brown: «русый» names the dull light-brown, dark-blond hair color so typical of the Russian peasant — there is no neat English equivalent. It modifies «борода» («beard») in feminine agreement.

— У мужика борода замерзла! — громко и задирчиво крикнул Коля, проходя мимо него.  
"The peasant's beard has frozen!" Kolya shouted loudly and provokingly as he passed by him.
> «у» + genitive for the possessor: «У мужика борода замерзла» = «the peasant's beard has frozen», literally «at the peasant the beard froze»: «у» + genitive «мужика» names the possessor, with «борода» as the nominative subject of «замёрзла».
> Gerund «проходя» + «мимо» + genitive: «проходя» (imperfective gerund of «проходить») = «as he passed», simultaneous with the shout. «мимо» («past, by») governs the genitive «него» (the «н-» prefixed pronoun after a preposition).

— У многих замерзла, — спокойно и сентенциозно промолвил в ответ мужик.  
"Plenty of folks' have frozen," the peasant retorted calmly and sententiously.
> Substantivized «многих» + ellipsis: «У многих замерзла» = «[the beards] of many have frozen»: «многих» (genitive of «многие», «many [people]») stands as a noun after «у», and the subject «борода» is left understood from the previous line. The peasant's laconic comeback.
> «сентенциозно» — sententiously: The narrator's «спокойно и сентенциозно» («calmly and sententiously») wryly dignifies the peasant's flat retort, as if Matvei were delivering a worldly maxim. «промолвил» («uttered») is itself a faintly literary verb of speech.

— Не задирай его, — заметил Смуров.  
"Don't bait him," Smurov observed.
> Negated imperfective imperative: «Не задирай» («Don't bait/provoke [him]») is the imperfective imperative — Russian uses the imperfective for prohibitions and general 'don't do this'. «задирать» is colloquial: «to needle, pick a fight with».

— Ничего, не осердится, он хороший.  
"It's all right, he won't take offense, he's a good fellow."
> Archaic «осердиться»: «осердится» (perfective future, «-ся») = «he won't take offense / get angry». «осердиться» is an older, folksy variant of «рассердиться», fitting the rustic exchange. The «-ся» here marks an inward change of state.

Прощай, Матвей.  
Farewell, Matvei.
> Imperative as leave-taking: «Прощай» is literally the imperative «forgive [me]» (from «прощать»), the standard Russian word for «farewell/goodbye» — the singular/familiar form, addressing the peasant with the intimate «ты».

— Прощай.  
"Farewell."

— А ты разве Матвей?  
"Are you really Matvei, then?"
> Particle «разве» of surprise: «разве» frames an incredulous question — «You're really Matvei?» / «Are you actually…?» — expressing mild astonishment that the random guess was right. The sentence is verbless (zero copula).

— Матвей. А ты не знал?  
"Matvei. And you didn't know?"
> Topic-shifting «а» + negated past: «А ты не знал?» («And you didn't know?») opens with the mild contrastive «а» turning the exchange back on Kolya. «знал» (imperfective past) negated states the simple fact of not knowing.

— Не знал; я наугад сказал.  
"I didn't know; I said it at random."
> «наугад» — at random: «наугад» is a fixed adverb «at random, by guesswork» (from «угадать», «to guess»). Kolya confesses he «said it at random» — the name was a lucky shot.

— Ишь ведь. В школьниках небось?  
"Fancy that. A schoolboy, I suppose?"
> «Ишь» — peasant interjection: «Ишь» is a colloquial exclamation of surprise or mild mockery — «look at that! / fancy that!» — strongly marking peasant speech. Coupled with «ведь», it gives Matvei's wondering, knowing tone.
> «в школьниках» + «небось»: «В школьниках?» («[You're] among the schoolboys?») uses «в» + prepositional plural to mean «in the class/category of»: a peasant idiom for 'you're a schoolboy'. «небось» («I suppose, I dare say») is a folksy hedging particle.

— В школьниках.  
"A schoolboy."
> Echo answer in the prepositional: Kolya answers by echoing the peasant's idiom «в школьниках» («[yes, I'm] among the schoolboys»), the prepositional plural marking membership in a group — the same '«в» + prepositional = belonging to a class' pattern.

— Что ж тебя, порют?  
"Well, do they flog you?"
> Impersonal «они»-passive «порют»: «порют» («they flog») is a 3rd-person-plural with no stated subject — the common Russian way to render an impersonal/passive 'are you flogged?'. «тебя» is the accusative object; «ж» (=«же») adds the insistent particle.

— Не то чтобы, а так.  
"Not exactly, but more or less."
> «не то чтобы… а так» — not exactly: A colloquial hedging frame: «не то чтобы» («not that, not exactly») followed by «а так» («but sort of, just so»). Kolya dodges a straight answer — «not really, but kind of».

— Больно?  
"Does it hurt?"

— Не без того!  
"Not without that!"
> «Не без того!» — well, yes: Literally «not without that!», an idiomatic understatement = «I'll say! / it does, a bit». The double negative wryly concedes the point — yes, it hurts.

— Эх, жисть! — вздохнул мужик от всего сердца.  
"Eh, what a life!" the peasant sighed from the very bottom of his heart.
> «жисть» — dialect for «жизнь»: «жисть» is the peasant-dialect pronunciation and spelling of «жизнь» («life») — Dostoevsky transcribes Matvei's accent. With the sighing interjection «Эх» it gives a whole worldview of weary resignation: «Eh, what a life!»
> «от» + genitive of source: «от всего сердца» («from the very bottom of [his] heart», lit. «from all [his] heart») uses «от» + genitive «всего сердца» to express the source of the feeling — a fixed expressive phrase.

— Прощай, Матвей.  
"Farewell, Matvei."
> Closing imperative — the frame: The repeated «Прощай, Матвей» (imperative «forgive», = «farewell») closes the exchange as it opened, bracketing the little scene. The familiar singular form keeps the warm, equal footing Kolya strikes with the peasant.

— Прощай. Парнишка ты милый, вот что.  
"Goodbye. You're a fine little fellow, that's what you are."
> «парнишка» — a friendly little fellow: «парнишка» is an affectionate diminutive of «парень» (lad, young fellow), formed with the expressive suffix -ишк-. Here it is warm rather than belittling — Kolya is fondly sizing up the boy.
> Topic-fronting and the tag «вот что»: The predicate «парнишка… милый» is pulled to the front and «ты» tucked inside, so the new, emphatic information lands first; «вот что» ("that's what") then caps the utterance as a colloquial verdict. This expressive, comment-first order is pure spoken Russian.

Мальчики пошли дальше.  
The boys walked on.
> Prefixed motion verb «пошли»: «пошли» is the perfective «пойти» (to set off, get going) — the prefix по- turns «идти» into a single completed start of movement. With «дальше» ("further on") it reads as the boys resuming and continuing their walk.

— Это хороший мужик, — заговорил Коля Смурову. — Я люблю поговорить с народом и всегда рад отдать ему справедливость.  
"That's a good peasant," Kolya began to Smurov. "I like talking with the common folk, and I'm always glad to do them justice."
> «мужик» — peasant man: «мужик» is the everyday word for a peasant or common working man, often with a touch of condescension when said by an educated speaker. Kolya's whole speech here turns on his self-conscious posture toward "the people."
> Dative of the person addressed: «Смурову» is dative — the one to whom Kolya "began speaking." The perfective «заговорил» (за- marking the onset of speech) captures the start of the conversation as a single event against the narrative flow.
> «отдать справедливость» — to do someone justice: A set idiom: «отдать справедливость» means "to give someone their due, acknowledge their merit." «народ» (here "the common folk") is the high-minded abstraction Kolya likes to flatter himself with.

— Зачем ты ему соврал, что у нас секут? — спросил Смуров.  
"Why did you lie to him that they flog us?" asked Smurov.
> «соврать» — to tell a lie: «соврал» is the perfective of «врать» (to lie, fib), more colloquial and pointed than «солгать». Smurov bluntly accuses Kolya of having fibbed to the peasant.
> Impersonal «секут» — they flog: «секут» is third-person plural with no stated subject — the indefinite-personal "they flog," i.e. one is flogged. «у нас» ("at our place," at school) sets the locale; «сечь» is to flog with a switch or birch.

— Надо же было его утешить?  
"I had to comfort him somehow, didn't I?"
> Impersonal «надо было» + the particle «же»: «надо было… утешить» is a subjectless necessity construction ("it was necessary to comfort him"); there is no nominative subject, only the bare predicate plus infinitive. The particle «же» adds insistent self-justification — "I simply had to, didn't I?"

