# The Brothers Karamazov, Precocity

Братья Карамазовы · Fyodor Dostoevsky · Book X — The Boys

Source: https://1732studios.com/books/karamazov/b10-c6. Data: https://1732studios.com/books/karamazov/b10-c6.json.


— Как вы думаете, что ему скажет доктор? — скороговоркой проговорил Коля, — какая отвратительная, однако же, харя, не правда ли?  
"What do you suppose the doctor will tell him?" Kolya rattled out. "What a repulsive mug, though, isn't it?"
> «скороговоркой» — at a gabble: An instrumental-of-manner adverb from «скорый» (fast) + «говорить» (to speak): "in a patter, rapidly, tripping over the words." The same noun also means a tongue-twister. It paints Kolya's nervous, breathless rush to impress.
> «харя» — an ugly mug: A coarse, slangy word for a face — "mug, snout, ugly phiz" — much ruder than «лицо». Kolya's reaching for low, swaggering register here is part of the boy's pose; Dostoevsky lets the vulgar word betray him.
> «однако же» — emphatic 'and yet': «однако» means 'however, yet'; the appended particle «же» does not translate as a word but lends insistence and a conversational shrug — "and yet, you know." Such particles are the texture of Dostoevsky's spoken Russian.
> «не правда ли?» — a tag question: Literally "is it not the truth?", this fixed tag seeks the listener's agreement, like English "isn't it?" / "don't you think?" Kolya leans on it repeatedly through the chapter, a verbal tic of someone anxious to be confirmed.

Терпеть не могу медицину!  
I can't abide medicine!
> «терпеть не могу» — I can't stand it: A set idiom, literally "I cannot endure," used for strong dislike — "I can't abide / can't stand." The infinitive «терпеть» (to bear, endure) under the negated «не могу» is fully lexicalized into one emphatic expression of distaste.

— Илюша умрет.  
"Ilusha is going to die.
> «умрёт» — perfective future: A perfective verb («умереть», to die) conjugated with present-tense endings yields the simple future: "he will die." There is no auxiliary — the futurity sits in the ending, and the perfective frames the death as a single, completed certainty.

Это, мне кажется, уж наверно, — грустно ответил Алеша.  
That seems to me quite certain now," Alyosha answered sadly.
> «мне кажется» — it seems to me: An impersonal construction: there is no nominative subject, and the experiencer stands in the dative «мне» while the verb «кажется» (it seems) carries reflexive «-ся». This dative-experiencer frame is everywhere in the novel's reporting of inner states.
> «уж наверно» — pretty surely now: The particle «уж» (a worn-down «уже», 'already') here adds intensity and resignation rather than literal time — "by now, surely, quite definitely." «наверно» means 'for certain' (in 19th-c. usage stronger than today's hedging 'probably'). Alyosha's quiet grief is in that little «уж».

— Шельмы!  
"Scoundrels!
> «шельмы» — rogues, scoundrels: A German loan (Schelm, 'rogue') long naturalized in Russian as an expressive insult — "scoundrels, rascals." The bare exclamatory plural, flung out here by Kolya against the doctors, has the flavour of old-fashioned, theatrical abuse.

Медицина шельма!  
Medicine is a scoundrel!
> Zero copula: "Medicine [is] a scoundrel": Russian uses no present-tense 'to be': two nominatives are simply juxtaposed — «Медицина шельма», 'Medicine [is] a rogue.' The English supplies "is"; the Russian leaves the link unspoken, which gives the line its blunt, proverb-like punch.

Я рад, однако, что узнал вас, Карамазов.  
All the same, I'm glad I've come to know you, Karamazov.
> «узнал» — perfective 'to get to know': The perfective «узнать» here means not 'recognize' but 'come to know, make the acquaintance of' — a completed, momentous event for Kolya. Contrast the imperfective «знать» (to know as a state); the prefix and perfective aspect mark the threshold he feels he has crossed.

Я давно хотел вас узнать.  
I've long wanted to know you.
> Imperfective «хотел» of a long-standing wish: The imperfective past «хотел» with «давно» ('long [since]') expresses an enduring, ongoing desire — "I have long wanted." Russian uses a plain past where English needs a perfect; the imperfective supplies the sense of a wish that has lasted up to now.

Жаль только, что мы так грустно встретились…  
It's only a pity that we've met under such sad circumstances..."
> «жаль» — impersonal 'it's a pity': «жаль» is an invariable predicative word taking no nominative subject — "[it is] a pity." The clause it heads is opened by subordinating «что» ('that'). The construction belongs to the same subjectless, feeling-first family as «мне кажется» and «мне холодно».
> «встретились» — reciprocal «-ся»: From «встретиться», to meet one another: the clitic «-ся» (here «-сь» after a vowel) carries reciprocal meaning — the two of them met each other. It is the same «-ся» that turns «целовать» (to kiss) into «целоваться» (to kiss each other).

Коле очень бы хотелось что-то сказать еще горячее, еще экспансивнее, но как будто что-то его коробило.  
Kolya would dearly have liked to say something still warmer, still more expansive, but something seemed to hold him back.
> «хотелось бы» — conditional dative desire: Three Russian habits fuse here: the dative experiencer «Коле» (no nominative subject), the impersonal reflexive «хотелось» (it was wished to him), and the irrealis particle «бы» making it conditional — "Kolya would dearly have liked." A perfect specimen of how Russian frames longing.
> «что-то» — a specific but unknown 'something': The clitic «-то» on «что» marks a definite-but-unidentified referent: "something [in particular]," not just 'anything.' It recurs in the same sentence as the subject of «коробило» — "something held him back" — leaving the inhibiting force deliberately vague.
> «коробило» — it made him cringe: Impersonal «коробить» literally means 'to warp, buckle (as wood)'; figuratively, "to jar on, to make one wince/cringe." The neuter past with no subject — «что-то его коробило» — conveys an inner recoil he can't quite name.

Алеша это заметил, улыбнулся и пожал ему руку.  
Alyosha noticed it, smiled, and pressed his hand.
> Three perfectives in a chain: A string of perfective past verbs — noticed, smiled, pressed — moves the action forward event by event. This is narrative aspect at work: each perfective marks a discrete completed step, against which imperfectives would have given background or process.

— Я давно научился уважать в вас редкое существо, — пробормотал опять Коля, сбиваясь и путаясь.  
"I learned to respect you long ago as a rare being," Kolya muttered again, faltering and getting tangled up.
> «в вас» — to respect a quality 'in' someone: The idiom «уважать в ком-то что-то» = 'to value something in someone.' «в вас» (in you) takes the prepositional after «в», while «редкое существо» ('a rare being/creature') is the accusative object of «уважать». The phrasing casts Alyosha as a rare specimen Kolya has learned to honour.
> «сбиваясь и путаясь» — paired gerunds: Two imperfective present gerunds (деепричастия) in -я, 'getting muddled and tangled,' describe Kolya's manner simultaneously with «пробормотал» (muttered). They must share the main verb's subject, and stacking them is a hallmark of literary narration.

— Я слышал, вы мистик и были в монастыре.  
"I've heard you're a mystic and that you were in the monastery.
> «мистик» — a 'mystic': In the mouth of radical youth «мистик» is half-pejorative — a credulous religious dreamer, out of step with rational, scientific progress. Kolya means it as a diagnosis, which is why Alyosha gently asks what he means by the word.

Я знаю, что вы мистик, но… это меня не остановило.  
I know you're a mystic, but... that hasn't stopped me.
> «не остановило» — negated perfective past: «остановить» (to stop) is perfective; negated, «не остановило» denies that a single completed event took place — "it didn't stop me." The inanimate neuter «это» is the subject and «меня» the accusative object.