— Чем это?  
"How do you mean?"
> Instrumental of means «чем»: «чем» is the instrumental of «что» — "by what means?", here "comfort him with what?". The verb is dropped and recovered from context, a terse colloquial reply.

— Видишь, Смуров, не люблю я, когда переспрашивают, если не понимают с первого слова.  
"You see, Smurov, I don't like having to repeat myself when people don't grasp a thing the first time around.
> Indefinite-personal «переспрашивают» and fronted «не люблю»: «переспрашивают» is again subjectless 3rd-plural — "when people ask again." The negated «не люблю я» is fronted for emphasis, putting Kolya's distaste first; «пере-» on the verb conveys re-asking, asking over.
> Conditional «если» clause with «не»: «если не понимают» is a real (non-hypothetical) conditional — present-tense, no «бы». «с первого слова» ("from the first word") is the idiom for grasping something at once.

Иного и растолковать нельзя.  
Some things simply can't be explained to certain people.
> Impersonal «нельзя» + genitive object «иного»: «нельзя… растолковать» is an impersonal impossibility construction with no subject. «иного» here is the substantivized "some [people / things]," and «и» is the emphatic particle "even" — "some things simply can't be explained at all."

По идее мужика, школьника порют и должны пороть: что, дескать, за школьник, если его не порют?  
In the peasant's mind, schoolboys are flogged and ought to be flogged: what sort of schoolboy is it, he reasons, if he isn't flogged?
> «по» + dative «по идее»: The preposition «по» governs the dative; «по идее мужика» means "according to the peasant's notion." «идея» here is closer to "way of thinking" than the philosophical "idea."
> Indefinite-personal «порют» and the aspect pair: «порют» ("they flog") is subjectless 3rd-plural; «пороть» is its imperfective infinitive after «должны» ("ought to flog"), naming the habitual practice rather than one event. The repetition drives home the peasant's fixed conviction.
> «дескать» — reported-speech marker: «дескать» is a colloquial particle flagging that the words are someone else's supposed reasoning — "as if to say, so he reckons." Kolya uses it to ventriloquize the peasant's logic mockingly.

И вдруг я скажу ему, что у нас не порют, ведь он этим огорчится.  
And if I were suddenly to tell him that we aren't flogged, why, it would only upset him.
> Perfective future «скажу» in a hypothetical: «скажу» is the perfective simple future of «сказать» — conjugated like a present but meaning a single completed "I will say." Coupled with «вдруг» ("suddenly") it frames a hypothetical: "and suppose I were suddenly to tell him."
> Particle «ведь» + instrumental cause «этим»: «ведь» appeals to shared understanding — "why, after all." «огорчится» is reflexive (-ся, "will become upset"), and «этим» is the instrumental of cause/means: he'd be upset *by this*.

А впрочем, ты этого не понимаешь.  
But there — you wouldn't understand that.
> Genitive of negation «этого»: Under negation the object «это» shifts to the genitive «этого» — a classic genitive of negation with an abstract object. «А впрочем» ("but then again") is a dismissive conversational pivot, very Kolya.

С народом надо умеючи говорить.  
One has to know how to talk with the common people."
> Impersonal «надо» + the archaic gerund «умеючи»: «надо… говорить» is again subjectless necessity ("one must talk"). «умеючи» is a folksy, archaic gerund of «уметь» (to know how) meaning "knowingly, with skill" — Kolya affects a peasant-flavored proverbial tone.
> «народ» — the (common) people: «народ» is the collective "the people, the folk," charged in 19th-century Russia with all the idealism of the educated classes' relation to the peasantry. Kolya parrots this fashionable populist piety.

— Только не задирай, пожалуйста, а то опять выйдет история, как тогда с этим гусем  
"Only please don't go provoking anyone, or there'll be another scene like that time with the goose."
> Negated imperfective imperative «не задирай»: A negative command takes the imperfective imperative: «не задирай» ("don't go provoking"), where the imperfective conveys a general prohibition against the activity. «задирать» is colloquial "to pick fights with, taunt."
> Instrumental after «с» «с гусем»: «с этим гусем» is «с» + instrumental ("with that goose"), recalling an earlier escapade. The construction «выйдет история» — "a scene will come of it" — uses the perfective future of «выйти».

— А ты боишься?  
"So you're afraid?"
> Reflexive-only verb «бояться»: «боишься» belongs to the class of verbs that exist only in the -ся form (бояться — to be afraid). The opening «А» is the contrastive conjunction that pivots the topic — "So you're afraid, are you?"

— Не смейся, Коля, ей-богу, боюсь.  
"Don't laugh, Kolya, by God, I am afraid.
> «ей-богу» — by God, honestly: «ей-богу» is a fixed oath, "by God, truly," with «ей» a worn-down old form of address to God. It marks Smurov's sincerity, contrasting the timid boy with the swaggering Kolya.
> Negated imperfective imperative «не смейся»: Again the negative command uses the imperfective imperative, here of the -ся verb «смеяться» (to laugh): «не смейся» — "don't (be) laughing." The -сь/-ся clitic stays attached to the command form.

Отец ужасно рассердится.  
Father will be dreadfully angry.
> Perfective future «рассердится»: «рассердится» is the perfective future of the -ся verb «рассердиться» (to get angry) — a single anticipated event, "Father will get furious." «ужасно» ("terribly") here is an intensifying adverb, not literal horror.

Мне строго запрещено ходить с тобой.  
I'm strictly forbidden to go about with you."
> Short passive participle «запрещено» + dative subject: «запрещено» is the short (predicative) form of the past passive participle «запрещённый» — "it is forbidden." The person affected stands in the dative «мне», a classic impersonal: "to me it is forbidden to go about."
> Multidirectional «ходить» for habitual going: «ходить» is the multidirectional motion verb, used for repeated or general going about — Smurov is forbidden *to keep company* with Kolya, not to make one trip. «с тобой» is «с» + instrumental.

— Не беспокойся, нынешний раз ничего не произойдет.  
"Don't fret, nothing will happen this time.
> Negated reflexive imperative «не беспокойся»: «не беспокойся» — "don't worry" — is the imperfective imperative of the -ся verb «беспокоиться». «нынешний раз» is an older, bookish-colloquial way of saying "this time" (cf. modern «на этот раз»).
> Negative concord «ничего… не»: «ничего… не произойдёт» pairs the ни-pronoun «ничего» with the verbal «не» — Russian's obligatory negative concord, "nothing will happen." «произойдёт» is perfective future.

Здравствуй, Наташа, — крикнул он одной из торговок под навесом.  
Hello there, Natasha," he called out to one of the market women under the awning.
> Dative addressee + partitive genitive «из торговок»: «одной из торговок» — "to one of the market women" — sets «одной» in the dative (the person shouted to) and «торговок» in the genitive plural after «из». «торговка» is a female market trader.

— Какая я тебе Наташа, я Марья, — крикливо ответила торговка, далеко еще не старая женщина.  
"What kind of Natasha am I to you — I'm Marya," the trader shot back shrilly, a woman still far from old.
> Ethical dative «тебе» of indignation: «тебе» here is an ethical dative — not "to you" literally but "what business is it that you call me…": "What kind of Natasha am I to you?" The retort bristles at being addressed by the wrong name.
> «крикливо» — shrilly: «крикливо» ("shrilly, raucously"), an adverb from «крикливый», colors Marya's reply — loud and bristling, the characteristic voice of the market-woman.
> Negation «не» softened by «далеко ещё»: «далеко ещё не старая» — "far from old yet" — uses «не» before the adjective with «далеко» intensifying the negation. The phrase is an appositive describing the trader, set off after her reply.

— Это хорошо, что Марья, прощай.  
"It's a good thing you're Marya, then. Goodbye."
> Subordinating «что» reporting a fact: «что Марья» is a «что»-clause stating a plain fact after «это хорошо» ("it's good that [you're] Marya"). The copula is zero in the present, so «Марья» stands bare in the nominative.

— Ах ты постреленок, от земли не видать, а туда же!  
"Why, you little scamp, no higher than a daisy and already at it!"
> «постреленок» — little rascal: «постреленок» (also «постреленок») is an affectionate-scolding word for a quick, mischievous child — "young scamp, imp." The diminutive -енок suffix (as in animal young) underlines his smallness and cheek.
> «от земли не видать, а туда же» — idiom of cheeky youth: A stock folk jibe: «от земли не видать» ("can't be seen above the ground," i.e. tiny) plus «а туда же» ("and yet right in there too") mocks a child who acts grown-up beyond his size — "knee-high and already at it."

— Некогда, некогда мне с тобой, в будущее воскресенье расскажешь, — замахал руками Коля, точно она к нему приставала, а не он к ней.  
"No time, no time for you, you can tell me next Sunday," Kolya waved her off with both hands, as though she were the one pestering him and not the other way round.
> Impersonal «некогда» + dative «мне»: «некогда мне» is an impersonal "there's no time for me," the experiencer in the dative «мне» and no nominative subject — a hallmark Russian construction. The verb is elided: "no time for me [to deal] with you."
> Inceptive «за-» + instrumental «руками»: «замахал» — the prefix за- marks the onset of an action, "started waving." «руками» is the instrumental of means: he waved *with his hands*, the body part as instrument.
> «точно» = as if; contrastive «а» with chiasmus: «точно» here means "as though." The clause balances «она к нему» against «он к ней» across the contrastive «а», a neat chiasmus: she pestering him versus he her. «приставать к» (+ dative) is "to pester, badger."

— А что мне тебе рассказывать в воскресенье?  
"And what have I got to tell you on Sunday?
> Stacked datives «мне… тебе» with infinitive: Two datives sit side by side: «мне» the (dismissive) experiencer-dative and «тебе» the recipient — "what have I to tell you?". «рассказывать» is imperfective, framing the telling as an open activity.

Сам привязался, а не я к тебе, озорник, — раскричалась Марья, — выпороть тебя, вот что, обидчик ты известный, вот что!  
You started it yourself, I didn't pester you, you rascal," Marya broke into a clamor. "You want a good thrashing, that's what — you're a known little troublemaker, that's what!"
> Intensifier «сам» + reflexive «привязался»: «сам» ("yourself") intensifies the accusation; «привязался» is the -ся verb «привязаться» ("to fasten oneself onto, latch onto someone"). The contrastive «а не я» throws the blame back: "*you* latched on, not I."
> «озорник» — mischief-maker: «озорник» is a rascal, prankster, troublemaker; «обидчик» ("offender, one who wrongs others") follows in the same vein. Both are scolding-affectionate market-woman vocabulary.
> Bare infinitive «выпороть» as a wish/threat: A subjectless infinitive «выпороть тебя» ("to give you a flogging") stands as an exclamatory threat — "you ought to be thrashed!" — capped by the colloquial tag «вот что». «выпороть» is the perfective "flog through, give a whipping."

Между другими торговками, торговавшими на своих лотках рядом с Марьей, раздался смех, как вдруг из-под аркады городских лавок выскочил ни с того ни с сего один раздраженный человек вроде купеческого приказчика и не наш торговец, а из приезжих, в длиннополом синем кафтане, в фуражке с козырьком, еще молодой, в темно-русых кудрях и с длинным, бледным, рябоватым лицом.  
Among the other market women trading at their stalls beside Marya a laugh broke out, when suddenly, out from under the arcade of the town shops, with no rhyme or reason, sprang an irritated man — something like a merchant's clerk, though no trader of ours but one of the visiting sort — in a long-skirted blue caftan and a peaked cap, still young, with dark-chestnut curls and a long, pale, pockmarked face.
> Past active participle «торговавшими»: «торговавшими» is the past active participle of «торговать» (to trade), in the instrumental plural to agree with «торговками» — "market women who were trading." It packs a whole relative clause into one declined word, the bookish hallmark of Dostoevsky's narration.
> «ни с того ни с сего» — out of the blue: A fixed idiom, "for no reason at all, out of nowhere." It is built on doubled «ни» + genitive of the demonstratives «тот/сей», and «сего» preserves the archaic «сей» ("this").
> Verb-first inversion for a sudden entrance: The verb «выскочил» ("sprang out," perfective, prefix вы- = outward) precedes its subject «человек», throwing the abrupt action first — the new, dramatic information. Russian's free word order lets the sentence stage the surprise.

Он был в каком-то глупом волнении и тотчас принялся грозить Коле кулаком.  
He was in some foolish state of agitation and at once began shaking his fist at Kolya.
> «приняться» + infinitive; dative «Коле», instrumental «кулаком»: «принялся… грозить» ("set to threatening") is an inceptive -ся construction taking an imperfective infinitive. «грозить» governs the dative of the person threatened («Коле») and the instrumental of the means («кулаком», with his fist).

— Я тебя знаю, — восклицал он раздраженно, — я тебя знаю!  
"I know you," he exclaimed in irritation, "I know you!"
> Accusative of the personal pronoun «тебя»: «тебя» is the accusative of «ты», the direct object of «знаю» — "I know you." The drumming repetition of this flat clause becomes the clerk's idiotic refrain.
> Imperfective «восклицал» for ongoing outcry: «восклицал» is imperfective past — the exclaiming is durative, repeated, in keeping with the man's mounting agitation, rather than one finished cry. «раздражённо» ("irritably") is the adverb of his state.

Коля пристально поглядел на него.  
Kolya looked at him intently.
> Perfective «поглядел» — a single glance: «поглядел» is perfective (по- here delimiting a brief, bounded act) — Kolya "took a look" at him, one completed glance. «пристально» ("intently, fixedly") sharpens it.

Он что-то не мог припомнить, когда он с этим человеком мог иметь какую-нибудь схватку.  
He couldn't quite recall ever having had a run-in with this man.
> Indefinite particle «-то» in «что-то»: Here «что-то» works adverbially — "somehow, for some reason" he couldn't recall. The clitic -то marks a vague, unspecified cause, softening the statement. «припомнить» is perfective "to call to mind."
> «-нибудь» for any scuffle at all: «какую-нибудь схватку» uses -нибудь for a non-specific "any sort of" clash — he couldn't recall having had *any* run-in with this man. «с этим человеком» is «с» + instrumental.

Но мало ли у него было схваток на улицах, всех и припомнить было нельзя.  
But then he'd had no end of scuffles in the streets — there was no remembering them all.
> Idiom «мало ли» with the particle «ли»: «мало ли» (literally "is it few?") is a fixed turn meaning "no end of, plenty" — the «ли» is the question-particle frozen into an idiom. «схваток» is genitive plural after «мало» (quantity).
> Impersonal «нельзя» + genitive «всех»: Another impersonal impossibility: «припомнить… было нельзя» — "there was no recalling them all." «всех» stands in the genitive/accusative-of-animacy as object, fronted for emphasis with the particle «и» ("even all of them").

— Знаешь? — иронически спросил он его.  
"You know me?" he asked him ironically.
> Perfective «спросил» — a single question: «спросил» is the perfective of «спрашивать», one completed question. The double object «он его» — nominative subject, accusative «его» ("asked him") — is normal; «иронически» colors Kolya's tone.

— Я тебя знаю! Я тебя знаю! — наладил как дурак мещанин.  
"I know you! I know you!" the townsman kept harping like an idiot.
> «наладить» — to keep harping (colloquial): «наладил» here is the colloquial "kept harping on the same thing, droned on repeating" — not the standard "to fix." «как дурак» ("like a fool") and «мещанин» (townsman of the petty-bourgeois estate) paint his dull persistence.

— Тебе же лучше. Ну, некогда мне, прощай!  
"All the better for you. Well, I've no time — goodbye!"
> Dative «тебе» + comparative «лучше» + particle «же»: An impersonal comparative: «тебе лучше» ("the better for you," dative experiencer), with «же» pressing the point home. «лучше» is the suppletive comparative of «хороший/хорошо».

— Чего озорничаешь? — закричал мещанин. — Ты опять озорничать?  
"What are you making mischief for?" cried the townsman. "Up to your tricks again?"
> Genitive-case «чего» for "why / what for": Colloquially «чего» (genitive of «что») stands in for "why, what for" — "what are you making mischief for?". «озорничаешь» is the present imperfective of «озорничать» (to act up, play pranks).
> Bare infinitive «озорничать» as an indignant question: The lone infinitive with no finite verb — "You [are going] to make mischief again?" — is an expressive colloquial pattern voicing outrage or threat. The infinitive leaves the modality (intend/dare) implied.

Я тебя знаю! Ты опять озорничать?  
I know you! Up to your tricks again?"
> Repetition for harangue: The clerk recycles his own infinitive-question «Ты опять озорничать?» word for word, the repetition mimicking his stuck, witless agitation. Spoken Russian readily drops the modal verb, leaving the bare infinitive to carry the threat.