Прикосновение к действительности вас излечит…  
Contact with reality will cure you...
> «прикосновение к действительности» — contact with reality: A bookish abstract noun «прикосновение» (a touching, contact) in -ие governs «к» + dative «действительности» ('reality, actuality'). The phrasing is the language of journalism and ideas — exactly the second-hand intellectual register Kolya is performing.
> «излечит» — perfective future cure: Perfective «излечить» (to cure completely) conjugated for the future: "will cure [you]." The prefix «из-» and the perfective aspect promise a finished, total healing — Kolya confidently predicting Alyosha's recovery from faith.

С натурами, как вы, не бывает иначе.  
With natures like yours it can't be otherwise."
> «с натурами» — instrumental after «с»: The preposition «с» ('with') governs the instrumental, here the plural «натурами» ('with natures [like yours]'). «натура» is a slightly bookish word for a person's fundamental cast of character.
> «не бывает» — impersonal habitual negation: «бывает» is the iterative/habitual of «быть» — 'it [generally] happens, tends to be.' Negated and subjectless, «не бывает иначе» means "it never turns out otherwise." The form states a settled general truth rather than a single event.

— Что вы называете мистиком?  
"What do you mean by a mystic?
> «называете ... мистиком» — instrumental of the predicate: «называть кого-то кем-то» (to call someone something) puts the naming complement in the instrumental: «мистиком» ('[as] a mystic'). The interrogative «что» asks what Kolya so labels — "What do you call a mystic?"

От чего излечит? — удивился немного Алеша.  
Cure me of what?" Alyosha asked, a little surprised.
> «от чего» — genitive after «от»: The preposition «от» ('from, of') governs the genitive, here the interrogative «чего». «излечить от чего-либо» = to cure of something, so Alyosha asks "Cure [me] of what?" The verb's subject (reality) is understood from the previous line.

— Ну там бог и прочее.  
"Oh, God and all the rest of it."
> «ну ... там ... и прочее» — dismissive filler: A cluster of throwaway particles: «ну» ('well'), the vague gesturing «там» (here not 'there' but 'oh, you know'), and «и прочее» ('and the rest, et cetera'). Together they wave God off as a tiresome topic — Kolya affecting worldly indifference.

— Как, да разве вы в бога не веруете?  
"What, do you mean you don't believe in God?"
> «разве» — incredulous question: The particle «разве» registers surprise or disbelief — "do you mean to say...? / surely not...?" Coupled with opening «да», it makes Alyosha's astonishment palpable. Such attitudinal particles carry what English would mark only by intonation.
> «веровать» — to believe (in the religious sense): «веровать» (here «веруете», 'you believe') is the elevated, churchly verb of religious faith, distinct from everyday «верить». «веровать в Бога» = 'to believe in God' as an act of faith. Its solemn register suits the subject under debate.

— Напротив, я ничего не имею против бога.  
"On the contrary, I have nothing against God.
> «ничего не имею» — negative concord: Russian requires double negation: the ни-pronoun «ничего» ('nothing') co-occurs with the negated verb «не имею» — literally "I have nothing not against God," meaning "I have nothing against God." Both negatives are obligatory; together they make a single denial.

Конечно, бог есть только гипотеза… но… я признаю, что он нужен, для порядка… для мирового порядка и так далее… и если б его не было, то надо бы его выдумать, — прибавил Коля, начиная краснеть.  
Of course, God is merely a hypothesis... but... I admit that he is necessary, for the sake of order... for the order of the world and so on... and if he didn't exist, then he would have to be invented," Kolya added, beginning to blush.
> Counterfactual conditional with «бы»: A textbook irrealis: «если б ... не было» (if [he] did not exist) in the protasis and «надо бы ... выдумать» (it would be necessary to invent) in the apodosis, both built on past-form/predicative + the particle «бы» («б»). «его не было» also shows the genitive of negation — the absent subject stands in the genitive.
> «гипотеза», «мировой порядок» — the freethinker's lexicon: «гипотеза» (a hypothesis) and «мировой порядок» (the order of the world / cosmic order) are the bookish, Westernizing vocabulary of 1860s–70s rationalism. The Latinate diction itself signals Kolya ventriloquizing ideas he has read rather than thought.

Ему вдруг вообразилось, что Алеша сейчас подумает, что он хочет выставить свои познания и показать, какой он «большой».  
It suddenly struck him that Alyosha might think he was trying to parade his learning and show off what a "big" person he was.
> «ему вообразилось» — dative + reflexive impersonal: Another subjectless construction: «вообразиться» ('to come into one's imagination') with reflexive «-ся» and the experiencer in the dative «ему» — "it suddenly struck him / he suddenly fancied." The thought presents itself to Kolya rather than being actively thought.
> «большой» in quotation marks — a 'big' boy: Ordinarily «большой» = 'big, grown-up.' Dostoevsky's quotation marks flag it as Kolya's own childish, self-conscious word: he dreads looking like a kid showing off how grown-up and clever he is. The marks let the boy's anxious self-image leak through the narration.

«А я вовсе не хочу выставлять пред ним мои познания», — с негодованием подумал Коля.  
"But I don't want to parade my learning in front of him at all," Kolya thought with indignation.
> «пред» — bookish 'before': «пред» is the elevated, literary variant of the everyday «перед» ('in front of, before'), governing the instrumental «ним». The clipped form belongs to the higher, slightly archaic register and adds a faintly theatrical dignity to Kolya's inner protest.
> «негодование» — indignation: «негодование» is a strong, somewhat lofty word for moral indignation or outrage; «с негодованием» = 'with indignation.' The grand emotion clashes comically with the triviality of Kolya's worry, sharpening Dostoevsky's affectionate satire of the boy.

И ему вдруг стало ужасно досадно.  
And all at once he felt terribly vexed.
> «ему стало досадно» — dative of sudden feeling: The fullest dative-experiencer pattern: «ему» (dative) + «стало» (it became) + the predicative «досадно» ('vexing, galling'). No nominative subject — a state simply befalls Kolya: "he suddenly felt terribly vexed." «стало» marks the entering into the state.

— Я, признаюсь, терпеть не могу вступать во все эти препирания, — отрезал он, — можно ведь и не веруя в бога любить человечество, как вы думаете?  
"I confess I can't bear getting into all these wrangles," he snapped, "after all, one can love mankind even without believing in God, don't you think?
> «не веруя» — negated gerund: «веруя» is the imperfective present gerund of «веровать» (believing); negated, «не веруя» = 'without believing.' The deeper structure is «можно ... любить» (one can love) — an impersonal modal with infinitive — so: "one can love mankind even without believing in God."
> «ведь» — appeal to shared sense: The particle «ведь» invokes common ground — "after all, surely, you know." Kolya uses it to make his proposition sound self-evident and to draw Alyosha into agreement, reinforced by the closing tag «как вы думаете?» (don't you think?).
> «препирания» — squabbles, wrangles: «препирательство» / «препирания» means petty argument, bickering, wrangling. The slightly bookish plural, dismissed with «отрезал» (he snapped/cut off), shows Kolya pretending to rise above a debate he is in fact eager to win.