— Это, брат, не твое теперь дело, что я озорничаю, — произнес Коля, остановясь и продолжая его разглядывать.  
"My friend, whether or not I'm making mischief is no business of yours now," said Kolya, stopping short and continuing to size him up.
> «что»-clause as the real subject: «что я озорничаю» ("that I'm making mischief") is a subordinate clause functioning as subject of «не твоё дело» — "that I act up is no business of yours." The negated predicate «не твоё дело» needs no copula in the present.
> Two gerunds: «остановясь» and «продолжая»: «остановясь» is a perfective past gerund (-ся verb «остановиться») — "having stopped" — and «продолжая» an imperfective present gerund — "continuing to." Both hang off Kolya as subject, a tidy chain of attendant action typical of literary narration.
> «брат» as a familiar address: «брат» ("brother") is used here not literally but as a condescending-familiar form of address — "my friend, old man" — Kolya talking down to the clerk. Russian freely deploys kinship terms as social address.

— Как не мое?  
"How is it no business of mine?"
> Elliptical retort with «не мое»: A clipped echo-question: «Как не моё?» — "How [is it] not mine?" The copula and noun «дело» are dropped, recovered from the prior line; «моё» is the neuter possessive agreeing with the unspoken «дело».

— Так, не твое.  
"Just so — it's none of yours."
> «так» as a flat dismissive "just so": «Так» here is a curt "just so, that's how it is" — Kolya stonewalling. Russian «так» ranges from "thus" to this conversational shrug; the bare «не твоё» again drops «дело».

— А чье же? Чье же? Ну, чье же?  
"Then whose is it? Whose? Well, whose?"
> Interrogative «чьё» + insistent «же»: «чьё» is the neuter of the interrogative possessive «чей» ("whose"), agreeing with the dropped «дело». The repeated «же» («чьё же?») presses the demand — "whose then? whose, then?" — the particle of insistent questioning.

— Это, брат, теперь Трифона Никитича дело, а не твое.  
"It's Trifon Nikitich's business now, my friend, not yours."
> Genitive of possession «Трифона Никитича»: «Трифона Никитича дело» places the name in the genitive of possession before the noun — "Trifon Nikitich's business." Putting the possessor genitive *before* «дело» is a folksy-emphatic order.

— Какого такого Трифона Никитича? — с дурацким удивлением, хотя всё так же горячась, уставился на Колю парень.  
"What sort of Trifon Nikitich is that?" the fellow stared at Kolya in stupid bewilderment, though still as hot as ever.
> «какой такой» + animate accusative/genitive: «какого такого» is an indignant colloquial doubling — "what sort of [this] Trifon Nikitich?". The animate masculine name takes the genitive-shaped accusative «Трифона Никитича», so subject and object stay distinct.
> Imperfective gerund «горячась»: «горячась» is the present gerund of the -ся verb «горячиться» (to grow heated, worked up) — "[while] still flaring up." «всё так же» ("still just as") marks the unbroken agitation accompanying his stare.

Коля важно обмерил его взглядом.  
Kolya gravely looked him up and down.
> «обмерить взглядом» — to look up and down: «обмерить взглядом» literally "to measure with a glance" — the idiom for sizing someone up head to toe. «важно» ("with grave self-importance") catches Kolya's pompous performance; «взглядом» is the instrumental of means.

— К Вознесенью ходил? — строго и настойчиво вдруг спросил он его.  
"Have you been to the Ascension?" he suddenly demanded of him, stern and insistent.
> «к» + dative; multidirectional «ходил»: «к Вознесенью» is «к» + dative (motion toward), and «ходил» the multidirectional past — "have you been (there and back) to the Ascension?", a completed round trip rather than a one-way going. Subject «ты» is dropped, recoverable from the ending.

— К какому Вознесенью? Зачем? Нет, не ходил, — опешил немного парень.  
"To what Ascension? What for? No, I haven't," the fellow faltered a little.
> Interrogative «какой» agreeing in the dative: «к какому Вознесенью» — «какому» ("which / what") is the dative neuter of «какой», agreeing with «Вознесенью» after «к». The bewildered echo throws Kolya's own preposition and case back at him.
> «опешить» — to be taken aback: «опешил» (perfective «опешить») means to be suddenly nonplussed, stopped in one's tracks — the clerk's bluster falters. It is a vivid, slightly colloquial verb with no plain English equivalent.

— Сабанеева знаешь? — еще настойчивее и еще строже продолжал Коля.  
"Do you know Sabaneyev?" Kolya pressed on, more insistent and sterner still.
> Animate accusative «Сабанеева» fronted: The animate surname takes the genitive-shaped accusative «Сабанеева» ("do you know Sabaneyev?"), and it is fronted before the verb for focus — the name is the point of the question.
> Comparatives «настойчивее», «строже»: Two predicative comparatives intensified by «ещё» ("still more"): «настойчивее» (more insistently) and «строже» (more sternly, with the к→ж consonant shift). They escalate Kolya's mock-interrogation.

— Какого те Сабанеева? Нет, не знаю.  
"What Sabaneyev of yours is that? No, I don't know him."
> Colloquial «те» for «тебе»: «Какого те Сабанеева?» uses «те», a clipped colloquial form of «тебе» ("to you"), here an ethical dative meaning roughly "what Sabaneyev is this to you?" Dostoevsky writes the market crowd and the clerk in this clipped peasant register («те» for «тебе», «твово» for «твоего», «надоть» for «надо») to mark their uneducated speech.

— Ну и черт с тобой после этого! — отрезал вдруг Коля и, круто повернув направо, быстро зашагал своею дорогой, как будто и говорить презирая с таким олухом, который Сабанеева даже не знает.  
"Well, the devil take you then!" Kolya snapped abruptly, and turning sharply to the right, he strode off on his way at a brisk pace, as if scorning even to speak with such a blockhead as didn't so much as know Sabaneyev.
> «чёрт с тобой» — the devil take you: «чёрт с тобой» (literally "the devil [be] with you") is a stock dismissive curse, "to hell with you, have it your way." «отрезал» ("cut off," perfective) marks the curt finality of the retort.
> Perfective gerund «повернув»: «повернув» is a perfective past gerund — "having turned sharply right" — a completed action preceding the main «зашагал». «за-» on «зашагал» again marks the inception of striding off.
> Gerund «презирая» + instrumental «олухом»: «презирая» is a present gerund ("scorning"), governing the infinitive «говорить»; «с таким олухом» is «с» + instrumental. «который Сабанеева даже не знает» is a «который»-clause with genitive-of-negation object («Сабанеева»). «олух» is a coarse "blockhead, dolt."

— Стой ты, эй! Какого те Сабанеева? — опомнился парень, весь опять заволновавшись. — Это он чего такого говорил? — повернулся он вдруг к торговкам, глупо смотря на них.  
"Hold on, you, hey! What Sabaneyev of yours is it?" the fellow recovered himself, working himself up all over again. "What was he going on about there?" he turned suddenly to the market women, staring at them stupidly.
> Reflexive «опомнился» + perfective gerund «заволновавшись»: «опомнился» (-ся, "came to his senses") and «заволновавшись» (perfective gerund of «заволноваться», "having gotten worked up") both take -ся; «весь опять» ("all over again") heightens the renewed agitation. The «за-» marks the fresh onset of his fluster.
> Colloquial «чего такого» as object: «чего такого» is the genitive-form object "what (sort of thing)" in a rough colloquial register — "what was he going on about?". Fronting «это он» and the loose word order mimic flustered speech.
> Present gerund «смотря»: «смотря» is the imperfective present gerund of «смотреть» ("looking"), describing his manner as he turns — "staring stupidly at them." It shares the subject of «повернулся».

Бабы рассмеялись.  
The women laughed.
> «бабы» — the (peasant) women: «бабы» is the plain, earthy plural for peasant or common women — neither rude nor polite, simply of the people. Dostoevsky shifts between «торговки» (traders) and «бабы» (folk-women) for the same market crowd.

— Мудреный мальчишка, — проговорила одна.  
"A crafty little lad," said one.
> «мудрёный» — crafty, hard to figure out: «мудрёный» means "tricky, intricate, hard to make out" — here "a sharp, knowing little lad." «мальчишка» is the slightly rough diminutive of «мальчик» (-ишк-), affectionate-disparaging.

— Какого, какого это он Сабанеева? — всё неистово повторял парень, махая правою рукой.  
"What Sabaneyev, what Sabaneyev does he mean?" the fellow kept repeating frantically, flapping his right arm.
> Reduplicated «какого» + animate object: The doubled «какого, какого» conveys frantic repetition; «Сабанеева» is again the animate accusative (genitive-shaped). «неистово» ("frantically, wildly") and «махая правою рукой» (gerund + instrumental «рукой») paint his arm-flapping panic.
> Archaic instrumental ending «-ою»: «правою рукой» shows the older, bookish instrumental feminine ending «-ою» (modern «-ой»: «правой»), common in 19th-century prose for rhythm and elevation. It is the instrumental of means — flapping *with* his right hand.