Вольтер же не веровал в бога, а любил человечество? («Опять, опять!» — подумал он про себя).  
Voltaire, now, didn't believe in God, yet he loved mankind, didn't he?" ("Again, there I go again!" he thought to himself.)
> «же» — contrastive emphasis on Voltaire: Here «же» fastens onto the topic «Вольтер» to single it out and press the point — "Voltaire, now / take Voltaire." The particle marks the named example as the very pivot of the argument Kolya is rolling out.
> «про себя» — the reflexive 'to oneself': «про себя» ('to oneself, inwardly') uses the reflexive pronoun «себя», which points back to the clause's own subject and has no nominative. «думать про себя» = to think silently, an aside the reader overhears but Alyosha does not.

— Вольтер в бога верил, но, кажется, мало и, кажется, мало любил и человечество, — тихо, сдержанно и совершенно натурально произнес Алеша, как бы разговаривая с себе равным по летам или даже со старшим летами человеком.  
"Voltaire did believe in God, only not much, it seems, and he loved mankind not much either, it seems," Alyosha pronounced quietly, with restraint, and quite naturally, as though he were talking with someone his own age, or even older than himself.
> «как бы» + gerund — 'as though talking': «как бы» ('as if, as it were') softens and hedges, here over the imperfective gerund «разговаривая» (talking, conversing) — "as though conversing." The gerund describes Alyosha's manner simultaneously with «произнёс» (he pronounced). «как бы» recurs through the chapter as Dostoevsky's marker of tentativeness.
> «равный», «старший» + instrumental of respect: «равный кому-то» (equal to someone) takes the dative «себе» ('to himself'), while «по летам» and the instrumental «летами» specify the respect 'in years/age.' «летами» is the instrumental plural of the old «лето» in its sense 'year' — the same root behind «сколько вам лет?»
> «лета» — years of age: «лето» means 'summer,' but its plural «лета» supplies the suppletive plural of «год» in counting age and in fixed expressions ("сколько вам лет?"). Here «по летам» and «летами» both mean 'in years, in age' — a slightly elevated turn for someone's age.

Колю именно поразила эта как бы неуверенность Алеши в свое мнение о Вольтере и что он как будто именно ему, маленькому Коле, отдает этот вопрос на решение.  
What struck Kolya in particular was this seeming uncertainty of Alyosha's about his own opinion of Voltaire, and the way he seemed to be leaving the question to him, little Kolya, to decide.
> Object-first word order for focus: The accusative object «Колю» (Kolya) is fronted before the verb «поразила», whose true subject is «неуверенность» (the uncertainty) — "what struck Kolya was this uncertainty." Free case-marked order lets Russian foreground who was affected before naming the cause.
> «маленькому Коле» — dative in apposition: «отдаёт ... ему, маленькому Коле» — the indirect object «ему» (to him) is restated by the appositive dative «маленькому Коле» ('to little Kolya'), adjective and name agreeing in the dative. The diminutive of the scene is sharpened by the narrator's wry «маленький».

— А вы разве читали Вольтера? — заключил Алеша.  
"And have you actually read Voltaire?" Alyosha asked in conclusion.
> «разве» again — gentle incredulity: Opening «а» (a soft contrastive 'and/but') plus «разве» turns this into a probing, faintly skeptical question — "And have you really read Voltaire?" The imperfective «читали» asks about the experience of reading, not its completion, leaving room for Kolya's evasive answer.

— Нет, не то чтобы читал… Я, впрочем, «Кандида» читал, в русском переводе… в старом, уродливом переводе, смешном… (Опять, опять!)  
"No, it isn't that I've read him exactly... Though I did read 'Candide,' in a Russian translation... an old, hideous translation, a ridiculous one..." ("Again, there I go again!")
> «не то чтобы» — 'it's not exactly that': A fixed hedging construction, «не то чтобы ...» = 'it's not exactly that..., not so much that...'. Kolya uses it to half-deny having read Voltaire while leaving himself an escape, the very picture of a boy caught out.
> «в ... переводе» — agreement in the prepositional: After «в» (location) the noun «переводе» stands in the prepositional, and the adjectives «старом, уродливом» agree with it in the prepositional masculine singular. The piled-up modifiers ('old, ugly, ridiculous') mark Kolya's flustered over-explaining.

— И поняли?  
"And you understood it?"
> «поняли?» — perfective of full comprehension: The bare perfective past «поняли» ('did you understand [it fully]?') asks whether comprehension was actually achieved as a completed result — a pointed, slightly teasing one-word question from Alyosha. The subject «вы» is dropped, recoverable from the verb's plural/polite ending.

— О да, всё… то есть… почему же вы думаете, что я бы не понял?  
"Oh yes, all of it... that is... why should you suppose I wouldn't understand it?
> «я бы не понял» — conditional + «же»: «бы» + past «не понял» forms the irrealis — "that I wouldn't have understood." The particle «же» on «почему» adds indignant emphasis ('but why on earth...'). The whole is an embedded clause introduced by reporting «что» under «думаете».

Там, конечно, много сальностей…  
There's a good deal that's bawdy in it, of course...
> «сальности» — smut, bawdy bits: «сальность» (from «сало», 'fat, grease') means a coarse or obscene remark — 'smut, ribaldry.' The genitive plural «сальностей» follows «много» ('much, many'). Kolya's prim acknowledgement that Candide has "a good deal that's bawdy" is part of his grown-up pose.

Я, конечно, в состоянии понять, что это роман философский и написан, чтобы провести идею… — запутался уже совсем Коля.  
I'm quite capable, of course, of grasping that it's a philosophical novel and was written to put across an idea..." Kolya floundered hopelessly by now.
> «написан» + «чтобы» of purpose: «написан» is the short-form past passive participle ('[it] was written'), the basis of the periphrastic passive. It is followed by purpose «чтобы» + the infinitive «провести» ('to put across, carry through [an idea]') — the willed-result conjunction, not plain reporting «что».
> «запутался» — got thoroughly tangled: Perfective «запутаться» (with «-ся») = 'to get tangled up, lost (in one's words).' Reinforced by «уже совсем» ('completely by now'), the narrator's verb deflates Kolya's intellectual flourish at the very moment he delivers it.

— Я социалист, Карамазов, я неисправимый социалист, — вдруг оборвал он ни с того ни с сего.  
"I'm a socialist, Karamazov, I'm an incorrigible socialist," he suddenly broke off, apropos of nothing at all.
> «ни с того ни с сего» — out of the blue: A frozen idiom, literally 'from neither this nor that,' meaning 'for no reason at all, apropos of nothing.' It preserves the old demonstrative «сей» («с сего» = from this) and shows the ни...ни negative-concord pattern fused into a set phrase.

— Социалист? — засмеялся Алеша, — да когда это вы успели?  
"A socialist?" Alyosha laughed. "Why, when did you find the time?
> «успели» + «это» of mild astonishment: Perfective «успеть» = 'to manage [in time], find the time to.' «когда это вы успели?» — "when did you ever find the time?" — where «это» is not 'this' but an emphatic, almost teasing particle thrown into the question. Alyosha's laughter is built into the syntax.

Ведь вам еще только тринадцать лет, кажется?  
You're only thirteen, I think?"
> «вам ... лет» — dative of age + numeral case: Age is impersonal and dative: «вам ... лет» = 'to you [there are] ... years.' The numeral «тринадцать» (13, like all 5-and-above) takes the genitive plural «лет». «ещё только» ('still only') gently underscores his youth.

Колю скрючило.  
Kolya winced as if he'd been pinched.
> «Колю скрючило» — impersonal accusative experiencer: A vivid subjectless construction: the neuter past «скрючило» ('it twisted/cramped [him] up') with the experiencer in the accusative «Колю». Such accusative-impersonals describe a force seizing the body — Kolya literally writhing at the dig about his age.