— А это, надоть быть, Сабанеева, который у Кузьмичевых служил, вот как, надоть быть, — догадалась вдруг одна баба.  
"That'll be the Sabaneyev who worked for the Kuzmichevs, that's it, sure to be," one woman guessed all at once.
> Dialect «надоть» for «надо»: «надоть» is a peasant-dialect variant of «надо» ("must, ought"); «надоть быть» means "it must be, that'll be the one." Dostoevsky writes the market women in this folk register to give their gossip its voice.
> Relative «который» + «служить» idiom: «который… служил» is a «который»-clause modifying «Сабанеева» (the relative takes nominative as subject of its own clause). «у Кузьмичевых служил» — "served (worked) for the Kuzmichevs"; «служить» + «у» + genitive is the period idiom for being in someone's employ.

Парень дико на нее уставился.  
The fellow stared at her wildly.
> Perfective «уставился» — fixed a wild stare: «уставился» (perfective -ся, «уставиться» — to fasten one's eyes on) is a single completed act, "fixed a stare at her." «дико» ("wildly") catches his unhinged bewilderment.

— Кузь-ми-чева? — переговорила другая баба, — да какой он Трифон?  
"The Kuz-mi-chevs?" another woman objected. "But how is he Trifon?
> Interrogative «какой» as predicate: «какой он Трифон?» — "how is he a Trifon?", i.e. "in what way is he Trifon at all?" — uses «какой» predicatively with zero copula. The opening «да» is a folksy objecting particle, "but, why."

Тот Кузьма, а не Трифон, а парнишка Трифоном Никитычем называл, стало, не он.  
That one's Kuzma, not Trifon, but the lad called him Trifon Nikitich, so it can't be him."
> Instrumental of the predicate after «называть»: «называл… Трифоном Никитычем» puts the name in the instrumental — «называть кого-то кем-то» ("to call someone something") governs the instrumental for what one is called. «Никитычем» is the colloquially contracted patronymic «Никитич».
> «стало» — colloquial "so, therefore": «стало» (short for «стало быть») is a folk discourse marker meaning "so then, therefore, it follows." It threads the women's homespun deduction: "so it can't be him."

— Это, вишь, не Трифон и не Сабанеев, это Чижов, — подхватила вдруг третья баба, доселе молчавшая и серьезно слушавшая, — Алексей Иванычем звать его.  
"Look here, it's neither Trifon nor Sabaneyev, it's Chizhov," a third woman put in suddenly, one who had been silent until then and listening seriously. "Alexey Ivanych is his name.
> «вишь» — "look, you see": «вишь» is a colloquial particle worn down from «видишь» ("you see"), drawing attention — "look here, mark you." It belongs squarely to the folk speech of the market women.
> Paired past active participles «молчавшая… слушавшая»: Two past active participles in -вш-, feminine to agree with «баба»: «молчавшая» (who had been silent) and «слушавшая» (who had been listening). «доселе» is the archaic-bookish "hitherto, until now," a literary touch in the narration.
> Instrumental «Алексей Иванычем» + impersonal «звать»: «звать его Алексей Иванычем» — the impersonal «звать» ("to call, name") takes the named person in the accusative «его» and the name in the instrumental of the predicate. «Иванычем» is the contracted patronymic «Иванович».

Чижов, Алексей Иванович.  
Chizhov, Alexey Ivanovich."

— Это так и есть, что Чижов, — настойчиво подтвердила четвертая баба.  
"That's right, it's Chizhov," a fourth woman confirmed emphatically.
> Emphatic «так и есть» + «что»-clause: «так и есть» ("that's just how it is, exactly right") is an affirming idiom where «и» reinforces «так»; the «что Чижов» clause supplies what is so. «настойчиво подтвердила» marks the fourth woman's emphatic confirmation.

Ошеломленный парень глядел то на ту, то на другую.  
The dumbfounded fellow looked from one to the other.
> «ошеломлённый» — dumbfounded: «ошеломлённый» (past passive participle of «ошеломить», to stun, dumbfound) is the perfect close to the comic scene — the clerk stunned senseless. Its root «шелом» (helmet) literally suggests a blow to the head.
> Correlative «то… то» with demonstrative «ту»: «то на ту, то на другую» is the correlative "now at this one, now at that one," alternating actions, with «ту» the accusative of the demonstrative «та». It captures his head swiveling helplessly from woman to woman.

— Да зачем он спрашивал, спрашивал-то он зачем, люди добрые? — восклицал он уже почти в отчаянии, — «Сабанеева знаешь?» А черт его знает, какой он есть таков Сабанеев!  
"But what did he ask for, what did he go and ask for, good people?" he exclaimed, by now almost in despair. "'Do you know Sabaneyev?' The devil only knows what sort of fellow this Sabaneyev is!"
> Imperfective repetition and the emphatic «-то»: The imperfective past «спрашивал» (kept asking) is hammered out twice (спрашивал… спрашивал-то) to convey baffled exasperation, not a single completed query. The clitic «-то» pins «спрашивал» as the known topic — 'this asking of his, what was it for?' — a flavour English can only get with stress.
> «люди добрые» — 'good people': A folksy vocative-style appeal to bystanders, with the adjective trailing after its noun in the old set-phrase order. It is the cry of someone seeking witnesses to his grievance, a marketplace gesture.
> «черт его знает» and the redundant «есть таков»: «Чёрт его знает» — 'the devil knows', i.e. 'I've no idea'. The peasant's «какой он есть таков» piles up «есть» (an archaic, normally-omitted present of 'to be') with «таков» ('such') for an overloaded, uneducated 'what sort of fellow he even is'.

— Бестолковый ты человек, говорят те — не Сабанеев, а Чижов, Алексей Иванович Чижов, вот кто! — внушительно крикнула ему одна торговка.  
"You're a thick-headed man, you're told it's not Sabaneyev but Chizhov, Alexey Ivanovich Chizhov, that's who!" one of the traders called out to him impressively.
> Pronoun wedged inside the noun phrase: Colloquial Russian splits «ты» into the middle of «бестолковый… человек» ('you muddle-headed man'), a vocative-like insult frame. The displaced pronoun signals spoken, emotive word order rather than the neutral «ты бестолковый человек».
> Dialectal «те» for «тебе»: «те» is a reduced colloquial/dialectal form of the dative «тебе» ('to you'): 'you're being told'. The impersonal 3rd-plural «говорят» ('they say / one tells you') has no named subject — a common Russian way to report common talk.
> Corrective «а» after a negation: The pattern «не X, а Y» ('not X, but rather Y') uses the contrastive conjunction «а» to substitute the right name for the wrong one. This «а» marks replacement, distinct from oppositional «но».

— Какой Чижов? Ну, какой? Говори, коли знаешь.  
"What Chizhov? Well, which one? Out with it, if you know."
> «коли» — folk 'if': «коли» is a colloquial, archaic-flavoured equivalent of «если» ('if'), pervasive in peasant speech throughout this scene. It opens a real (not hypothetical) conditional clause: 'if you do know'.
> Imperfective imperative «Говори»: The imperfective imperative «говори» ('out with it, speak') is built from the present stem with stressed «-и». Choosing the imperfective over perfective «скажи» urges the act itself — get talking — rather than a single finished utterance.

— А длинный, возгривый, летось на базаре сидел.  
"The tall, snotty one who sat in the marketplace last summer."
> «возгривый» — snot-nosed: A coarse, regional adjective meaning 'snotty, with a running nose' (from «возгря», snot). It is exactly the kind of earthy, dialectal lexis Dostoevsky uses to render the marketplace women's voices vividly.
> «летось» — last summer: A folk adverb meaning 'last summer / last year', built on «лето» (summer). It is dialectal and old-fashioned, untranslatable into one neat English word, and again colours the speaker as a common townswoman.

— А на кой ляд мне твово Чижова, люди добрые, а?  
"And what the deuce do I want with this Chizhov of yours, good people, eh?"
> «на кой ляд» — 'what the deuce for': A vulgar, expressive idiom: 'what the devil for / what on earth do I want with'. «Ляд» is a euphemistic folk word for the devil, so the phrase is a milder dodge around outright cursing — the register of an irritated peasant.
> Dialectal genitive «твово»: «твово» is a colloquial/dialectal spelling of «твоего», the genitive of «твой» ('your'). The animate accusative «Чижова» takes the genitive form, and the whole phrase is a dismissive 'this Chizhov of yours'.