— Во-первых, не тринадцать, а четырнадцать, через две недели четырнадцать, — так и вспыхнул он, — а во-вторых, совершенно не понимаю, к чему тут мои лета?  
"In the first place, not thirteen but fourteen — fourteen in two weeks," he flared up at once, "and in the second place, I utterly fail to see what my age has to do with it.
> «во-первых ... во-вторых» — firstly, secondly: Ordinal adverbs marking the points of an argument, 'in the first place... in the second place.' Their formal, list-making cadence — in a furious boy correcting his age by two weeks — is comic, the rhetoric of a debater deployed over a triviality.
> «к чему» — 'to what end / what's the point': «к чему» (literally 'to what,' dative-governing «к» + «что») is idiomatic for 'why? what for? what's the relevance?' — "what have my years to do with it?" «тут» ('here') colloquially means 'in this matter.' Note again «лета» for 'years/age.'

Дело в том, каковы мои убеждения, а не который мне год, не правда ли?  
What matters is what my convictions are, not how old I am, isn't that so?"
> «каковы» — bookish short interrogative: «каков» (short, predicative 'what is ... like / of what sort') is a more formal, literary alternative to «какой». Its short plural «каковы» agrees with «убеждения» ('convictions') — "what my convictions are like." The elevated form fits Kolya's debating posture.
> «который мне год» — 'how old I am': An idiom using the interrogative «который» ('which') with dative «мне»: «который мне год» literally 'which year is to me,' i.e. 'what year of my life I'm in / how old I am.' It contrasts pointedly with «каковы мои убеждения» — character versus age.

— Когда вам будет больше лет, то вы сами увидите, какое значение имеет на убеждение возраст.  
"When you're older, you'll see for yourself how much one's age has to do with one's convictions.
> Real future conditional: «когда ... будет ... увидите»: A future-time «когда»-clause pairs two futures: imperfective compound «будет ... лет» ('when you have more years') and perfective «увидите» ('you will see [for yourself]'). The correlative «то» links the clauses. «сами» (you yourselves) drives the point home.

Мне показалось тоже, что вы не свои слова говорите, — скромно и спокойно ответил Алеша, но Коля горячо его прервал.  
It also seemed to me that you weren't speaking your own words," Alyosha answered modestly and calmly, but Kolya cut him off heatedly.
> «свои слова» — the reflexive possessive: «свой» means 'one's own,' referring to the subject of its clause: «не свои слова» = 'not your own words.' Using «ваши» instead would merely mean 'your words' without the pointed sense of authenticity — Alyosha's quiet charge that Kolya is parroting others.
> «прервал» — perfective interruption: Perfective «прервать» (to interrupt, cut off) marks a single sharp event breaking into Alyosha's speech, the adverb «горячо» ('hotly, heatedly') colouring Kolya's manner. The perfective is the natural aspect for an abrupt, completed action in narrative.

— Помилуйте, вы хотите послушания и мистицизма.  
"Come now, you want obedience and mysticism.
> «помилуйте» — 'come now! / for pity's sake!': Literally the imperative 'have mercy [on me]!' (from «помиловать»), but in polite speech it is a fixed exclamation of protest — "come now! / good heavens! / how can you?" Kolya opens three retorts with it in this exchange, a marker of agitated 19th-c. politeness.

Согласитесь в том, что, например, христианская вера послужила лишь богатым и знатным, чтобы держать в рабстве низший класс, не правда ли?  
You'll grant, for instance, that the Christian faith has served only the rich and the high-born, so as to keep the lower class in bondage, won't you?"
> «согласитесь» — polite imperative + reflexive: Imperative «согласитесь» (from reflexive «согласиться», to agree), with the polite/plural «-те» and the correlative «в том, что...» ('in this, that...') opening the subordinate clause. "You'll grant that..." — Kolya marshalling Alyosha toward a concession.
> «чтобы» + infinitive of purpose: «чтобы держать» ('so as to keep') gives the purpose served by the Christian faith. When the purpose-subject is the same as the main clause's, «чтобы» takes a bare infinitive rather than the past-form irrealis. «в рабстве» (in bondage) is location in the prepositional.

— Ах, я знаю, где вы это прочли, и вас непременно кто-нибудь научил! — воскликнул Алеша.  
"Ah, I know where you read that, and somebody certainly put you up to it!" Alyosha exclaimed.
> «кто-нибудь» vs «кто-то»: Here Alyosha uses «кто-нибудь» ('somebody or other, anybody'), the non-specific indefinite, because he doesn't know who the instigator was — "somebody must have put you up to it." Contrast «кто-то», which would assert a definite-but-unnamed person. «непременно» = 'certainly, without fail.'

— Помилуйте, зачем же непременно прочел?  
"Come now, why must it be that I read it?
> «зачем же» — indignant 'why': «зачем» ('why, what for') plus the emphatic particle «же» makes a heated rhetorical objection — "but why must it be that I read it?" The perfective «прочёл» (the older masculine past of «прочесть», read through) asserts the completed reading Kolya is denying.

И никто ровно не научил.  
And nobody at all put me up to it.
> «никто ... не научил» — negative concord: The ни-pronoun «никто» ('nobody') obligatorily co-occurs with negated «не научил» — "nobody put me up to it." «ровно» here is colloquial intensification, 'absolutely (nobody),' reinforcing the denial rather than meaning 'evenly.'

Я и сам могу… И если хотите, я не против Христа.  
I'm capable of it on my own... And if you want to know, I'm not against Christ.
> «и сам» — the intensive 'myself': The intensifier «сам» ('[my]self, on my own') with connective «и» asserts independent capacity — "I can do it myself too." «сам» agrees like an adjective (here masculine «сам») and stresses that no outside prompting was needed. The object of «могу» is left elliptical.

Это была вполне гуманная личность, и живи он в наше время, он бы прямо примкнул к революционерам и, может быть, играл бы видную роль… Это даже непременно.  
He was an entirely humane personality, and had he lived in our day, he would have joined the revolutionaries outright and might have played a conspicuous part... that's even beyond doubt."
> Counterfactual with inverted imperative: A bookish conditional: the imperative form «живи» ('were he to live') stands for «если бы он жил» — using the imperative as a hypothetical 'had he...'. The apodosis «он бы ... примкнул» (he would have joined) uses past + «бы». A vivid 19th-c. literary turn.
> «играл бы» — conditional 'would have played': Imperfective past «играл» + «бы» gives the hypothetical 'might have been playing / would have played [a conspicuous role].' The imperfective suits an ongoing, sustained role rather than a single act, against the perfective «примкнул» ('would have joined') just before.

— Ну где, ну где вы этого нахватались!  
"Well, where, oh where did you pick all this up!
> Emphatic repetition for exasperation: The doubled «ну где, ну где» ('well where, oh where') is expressive reduplication conveying Alyosha's amused exasperation. Word order and repetition, not new vocabulary, carry the emotional charge — the rhythm of spoken outburst.
> «нахвататься» — to pick up (scraps of): Perfective reflexive «нахвататься чего-либо» (+ genitive «этого») means 'to snatch up, pick up bits of' knowledge superficially and indiscriminately. The verb is faintly disparaging — Kolya has grabbed ideas piecemeal, not learned them — which is precisely Alyosha's point.

С каким это дураком вы связались? — воскликнул Алеша.  
What fool have you fallen in with?" Alyosha exclaimed.
> «с каким ... дураком» — instrumental after «с»: «связаться с кем-то» (to get mixed up with someone) governs the instrumental, here «с ... дураком» ('with [what] fool'), the interrogative «каким» agreeing in the instrumental. The inserted «это» adds colloquial exasperation, as in s37.