— А я почем знаю, на кой те ляд Чижова.  
"How should I know what the deuce you want with Chizhov."
> «почём знаю» — how should I know: «Почём я знаю» literally 'for how much do I know', an idiom meaning 'how should I know, it's not for me to say'. «Почём» (lit. 'at what price') has frozen into a colloquial 'how'.
> Verbless idiom with genitive object: The sentence has no verb at all — «на кой те ляд Чижова» ('what the deuce you want with Chizhov') — with «те» the reduced dative «тебе» and the animate genitive/accusative «Чижова». Russian readily drops a predictable verb in such heated exchanges.

— А кто тебя знает, на что он тебе, — подхватила другая, — сам должен знать, на что его тебе надо, коли галдишь.  
"Who knows what you want him for," another woman put in. "You ought to know yourself what you need him for, if you're making such a racket.
> Dative «тебе» of need — 'what for': «На что он тебе» ('what do you want him for') uses the dative «тебе» to mark the person to whom something is of use. This experiencer-dative, verbless construction is the everyday Russian way to ask purpose without 'want' or 'need'.
> «галдеть» — to make a din: «галдишь» (you're bawling, raising a clamour), from «галдеть» — to talk loudly and confusedly, to make a racket. An expressive, colloquial verb that paints him as making noise to no purpose.
> «подхватить» — to chime in: Here «подхватила» means another woman 'caught up' the thread and joined in, picking up the exchange. The prefix «под-» plus «хватить» gives the sense of seizing a remark in mid-air to add one's own.

Ведь он тебе говорил, а не нам, глупый ты человек.  
After all, he was talking to you, not to us, you foolish man.
> The particle «ведь» — 'after all': «Ведь» appeals to shared, obvious knowledge: 'he was talking to you, after all, not to us — you know that'. It carries the woman's exasperated reasonableness, a texture English supplies only through tone.
> Contrasting datives «тебе» / «нам»: The indirect objects of «говорил» stand in the dative: «тебе» (to you) set against «нам» (to us), the contrast sharpened by «а не» ('and not'). The dative marks the addressee of speech.

Аль правду не знаешь?  
Or don't you know the truth of it?"
> «аль» — folk 'or / or is it that': «Аль» is a colloquial, dialectal contraction of «али / или» ('or'), opening a rhetorical question: 'or don't you even know?'. It is a distinctly peasant, old-fashioned particle, rare in educated speech.
> Negated object — accusative held, not genitive: Under negation a direct object often slips to the genitive, but here the concrete, definite «правду» (the truth, accusative) is retained — Russian keeps the accusative when the object is specific. A small but real choice the reader can feel.

— Кого?  
"Know what?"
> Genitive/accusative «кого?» — 'know whom?': The bare one-word retort «Кого?» is the animate accusative (= genitive) of «кто», governed by the dropped verb «знаешь»: 'know whom?'. Russian answers an elided question by simply supplying the case the verb would demand.

— Чижова.  
"Chizhov."

— А черт его дери, Чижова, с тобой вместе! Отколочу его, вот что! Смеялся он надо мной!  
"The devil flay him, this Chizhov, and you along with him! I'll give him a drubbing, that's what! He was laughing at me!"
> «чёрт его дери» — 'devil take/flay him': An imprecation: «дери» is the imperative of «драть» (to tear, flog), so literally 'let the devil flay him'. A stock curse of frustration, here flung at Chizhov 'and you along with him'.
> «отколотить» — to give a thrashing: «Отколочу» (I'll thrash him), perfective of «колотить» (to beat). The «от-» prefix gives the sense of a thorough, finished drubbing — he pictures the whole beating done.
> Imperfective «смеялся» — 'was laughing at me': «Смеялся… надо мной» (he was laughing at me) is imperfective past of the reflexive «смеяться» (a verb that exists only in «-ся» form), governing «над» + instrumental «мной». The imperfective frames the mockery as an ongoing offence still rankling.

— Чижова-то отколотишь? Либо он тебя! Дурак ты, вот что!  
"You'd give Chizhov a drubbing? More like he'd give you one! You're a fool, that's what!"
> Topic-marking «-то» plus perfective future: «-то» tags «Чижова» as the topic in mocking disbelief — 'Chizhov, you'll thrash?'. «Отколотишь» is the perfective present form used with future meaning ('will you give a drubbing'), since perfectives have no present.
> «либо» with an elided verb: «Либо» ('or else') sets up the gleeful counter: «Либо он тебя!» — 'or more likely he'll thrash you!', the verb «отколотит» left unspoken but supplied by «тебя» (accusative you).

— Не Чижова, не Чижова, баба ты злая, вредная, мальчишку отколочу, вот что! Давайте его, давайте его сюда, смеялся он надо мной!  
"Not Chizhov, not Chizhov, you spiteful, nasty woman, I'll thrash the boy, that's what! Hand him over, hand him over here, he was laughing at me!"
> Long-form adjectives as an insult-vocative: Two attributive long-form adjectives «злая, вредная» (spiteful, harmful) agree with feminine «баба» in gender, number, and case, the pronoun «ты» wedged in for vocative bite: 'you spiteful, nasty woman'.
> Pejorative diminutive «мальчишка»: «Мальчишка» is «мальчик» (boy) plus the belittling «-ишк-» suffix: a contemptuous 'brat, urchin'. The man uses it scornfully of the boy who mocked him — the suffix carries the disdain, not mere smallness.
> «давайте» imperative — 'hand him over': The repeated «давайте» is the polite/plural imperative of «давать» ('give / hand over'), with «его» (him) as object: 'give him here'. The doubling conveys his agitated, jabbing insistence.

Бабы хохотали.  
The women roared with laughter.
> «бабы» and «хохотать»: «Бабы» is the plain, slightly coarse word for peasant/common women (singular «баба»), and «хохотали» (imperfective) is 'roared / guffawed', far heartier than «смеялись» (laughed). Together they paint a raucous marketplace burst of laughter.

А Коля шагал уже далеко с победоносным выражением в лице.  
And Kolya was already striding along far off, a triumphant expression on his face.
> Imperfective «шагал» — striding along: «Шагал» (was striding), imperfective past of «шагать», sets a continuous background image of Kolya already well off down the road as the women laughed behind him. Imperfective is the natural choice for such standing scene-painting.
> «победоносный» — triumphant, bookish: «Победоносный» (victorious, triumphant) is an elevated, literary adjective — almost martial — gently ironic over a thirteen-year-old's marketplace prank. The instrumental phrase «с… выражением» describes his manner.

Смуров шел подле, оглядываясь на кричащую вдали группу.  
Smurov walked at his side, glancing back at the shouting cluster in the distance.
> Gerund «оглядываясь» plus participle «кричащую»: Two literary non-finite forms stack here: the imperfective gerund «оглядываясь» (glancing back, simultaneous with «шёл») and the present active participle «кричащую» (shouting), which agrees as an adjective with «группу». They compress two clauses into one fluid image.
> «подле» — bookish 'beside': «Подле» ('beside, alongside', governing the genitive) is a slightly archaic, literary preposition where modern speech would say «рядом с». It lends the narration a measured, period tone.

Ему тоже было очень весело, хотя он всё еще опасался, как бы не попасть с Колей в историю.  
He too was having a merry time of it, though he still dreaded getting drawn into some scrape together with Kolya.
> Dative-subject construction «ему… весело»: There is no nominative subject: the experiencer «ему» (to him, dative) plus the neuter predicative «весело» (merry) plus past «было» yields 'he too was having a merry time'. This dative-of-feeling is the standard Russian frame for inner states.
> Apprehensive «как бы не» with «бы»: «Как бы не попасть» expresses fear that something might happen — 'lest he get drawn in'. The irrealis particle «бы» with negation and an infinitive builds this anxious 'in case…' clause after «опасался» (he dreaded).
> «попасть в историю» — to land in a scrape: Idiomatic: «история» here is not 'history' but 'a (nasty) affair, an incident', and «попасть в историю» means 'to get mixed up in trouble'. A classic false-friend trap for the learner.

— Про какого ты его спросил Сабанеева? — спросил он Колю, предчувствуя ответ.  
"What Sabaneyev was it you asked him about?" Smurov asked Kolya, anticipating the answer.
> Discontinuous «какого… Сабанеева» and «про»: The interrogative «какого» (which) is split far from its noun «Сабанеева» (animate accusative) for emphasis. «Про» + accusative means 'about, concerning' — a more colloquial alternative to «о» + prepositional.
> Gerund «предчувствуя» — anticipating: «Предчувствуя» (sensing in advance, foreseeing), an imperfective present gerund from «предчувствовать», marks Smurov's attendant state as he asks — he already half-knows the answer. The gerund shares the subject of «спросил».