— Помилуйте, правды не скроешь.  
"Come now, there's no hiding the truth.
> «правды не скроешь» — genitive of negation + 2sg 'you': Under negation the object «правда» shifts to the genitive «правды» — the genitive of negation. The 2nd-person perfective future «скроешь» ('you won't hide') is used generically/impersonally — 'one cannot hide the truth,' a proverb-like generalization rather than a literal 'you.'

Я, конечно, по одному случаю, часто говорю с господином Ракитиным, но… Это еще старик Белинский тоже, говорят, говорил.  
It's true I happen to talk a good deal with Mr. Rakitin, but... old Belinsky used to say it too, so they tell me."
> «по одному случаю» — 'as it happens / on a certain occasion': «по случаю» (literally 'by occasion') here means 'as it happens, by chance, on certain occasions' — Kolya minimizing his contact with Rakitin. «по» governs the dative «случаю». The hedging phrase betrays how much he wants to play down the connection.

— Белинский?  
"Belinsky?

Не помню.  
I don't recall it.
> «не помню» — dropped subject: "[I] don't recall." The pronoun «я» is omitted because the 1st-person singular ending of «помню» already identifies the subject — the default in Russian, where pronouns appear mainly for emphasis or contrast.

Он этого нигде не написал.  
He never wrote that anywhere."
> «нигде ... не написал» — negative concord + genitive: Two negation features: the negative adverb «нигде» ('nowhere') requires the verb's «не» (negative concord), and the negated object «это» appears in the genitive «этого» — the genitive of negation. "He nowhere wrote that."

— Если не написал, то, говорят, говорил.  
"He may not have written it, but he said it, so they tell me.
> «если ..., то ...» — real conditional + aspect contrast: A real (indicative) conditional, «если ..., то ...» ('if ..., then ...'), pivoting on aspect: perfective «написал» ('did [not] write [it down]') versus imperfective «говорил» ('used to say / said'). Kolya retreats from the written record to hearsay speech — the aspects carry the whole rhetorical dodge.

Я это слышал от одного… впрочем, черт…  
I heard it from a certain... well, the devil..."
> «от одного» — elliptical 'from a certain man': «от» (from) + genitive «одного» ('a certain one [person]'), with the noun «человека» left unspoken — "I heard it from a certain...". «один» here is not the numeral 'one' but the indefinite 'a certain,' trailing off as Kolya thinks better of naming his source.
> «впрочем, чёрт…» — 'well, the devil…': «впрочем» ('however, but then, on second thought') signals Kolya catching and reversing himself, and «чёрт» ('the devil') is a mild oath of vexation as he breaks off rather than name his informant. The trailing dash dramatizes his self-interruption.

— А Белинского вы читали?  
"And have you read Belinsky?"
> Animate accusative «Белинского»: «Белинского» is the accusative of the animate masculine name, which borrows the genitive ending «-ого» — here standing by metonymy for Belinsky's works ('have you read Belinsky?'). Fronting the object and dropping nothing else, Alyosha lands a quiet, pointed challenge.

— Видите ли… нет… я не совсем читал, но… место о Татьяне, зачем она не пошла с Онегиным, я читал.  
"Well, you see... no... I haven't quite read him, but... the passage about Tatyana, about why she didn't go off with Onegin, that I did read."
> «ли» softening an opener: «Видите ли» — literally "do you see," with the enclitic «ли» — is here not a true question but a hesitant conversational filler, "well, you see…". The particle, normally marking a yes/no question, lends a tentative, buttonholing tone.
> «пойти» — perfective verb of motion: «не пошла» is the perfective past of «пойти» (to set off, go), the prefixed perfective partner of «идти/ходить». The single completed departure — the decisive act of going off — is exactly why the perfective is chosen here.

— Как не пошла с Онегиным?  
"What do you mean, didn't go off with Onegin?
> Echo-question «Как…?»: Alyosha repeats Kolya's own words framed by «Как…?» ("How — what do you mean —…?"), a common spoken move that throws the interlocutor's phrase back as an incredulous query. The verb «не пошла» stays in the perfective past, lifted straight from the preceding line.

Да разве вы это уж… понимаете?  
Do you mean you already... understand that?"
> «разве» — incredulous question: «разве» opens a question expecting a negative or surprised answer — "surely you don't…?", "you mean to say…?". Paired with the opening «Да» (a hinge, not "yes") and the hesitant «уж», it conveys Alyosha's astonishment that so young a boy already grasps the point.

— Помилуйте, вы, кажется, принимаете меня за мальчика Смурова, — раздражительно осклабился Коля.  
"Come now, you seem to be taking me for the boy Smurov," Kolya bared his teeth in an irritated grin.
> «Помилуйте» — "good heavens, come now": Literally the polite-plural imperative of «помиловать» ("have mercy"), «Помилуйте» had bleached into a polite interjection of protest — "come now, for pity's sake, don't be absurd." It marks Kolya's wounded dignity at being mistaken for a younger child.
> «принимать за» — take for: The idiom «принимать кого-за кого» (take someone for someone) governs the accusative on both sides: «меня… за мальчика». «принимаете» is imperfective present, framing the mistake as Kolya's standing impression of how Alyosha sees him.
> «осклабиться» — to bare the teeth in a grin: «осклабиться» is an expressive, faintly unpleasant verb: to grin so the teeth show, a smirk rather than a warm smile. With «раздражительно» (irritably) it captures Kolya's prickly self-consciousness.

— Впрочем, пожалуйста, не думайте, что я уж такой революционер.  
"But please, don't imagine that I'm such a great revolutionary.
> «Впрочем» — "however, then again": «Впрочем» introduces a self-correction or qualification of what one has just said — "however," "on second thoughts," "mind you." It is a hallmark of Dostoevsky's nervous, back-tracking speakers, and Kolya wields it constantly.
> Negated imperative + «такой»: «не думайте» is a negated imperative ("don't imagine"), and «такой» ("such a," "that much of a") with «уж» belittles the noun — "such a great revolutionary." «такой» agrees like an adjective with «революционер».

Я очень часто не согласен с господином Ракитиным.  
Very often I don't agree with Mr. Rakitin at all.
> Short adjective «согласен» + instrumental: «согласен» is the short (predicative) form of «согласный», used only as a predicate: "I am in agreement." The person one agrees with stands in the instrumental after «с» («с господином Ракитиным»).

Если я о Татьяне, то я вовсе не за эманципацию женщин.  
If I bring up Tatyana, it isn't that I'm for the emancipation of women in the least.
> Elliptical «если… то»: «Если… то» is the standard "if… then" frame, but here the verb is dropped after «я» — "if I [speak] of Tatyana, then…". Such ellipsis of an understood verb («говорю») is natural in lively speech.
> «вовсе не» — emphatic negation: «вовсе не» negates emphatically — "not at all," "by no means." The preposition «за» here means "in favor of" and takes the accusative («за эманципацию»).

Я признаю, что женщина есть существо подчиненное и должна слушаться.  
I hold that woman is a subordinate creature and must obey.
> Bookish copula «есть»: Modern Russian normally drops the present-tense "to be," but here Kolya keeps the archaic, bookish «есть» ("is") for a pompous, aphoristic ring — "woman IS a subordinate creature." The predicate noun «существо» stands in the nominative after «есть».
> «слушаться» — reflexive "obey": «слушаться» (to obey) exists only in the «-ся» form; the «-ся» here is lexical, not reflexive in meaning. It governs the genitive of the person obeyed, though here the object is left understood.

Les femmes tricottent, как сказал Наполеон, — усмехнулся почему-то Коля, — и по крайней мере в этом я совершенно разделяю убеждение этого псевдовеликого человека.  
Les femmes tricottent, as Napoleon said," Kolya smirked for some reason, "and on this point, at least, I entirely share the conviction of that pseudo-great man."
> A French tag: "women knit": French for "women knit" — a phrase Kolya attributes to Napoleon, meaning a woman's place is domestic. Dostoevsky leaves it in French and footnotes the Russian gloss (Дело женщины — вязанье, "woman's business is knitting"); educated Russians of the period sprinkled their speech with French, and the boy shows off by doing the same.
> «псевдовеликий» — "pseudo-great": A coinage with the learned prefix «псевдо-», "pseudo-great" — Kolya's swaggering put-down of Napoleon, the very man he has just quoted approvingly. The hybrid Greek-prefixed adjective flaunts his bookishness.
> Genitive of possession in a chain: «убеждение… человека» — "the conviction of this man" — strings the noun and its possessor in the genitive, with «этого псевдовеликого» agreeing in genitive throughout. The whole modifier-chain makes the boy's self-important diction visible.

Я тоже, например, считаю, что бежать в Америку из отечества — низость, хуже низости — глупость.  
I also hold, for instance, that to run off to America away from one's fatherland is base — worse than base, it's stupid.
> Infinitive subject, zero copula: An infinitive phrase «бежать в Америку…» serves as the subject, equated to the predicate noun «низость» ("baseness") with no copula — "to flee… is baseness." «в Америку» is accusative of motion-toward; «из отечества» is genitive after «из».
> «низость» — baseness: «низость» (from «низкий», low) means moral lowness, a base or contemptible act. Kolya escalates: «хуже низости — глупость» — worse than base, it is stupidity — ranking folly above vice with mock-philosophical gravity.

Зачем в Америку, когда и у нас можно много принести пользы для человечества?  
Why go to America, when here at home one can do so much good for mankind?
> Impersonal «можно» + emphatic «и»: «можно» ("one can / it is possible") heads an impersonal construction with the infinitive «принести»; there is no nominative subject. The «и» before «у нас» is emphatic — "here too, right at home."
> Genitive after «много»: «много» (much) governs the genitive of the mass noun: «пользы» (gen. of «польза», benefit) — "much benefit." «для человечества» (genitive after «для») gives the beneficiary: "for mankind."

Именно теперь.  
Precisely now.
> Emphatic «именно»: «Именно» ("precisely, exactly") singles out and intensifies the word it precedes — here "precisely now." The clipped, verbless fragment heightens the rhetorical punch of Kolya's enthusiasm.

Целая масса плодотворной деятельности.  
A whole mass of fruitful activity.
> «плодотворная деятельность» — bookish abstraction: «плодотворный» (fruitful, from «плод», fruit) and «деятельность» (activity) are abstract, publicistic nouns of the radical press — Kolya speaks in newspaper slogans. «Целая масса» ("a whole mass") inflates the cliché further.

Так я и отвечал.  
That's just what I answered."
> Confirming «так… и»: The frame «так… и» binds adverb to verb to mean "that is exactly what I did" — "that's just how I answered." «отвечал» is imperfective, reporting the act of answering as a remembered speech-event.

— Как отвечали?  
"What do you mean, answered?
> Echo-question with polite plural: Alyosha again echoes Kolya's word as an incredulous «Как…?» question. «отвечали» is the polite second-person-plural past (vy-form), agreeing in plural even of a single boy — Alyosha addresses Kolya respectfully as «вы».

Кому?  
To whom?
> Dative «кому» — "to whom": «Кому» is the dative of «кто», the indirect-object case demanded by the verb «отвечать» (to answer someone, dat.). The single-word question economically asks for the addressee of Kolya's "answer."

Разве вас кто-нибудь уже приглашал в Америку?  
Has somebody actually invited you to America already?"
> «кто-нибудь» — non-specific "anyone": «кто-нибудь» ("anyone at all," non-specific) suits a question probing whether such a person even exists. «вас» is the accusative object of «приглашал» (imperfective: "was inviting / did invite"), and «Разве» again flags incredulity.

— Признаюсь, меня подбивали, но я отверг.  
"I confess they tried to talk me into it, but I refused.
> «признаюсь» — reflexive "I confess": «признаюсь» is the «-ся» verb «признаться» (to confess, admit), here a parenthetical "I confess." The «-сь» (the post-vowel form of «-ся») makes it intransitive-confessional rather than a transitive "recognize."
> «подбивать» vs «отвергнуть»: «подбивали» (imperfective, impersonal "they") means to egg on, incite, talk into — the repeated nudging. Against it Kolya sets the curt perfective «отверг» ("I rejected," from «отвергнуть»), an archaic-flavored, decisive single act.

Это, разумеется, между нами, Карамазов, слышите, никому ни слова.  
This is between us, of course, Karamazov — do you hear, not a word to anyone.
> «ни слова» — verbless emphatic negation: «никому ни слова» — "not a word to anyone" — is a clipped command with no verb, leaning on «ни» for force. «слова» is the genitive of «слово» (genitive of negation: "not [even] a word") and «никому» the negative dative "to no one."
> «слышите» as appeal: The plain present «слышите» ("do you hear") is inserted as a buttonholing appeal for attention and assent, much like English "you hear me?". It marks the conspiratorial urgency of "this is between us."

Это я вам только.  
This is for you alone.
> Emphatic word order, dropped verb: A verbless fragment — "this [is] for you alone" — where «только» (only) is post-posed for stress and «вам» is the dative of the addressee. The marked order throws the weight onto the confidential "to you."

Я совсем не желаю попасть в лапки Третьего отделения и брать уроки у Цепного моста, Будешь помнить здание У Цепного моста!  
I've no wish at all to fall into the clutches of the Third Section and take lessons by the Chain Bridge — You'll remember the building by the Chain Bridge!
> «лапки» — "little clutches": «лапки» is the diminutive of «лапы» (paws, clutches). The expressive diminutive lends a half-joking, half-shuddering tone to «попасть в лапки» ("to fall into the [little] clutches") of the secret police — fear dressed up as flippancy.
> Compound future «будешь помнить»: «Будешь помнить» is the imperfective compound future — «будешь» (future of «быть») plus the imperfective infinitive «помнить» — a menacing "you'll [long] remember." The line is the underground rhyme's threat, quoted by Kolya.

Помните?  
You remember it?

Великолепно!  
Splendid!
> «Великолепно!» — "Splendid!": «Великолепно» (magnificent, splendid), a sonorous compound of «велик-» (great) and «-лепо» (comely), is Kolya's theatrical exclamation of delight at his own cleverness — a slightly grand word for a schoolboy, in keeping with his showing-off.

Чему вы смеетесь?  
What are you laughing at?
> «смеяться» governs the dative: «смеяться» (to laugh) — a verb existing only in «-ся» — takes the dative of what one laughs at, hence «чему» (dative of «что»). Russian "laughs to/at a thing" rather than "at" it, a fixed government to note.