— А почем я знаю, про какого? Теперь у них до вечера крику будет.  
"How should I know which one? Now they'll be at it, bawling away till evening.
> Partitive genitive «крику» with «будет»: «Крику» is a partitive genitive (the old «-у» variant of «крик», shouting): 'there'll be a lot of shouting'. With «у них… будет» it means 'they'll have shouting going on till evening' — quantity expressed in the genitive.
> «почём знаю» as a brush-off: Kolya echoes the marketwoman's own idiom «почём я знаю» ('how should I know'), a verbless-feeling rhetorical shrug. Its reuse here is a small joke: he wields the same folk phrase he just provoked.

Я люблю расшевелить дураков во всех слоях общества.  
I love stirring up fools in every walk of society.
> «люблю» + perfective infinitive «расшевелить»: «Люблю расшевелить» pairs the habitual «люблю» with a perfective infinitive «расшевелить» (to stir up, rouse) — a slightly informal touch, since habit usually takes the imperfective «расшевеливать». The perfective lets each act of stirring stand as a completed little triumph.
> «расшевелить» — to stir into life: From «шевелить» (to stir, move) with «рас-»: to get someone going, provoke them out of their torpor. The image is poking a sleepy animal — exactly Kolya's self-satisfied sport with 'fools'.

Вот и еще стоит олух, вот этот мужик.  
There's another blockhead standing over there — that peasant.
> «олух» — dolt, blockhead: A colloquial term of abuse for a stupid, dull person ('blockhead, oaf'). Kolya's vocabulary of contempt — «дурак», «олух» — is part of his showing-off cleverness in this scene.

Заметь себе, говорят: «Ничего нет глупее глупого француза», но и русская физиономия выдает себя.  
Mind you, they say, 'There's nothing stupider than a stupid Frenchman,' but the Russian physiognomy gives itself away too.
> Imperative «заметь» with reflexive «себе»: «Заметь себе» (mark you, take note) is the perfective imperative of «заметить» plus the dative reflexive «себе» ('to yourself') — an ethical dative giving the command a confiding, lecturing air, very like Kolya.
> Comparative «глупее» + genitive of comparison: «Глупее» is the comparative of «глупый» (stupider), and «глупого француза» stands in the genitive as the standard of comparison ('than a stupid Frenchman'). With «ничего нет» the whole means 'nothing is stupider than…'.
> «физиономия» and «выдавать себя»: «Физиономия» (physiognomy, mug) is a faintly mocking word for the face, fitting Kolya's pseudo-intellectual pose; «выдаёт себя» (gives itself away) uses the true reflexive «себя» — the Russian face betrays its own stupidity. The era's vogue for reading character in faces lurks behind the remark.

Ну не написано ль у этого на лице, что он дурак, вот у этого мужика, а?  
Now, isn't it written all over this one's face that he's a fool — that peasant there, eh?"
> Interrogative «ль» and short passive «написано»: The enclitic «ль» (reduced «ли») forms a rhetorical yes/no question fronting «не написано»: 'isn't it written…?'. «Написано» is the short-form past passive participle (neuter), 'is written', stating a result on the man's face.

— Оставь его, Коля, пройдем мимо.  
"Leave him be, Kolya, let's just walk past."
> Two imperatives — singular «оставь», hortative «пройдём»: «Оставь его» is the perfective imperative 'leave him (alone)'; «пройдём мимо» uses the 1st-person-plural perfective future as a 'let's walk past' exhortation. Russian commonly uses the bare «-(е)м» future this way for 'let us'.

— Ни за что не оставлю, я теперь поехал. Эй! здравствуй, мужик!  
"Not for anything will I leave him — I'm in full swing now. Hey! Hello there, peasant!"
> Emphatic «ни за что» with negative concord: «Ни за что» ('not for anything, on no account') intensifies the negation, and the verb still carries «не» — «не оставлю» — in Russia's obligatory double-negative concord. Together: 'I won't leave him for anything'.
> «поехал» — 'I'm off and running': Literally 'I've set off' (perfective of the motion verb «поехать», to ride/drive), but idiomatic here for 'I'm in full swing now, off to the races'. Kolya casts his fun as a journey he's already launched on.

Дюжий мужик, медленно проходивший мимо и уже, должно быть, выпивший, с круглым простоватым лицом и с бородой с проседью, поднял голову и посмотрел на парнишку.  
A burly peasant, passing slowly by and evidently already a little drunk, with a round, simple face and a beard going gray, raised his head and looked at the lad.
> Two past active participles on «мужик»: Both «проходивший» (who was passing by, imperfective) and «выпивший» (who had had a drink, perfective) are past active participles agreeing with «мужик», stacking a who-clause and a who-had-clause into one noun phrase — a hallmark of literary description.
> Instrumental of attendant feature (с + instr.): The man's appearance is given in «с» + instrumental phrases: «с… лицом» (with a face), «с бородой» (with a beard). This is the standard Russian way to attach physical description, the instrumental governed by «с».
> «дюжий», «проседь», «парнишка»: «Дюжий» — sturdy, burly; «с проседью» — 'with gray streaks', a beard going gray; «простоватый» — simple-ish, a bit dim. The narrator calls Kolya «парнишка» (lad, young fellow), a faintly diminutive, affectionate word seen from the peasant's vantage.

— Ну, здравствуй, коли не шутишь, — неторопливо проговорил он в ответ.  
"Well, hello to you, if you're not joking," he answered unhurriedly.
> Folk conditional «коли не шутишь»: «Коли» again for «если» ('if'), with the imperfective present «шутишь» (you are joking): 'hello to you — if you're not making fun'. The peasant's wary, good-humoured proviso is built on this colloquial conditional.
> «неторопливо» and «проговорить»: «Неторопливо» — unhurriedly, without haste; «проговорил» (perfective «проговорить») — 'uttered, said' a complete remark. The pairing fixes the peasant's deliberate, unflappable manner against Kolya's quickness.

— А коль шучу? — засмеялся Коля.  
"And what if I am joking?" Kolya laughed.
> Clipped «коль» — folk 'and if?': «Коль» is an even shorter colloquial form of «коли/если» ('if'). The verbless-tailed «А коль шучу?» — 'and if I am joking?' — leaves the consequence hanging, a teasing challenge.

— А шутишь, так и шути, бог с тобой. Ничего, это можно. Это всегда возможно, чтоб пошутить.  
"Well, if you're joking, then joke away, God be with you. It's nothing, that's allowed. There's always room for a bit of a joke."
> Imperative «шути» — 'then joke away': The imperfective imperative «шути» (keep joking, joke away) follows the condition «шутишь… так» ('if you're joking, then…'). The imperfective fits an open-ended invitation to go on with the activity, not finish a single act.
> Purpose clause «чтоб пошутить»: «Чтоб» (reduced «чтобы») plus the perfective infinitive «пошутить» forms a purpose clause: 'there's always room to (have a) joke'. With a bare infinitive «чтобы» means 'in order to'.

— Виноват, брат, пошутил.  
"I'm sorry, brother, I was joking."
> «виноват» and «брат» as address: «Виноват» is a short adjective — 'guilty, at fault' — used idiomatically as 'sorry, my fault, excuse me'. «Брат» ('brother') is a familiar, classless term of address Kolya extends to the peasant, briefly leveling the social gap.
> Short adjective «виноват»: «Виноват» is the predicative short form of «виноватый» (guilty), agreeing only in gender/number (виноват/виновата). Short adjectives carry exactly this kind of momentary, predicative state — here a quick apology.

— Ну и бог те прости. Ты-то прощаешь ли?  
"Well, God forgive you. And you — do you forgive?"
> «-то» plus «ли» — 'and you, do you forgive?': The emphatic clitic «-то» on «ты» turns the question back on Kolya ('and you, for your part'), while the enclitic «ли» frames the yes/no question 'do you forgive?'. The peasant gently makes the boy the one now on trial.

— Оченно прощаю. Ступай.  
"Heartily I forgive. Go your way."
> «оченно» — folk 'very/heartily': «Оченно» is a dialectal, uneducated variant of «очень» (very). Kolya half-mimics peasant speech to play along — 'heartily I forgive' — a small condescension dressed as camaraderie.
> «ступай» — go, be off: «Ступай» is the imperative of «ступать» (to step, go), an old-fashioned, faintly imperious 'go on, be off with you'. It suits Kolya's habit of dismissing people as if granting them leave.

— Вишь ведь ты, да ты, пожалуй, мужик умный.  
"Well, look at you — why, you may be a clever peasant after all."
> «вишь» plus «ведь» — 'well, look at you': «Вишь» is a folk contraction of «видишь» ('you see, look'), here a wondering interjection; «ведь» adds the appealing 'why, after all'. The cluster of particles registers Kolya's surprised, slightly disarmed reaction.
> «пожалуй» — 'perhaps, I daresay': A modal word meaning 'perhaps, I suppose, possibly' (not the homonymous imperative 'help yourself'). It marks Kolya's grudging, surprised concession: 'you may, after all, be a clever peasant'.