Уж не думаете ли вы, что я вам всё наврал? («А что, если он узнает, что у меня в отцовском шкафу всего только и есть один этот нумер „Колокола“, а больше я из этого ничего не читал?» — мельком, но с содроганием подумал Коля).  
Surely you don't think I've made the whole thing up?" ("And what if he finds out that the one and only thing I've got in my father's cabinet is this single issue of 'The Bell,' and that I've read nothing more of it than that?" Kolya thought in passing, but with a shudder.)
> «Уж не… ли» — suspicious question: The frame «Уж не… ли» builds a leading, half-accusing yes/no question — "surely you don't think…?". «Уж» colors it, «ли» follows the focused negated verb «не думаете», and the whole expects a denial.
> «наврать» — perfective "to tell a pack of lies": «наврал» is the perfective of «врать» with the prefix «на-», which adds a sense of "a whole lot of it" — to have spun a heap of lies. The completed perfective fits the single accusation: "that I made the whole thing up."
> Instrumental of manner «с содроганием»: «с содроганием» ("with a shudder") uses «с» + instrumental to express manner. The narrator's parenthetical slips into Kolya's interior panic, the inner monologue framing his bravado from within.

— Ох, нет, я не смеюсь и вовсе не думаю, что вы мне налгали.  
"Oh no, I'm not laughing, and I don't in the least think you've lied to me.
> «налгать» + dative of the wronged party: «налгали» (perfective «налгать», to have lied) takes the dative «мне» — one lies "to" someone in the dative. «вовсе не» again negates emphatically: "I don't in the least think you've lied to me."

Вот то-то и есть, что этого не думаю, потому что всё это, увы, сущая правда!  
That's just the point, that I don't think it, because all of this, alas, is the plain truth!
> Idiom «то-то и есть»: «Вот то-то и есть» is a set spoken formula — "that's just the point," "that's exactly it." The clitic «-то» on «то» emphasizes the demonstrative, and «и есть» insists: "that is precisely the thing."
> «сущая правда» — the plain truth: «сущий» is a bookish, slightly archaic adjective meaning "very, real, sheer" (related to «суть», essence). «сущая правда» — "the absolute truth" — and the interjection «увы» ("alas") give Alyosha's reply a gently elevated, rueful note.

Ну скажите, а Пушкина-то вы читали, «Онегина»-то… Вот вы сейчас говорили о Татьяне?  
But tell me, have you read your Pushkin, 'Onegin' that is... You were speaking just now about Tatyana?"
> Topic-marking clitic «-то»: The hyphenated «-то» attaches to «Пушкина» and «Онегина» to flag them as the known topic under discussion — "as for Pushkin… 'Onegin,' that is." This is the emphatic topic «-то», distinct from the indefinite «кто-то»/«что-то».
> Animate-style accusative of the title: «Пушкина» is the animate accusative (= genitive) of the author's name, object of «читали». «Онегина» likewise takes the animate-genitive accusative because the title names a person — Russian treats «Онегин» as animate even as a book-title.

— Нет, еще не читал, но хочу прочесть.  
"No, I haven't read it yet, but I mean to.
> Imperfective process vs perfective goal: «еще не читал» (imperfective: "I haven't yet been reading / done any reading") states the bare unaccomplished fact, while «хочу прочесть» pairs it with the perfective «прочесть» — to read it through to the end. The aspect contrast neatly opposes "not yet begun" to "intend to complete."

Я без предрассудков, Карамазов.  
I'm without prejudices, Karamazov.
> Verbless «без» + genitive: A copula-less self-description: «без предрассудков» — "[I am] without prejudices." «без» governs the genitive, here genitive plural «предрассудков» (of «предрассудок», prejudice). The clipped declaration suits Kolya's brisk self-portrait.

Я хочу выслушать и ту и другую сторону.  
I want to hear out both the one side and the other.
> Correlative «и… и» with «тот/другой»: «и ту и другую» — "both the one and the other" — uses the demonstrative «та» and «другая» in the accusative, agreeing with «сторону» (acc. of «сторона», side). The doubled «и… и» means "both… and."
> «выслушать» — to hear out fully: The prefix «вы-» on «слушать» gives «выслушать» the perfective sense of hearing someone out completely, to the end — not just "listen" but "give a full hearing to." It underscores Kolya's claim to fair-minded openness.

Зачем вы спросили?  
Why do you ask?"
> «Зачем» — "to what end": «Зачем» asks purpose — "for what reason, what for" — as against «почему» (cause). «спросили» is the perfective past of «спросить», the completed single act of asking.

— Так.  
"No reason."
> «Так.» — "no particular reason": Standing alone, «Так» is a dismissive non-answer: "just because," "no reason." It deflects the question, leaving the motive deliberately unspoken — a tiny, very Russian conversational shrug.

— Скажите, Карамазов, вы ужасно меня презираете? — отрезал вдруг Коля и весь вытянулся пред Алешей, как бы став в позицию.  
"Tell me, Karamazov, do you despise me terribly?" Kolya snapped suddenly and drew himself up to his full height before Alyosha, as if striking a pose.
> «ужасно» as intensifier: «ужасно» (literally "terribly," from «ужас», horror) has bleached into a mere intensifier — "awfully, dreadfully much." Here it amplifies «презираете» (you despise): "do you despise me terribly?"
> «отрезал» — "snapped": Literally "cut off," «отрезал» (perfective «отрезать») is used of speech to mean to say something sharply and curtly, to snap. It conveys the abrupt, challenging way Kolya throws out his question.
> Perfective gerund «став»: «став» is the perfective past gerund («деепричастие») of «стать» — "having taken up [a stance]." Softened by «как бы» ("as if"), it adds an attendant, completed circumstance to the main verb «вытянулся»: he drew himself up, as if having struck a pose.

— Сделайте одолжение, без обиняков.  
"Do me the kindness, no beating about the bush."
> «Сделайте одолжение» — "do me the kindness": A set polite formula, "do me a favor / be so good" — «одолжение» is a favor or kindness. Here it prefaces a demand for blunt honesty, lending a faintly old-fashioned courtesy to Kolya's challenge.
> «без обиняков» — "without circumlocution": «обиняк» (mostly fossilized in this plural phrase) means a roundabout hint or evasion; «без обиняков» means "plainly, straight out, no beating about the bush." Kolya demands Alyosha speak directly.

— Презираю вас? — с удивлением посмотрел на него Алеша.  
"Despise you?" Alyosha looked at him in astonishment.
> Subjectless echo with dropped «я»: Alyosha drops the pronoun «я» — the first-person ending of «презираю» already carries it — and turns Kolya's word into an astonished echo-question: "Despise you?". The bare verb form is enough to mark person.
> Instrumental of manner «с удивлением»: «с удивлением» ("with astonishment") is «с» + instrumental expressing the manner of the gaze. Russian regularly builds such adverbial manner-phrases from an abstract noun in the instrumental.

— Да за что же?  
"Why, whatever for?
> «за что же» — "whatever for?": «за что» ("for what, on what grounds") with the emphatic «же» and opening «Да» voices Alyosha's bewildered protest — "but whatever for?". «за» + accusative «что» here names the grounds of an attitude.

Мне только грустно, что прелестная натура, как ваша, еще и не начавшая жить, уже извращена всем этим грубым вздором.  
I only feel sad that so fine a nature as yours, one that hasn't even begun to live, should already be warped by all this coarse nonsense."
> Dative-subject «мне грустно»: «Мне грустно» is the classic impersonal experiencer construction: no nominative subject, the person in the dative («мне»), the state in an invariable predicate adverb («грустно», "it is sad"). "I feel sad" is literally "to me [it is] sad."
> Participle + short passive participle: «начавшая» is a past active participle ("that has [not yet] begun") agreeing with «натура»; «извращена» is the short-form past passive participle of «извратить» ("is warped, corrupted"). Together they pack two verbal ideas into adjectival modifiers — a hallmark of literary syntax.
> «вздор» — rubbish, nonsense: «вздор» is a strong, dismissive word for nonsense or twaddle. «грубым… вздором» (instrumental after the passive «извращена»: "warped BY coarse nonsense") names the agent of the corruption, with «грубый» (coarse, crude) sharpening the contempt.