— Умней тебя, — неожиданно и по-прежнему важно ответил мужик.  
"Cleverer than you," the peasant answered unexpectedly, and as gravely as before.
> Comparative «умней» + genitive of comparison: «Умней» (colloquial for «умнее», 'cleverer') is the invariable predicative comparative, and «тебя» is the genitive standard of comparison: 'cleverer than you'. Russian regularly puts the thing compared against in the bare genitive.
> «важно» — gravely, with dignity: «Важно» here is not 'importantly' but 'gravely, with weighty dignity', describing the peasant's unruffled, self-possessed delivery. The understated «важно» is what makes his retort land.

— Вряд ли, — опешил несколько Коля.  
"Hardly," Kolya was somewhat taken aback.
> «вряд ли» — 'hardly, unlikely': A fixed expression of doubt — 'hardly, scarcely, I doubt it' — fossilizing the interrogative particle «ли». Kolya's one-word deflation as the tables turn.
> «опешить» — to be taken aback: «Опешил» (perfective «опешить») — to be momentarily stunned, dumbfounded, thrown off balance. A single completed jolt: the clever boy is, for once, wrong-footed by a peasant.

— Верно говорю.  
"I'm telling you true."
> Adverb-first «Верно говорю»: «Верно» (truly, rightly) is fronted before the imperfective «говорю» (I say / I'm telling you) for assertive weight: 'I'm telling you true'. The free word order lets the peasant lead with his certainty.

— А пожалуй что и так.  
"Well, perhaps it is so at that."
> «пожалуй что и так» — 'perhaps it is at that': A loose colloquial chain: «пожалуй» (perhaps) + «что» (filler) + «и так» (so it is, at that). Kolya half-concedes the peasant's point — 'well, maybe it is so' — in genuinely spoken, particle-laden Russian.

— То-то, брат.  
"There you are, brother."
> «то-то» — 'there you are / just so': «То-то» is an expressive particle of satisfied confirmation: 'just so, there you have it, that's the point'. The peasant closes the exchange with quiet triumph, «брат» returning the boy's earlier familiar address.

— Прощай, мужик.  
"Goodbye, peasant."

— Прощай.  
"Goodbye."

— Мужики бывают разные, — заметил Коля Смурову после некоторого молчания. — Почем же я знал, что нарвусь на умника.  
"There are peasants and peasants," Kolya remarked to Smurov after some silence. "How was I to know I'd run up against a clever one?
> Iterative «бывают» — 'tend to be / there are': «Бывают» (from «бывать», the iterative/habitual counterpart of «быть») states a general truth: 'peasants come in different kinds, are various'. It is the verb for what is so as a rule, beyond any single moment.
> Perfective future «нарвусь»: «Нарвусь» is the perfective present-as-future of «нарваться» (a «-ся» verb): 'that I'd run up against / blunder into a clever one'. The perfective frames the unexpected encounter as a single, completed stumble.
> «умник» — a smart one (often ironic): «Умник» means a clever fellow, but it carries a wry, sometimes mocking edge ('a wise guy'). Kolya, the self-styled clever one, ruefully grants the title to the peasant who out-talked him.

Я всегда готов признать ум в народе.  
I'm always ready to acknowledge intelligence in the common people."
> Short adjective «готов» + infinitive: «Готов» is the predicative short form of «готовый» (ready), governing the perfective infinitive «признать» (to acknowledge): 'ready to recognize'. The short adjective plus infinitive is the standard frame for 'ready/willing/able to do'.

Вдали на соборных часах пробило половину двенадцатого.  
In the distance the cathedral clock struck half past eleven.
> Impersonal «пробило» and Russian clock-telling: «Пробило» (neuter, subjectless) is the impersonal perfective 'it struck'. «Половину двенадцатого» literally 'half of the twelfth (hour)' = half past eleven — Russian counts toward the coming hour, a regular trap for learners.

Мальчики заспешили и остальной довольно еще длинный путь до жилища штабс-капитана Снегирева прошли быстро и почти уже не разговаривая.  
The boys hurried on, and the remaining stretch to the dwelling of Staff-Captain Snegiryov — still a fairly long one — they covered quickly and almost without talking.
> The rank "штабс-капитан": Штабс-капитан was a junior officer rank in the Imperial Russian army, just below капитан (captain). We render it "Staff-Captain" rather than flattening it to plain "Captain": the full term marks Snegiryov as a modest, low-ranking retired officer, which fits the family's poverty that the boys keep mentioning.
> Perfectives of result plus a gerund tail: «Заспешили» («за-» = began to hurry) and «прошли» (covered, perfective) move the narration forward as completed events, while the negated imperfective gerund «не разговаривая» (not talking) describes the manner throughout. A typical literary blend of perfective backbone and gerund coloring.

За двадцать шагов до дома Коля остановился и велел Смурову пойти вперед и вызвать ему сюда Карамазова.  
Twenty paces short of the house Kolya stopped and told Smurov to go on ahead and call Karamazov out to him here.
> «велел» + dative + infinitive — indirect command: «Велел Смурову пойти… и вызвать» — 'told Smurov to go and call out' — frames an order with the verb «велеть» plus a dative addressee «Смурову» and perfective infinitives. The person commanded stands in the dative.
> «за… до…» — 'short of, before': The frame «за двадцать шагов до дома» means 'twenty paces short of the house' — «за» + accusative measuring the distance, «до» + genitive the goal. A neat idiom for stopping just before reaching a point.

— Надо предварительно обнюхаться, — заметил он Смурову.  
"We need to sniff each other out first," he remarked to Smurov.
> «обнюхаться» — to sniff each other out: Literally 'to sniff one another all over' (reciprocal «-ся» on «обнюхать»), as dogs do on meeting. Kolya uses it half-jokingly for sizing each other up before friendship — a vivid, slightly cheeky figure.
> Impersonal «надо» + infinitive: «Надо… обнюхаться» ('one must sniff each other out first') is the impersonal necessity construction: «надо» plus a bare infinitive, with no nominative subject. The implied 'we' is felt, not stated.

— Да зачем вызывать, — возразил было Смуров, — войди и так, тебе ужасно обрадуются.  
"But why call him out?" Smurov started to object. "Just go in — they'll be terribly glad of you.
> The particle «было» — an aborted action: «Возразил было» uses the special particle «было», which marks an action begun but at once checked or undone: 'Smurov started to object (but…)'. It signals that his objection went nowhere — a subtle aspectual flourish.
> Subjectless 3rd-plural + dative «тебе»: «Тебе… обрадуются» — 'they'll be delighted at you' — pairs the impersonal 3rd-person-plural «обрадуются» (no named subject, 'people will') with the dative «тебе» governed by «обрадоваться» (to be glad of). The dative marks the cause of joy.

А то что же на морозе знакомиться?  
Why get acquainted out here in the cold?"
> Insistent «же» in a rhetorical question: «А то что же… знакомиться?» — 'why on earth get acquainted out here?'. The particle «же» sharpens the «что» into an exasperated 'what for', and the bare infinitive «знакомиться» frames the deliberative question ('why be doing X?').
> Locative «на морозе» — out in the cold: «На морозе» (on/in the frost) is «на» + prepositional for location: 'out in the freezing cold'. «Мороз» means hard frost, and the boys' standing about «на морозе» quietly underlines the season and the discomfort.

— Это уж я знаю, зачем мне его надо сюда на мороз, — деспотически отрезал Коля (что ужасно любил делать с этими «маленькими»), и Смуров побежал исполнять приказание.  
"I know quite well why I want him out here in the cold," Kolya cut him off despotically (something he was terribly fond of doing with these "little ones"), and Smurov ran off to carry out the order.
> Dative «мне» of need with «надо»: «Зачем мне его надо» — 'why I need him here' — is the impersonal «надо» (need) construction with a dative experiencer «мне» and accusative «его»: literally 'why to-me he is needed'. The needer goes in the dative, not the nominative.
> «деспотически» and «отрезать»: «Отрезал» — literally 'cut off', idiomatic for 'snapped, retorted curtly'; «деспотически» (despotically) names Kolya's tyrannical streak. The narrator's word choice gently satirizes the boy's love of lording it over the «маленьких» (little ones).
---

Source text: public domain (Fyodor Dostoevsky, d. 1881; Russian from the Nauka academic edition via ru.wikisource). English translation: original, © 1732 Studios (2026); rendered freshly from the public-domain Russian, not derived from any prior English translation. Sentence-aligned by 1732 Studios.