— Об моей натуре не заботьтесь, — не без самодовольства перебил Коля, — а что я мнителен, то это так.  
"Don't trouble yourself about my nature," Kolya interrupted, not without self-satisfaction, "but that I'm suspicious — that's true enough.
> Negated imperative + «о» + prepositional: «не заботьтесь» is the negated polite imperative of «заботиться» (a «-ся» verb, "to worry/care about"). Its object stands after «об» in the prepositional («о моей натуре»). Note the older «Об» before «м-» rather than modern «О».
> «мнителен» — suspicious, anxious: «мнительный» (here the short form «мнителен», "is suspicious") means inclined to suspicion, distrust, and morbid self-doubt — a key trait of Kolya's. The short adjective predicates a characteristic state.
> «не без» — litotes: «не без самодовольства» ("not without self-satisfaction") is litotes: a double negative that affirms mildly. The narrator's understated «не без» quietly underlines Kolya's vanity even as he protests humility.

Глупо мнителен, грубо мнителен.  
Stupidly suspicious, crudely suspicious.
> Adverb + short adjective: Two parallel verbless predications: the adverbs «глупо» (stupidly) and «грубо» (crudely) modify the short adjective «мнителен». The clipped, repeated structure dramatizes Kolya's masochistic self-accusation.

Вы сейчас усмехнулись, мне и показалось, что вы как будто…  
You smirked just now, and it seemed to me as if you were somehow..."
> Impersonal «показалось» + dative: «показалось» ("it seemed," perfective «показаться») is impersonal, with the experiencer in the dative «мне» and no nominative subject. The «и» reinforces the causal flow: "and so it seemed to me."
> Trailing «как будто»: «как будто» ("as if, as though") introduces a comparison that Kolya leaves unfinished — the sentence breaks off into a dash. The dangling «как будто…» enacts his hesitant, suspicious half-thought.

— Ах, я усмехнулся совсем другому.  
"Ah, I was smirking at something else entirely.
> «усмехнуться» + dative cause: «усмехнуться» (perfective «-ся»: to give a slight smile/smirk) takes the dative for what one smiles at, hence «другому» (dative of «другое», "at something else"). «совсем» ("entirely") strengthens the contrast: I smirked at a quite different thing.

Видите, чему я усмехнулся: я недавно прочел один отзыв одного заграничного немца, жившего в России, об нашей теперешней учащейся молодежи: «Покажите вы, — он пишет, — русскому школьнику карту звездного неба, о которой он до тех пор не имел никакого понятия, и он завтра же возвратит вам эту карту исправленною».  
You see what I was smirking at: I recently read a remark by some German from abroad who'd been living in Russia, about our students of the present day: 'Show a Russian schoolboy,' he writes, 'a map of the starry sky that he'd had no notion of until then, and the next day he'll hand it back to you corrected.'
> Past active participle modifying a noun: «жившего» is the past active participle of «жить» ("who had been living"), agreeing in the animate-accusative-genitive with «немца». It compresses a «который»-clause ("a German who was living in Russia") into a single declined modifier.
> Relative «который» in the prepositional: «о которой» — "of which" — shows «который» agreeing with «карта» in feminine singular but taking the prepositional case its own clause requires (after «о»). «не имел никакого понятия» is genitive-of-negation idiom: "had no notion whatever."
> Instrumental predicate of result; «-ою» ending: «возвратит» is the perfective future ("will return"); «исправленною» is the instrumental of the past passive participle «исправленный», a result-predicate — he returns the map "[as] corrected." The «-ою» is the older bookish variant of the feminine instrumental «-ой».

Никаких знаний и беззаветное самомнение — вот что хотел сказать немец про русского школьника.  
No knowledge whatever and a boundless conceit — that's what the German meant to say about the Russian schoolboy."
> «самомнение» — conceit: «самомнение» (literally "self-opinion") means conceit, overweening self-regard. «беззаветный» — "unstinting, boundless, selfless" — is normally laudatory (of devotion); pinned to «самомнение» it sharpens the irony: a wholehearted, limitless conceit.
> Correlative «вот что»: «вот что» — "this is what" — gathers up the preceding phrase as the comment of the sentence, with «что» functioning as a relative after the demonstrative «то»/«вот». It frames the German's implied meaning with summarizing emphasis.

— Ах, да ведь это совершенно верно! — захохотал вдруг Коля, — верниссимо, точь-в-точь!  
"Ah, but that's perfectly true!" Kolya suddenly roared with laughter. "Verissimo, exactly right!
> Appealing particle «ведь»: «ведь» appeals to shared, self-evident knowledge — "why, after all, you see." With the opening «да» it bursts out as enthusiastic agreement: "but that's perfectly true!" «верно» here is the short adjective/adverb "correct, true."
> «верниссимо» and «точь-в-точь»: «верниссимо» is Kolya's jokey mock-Italian superlative built on Russian «верно» (true) — "verissimo, most true!" — pure schoolboy showing-off. «точь-в-точь» is a colloquial reduplication meaning "exactly, to a T."

Браво, немец!  
Bravo, German!
> «Браво» as address: The Italian-derived «Браво» ("well done!") plus the bare nominative «немец» (German) as a form of address gives Kolya's exclamation a theatrical, applauding flourish — he cheers the absent foreigner like an audience member.

Однако ж чухна не рассмотрел и хорошей стороны, а, как вы думаете?  
And yet the Finn missed the good side of it, don't you think?
> «чухна» — a slur for a Finn: «чухна» (or «чухонец») is a disparaging old term for a Finn or Estonian of the Petersburg region. Kolya, having said "German," now carelessly downgrades the foreigner to a despised «чухна» — casual ethnic contempt that Dostoevsky lets stand as characterization.
> Genitive of negation with «и»: «не рассмотрел… хорошей стороны» puts the object in the genitive under negation — "did not make out the good side." The «и» ("also, even") adds: he failed to see even the good side. «рассмотреть» is perfective: to discern, make out.
> «Однако ж» — "and yet": «Однако» means "however, yet"; the appended «ж» (a short form of «же») reinforces it conversationally — "and yet, mind you." Such tacked-on particles texture Kolya's restless speech.

Самомнение — это пусть, это от молодости, это исправится, если только надо, чтоб это исправилось, но зато и независимый дух, с самого чуть не детства, зато смелость мысли и убеждения, а не дух ихнего колбаснического раболепства пред авторитетами… Но все-таки немец хорошо сказал!  
Conceit — never mind that, that comes from being young, it'll right itself, if it even needs to right itself at all — but on the other hand there's an independent spirit from almost the cradle, on the other hand a boldness of thought and conviction, and not the spirit of their sausage-eating servility before authority... But all the same the German put it well!
> Reflexive «исправиться» and «чтоб» + past: «исправится / исправилось» is the middle «-ся» verb "to right itself, be corrected." In «чтоб это исправилось», the contracted «чтоб» (= «чтобы») takes the past-form irrealis to express a willed/hypothetical outcome — "so that it should right itself."
> Concessive «пусть» and «зато»: «пусть» ("let it be, never mind") concedes a point, set against «зато» ("but in compensation, on the other hand"). Kolya grants the conceit only to insist on a counterweight: the «независимый дух» (independent spirit).
> «колбасник» and «раболепство»: «колбаснический» derives from «колбасник» ("sausage-maker"), a contemptuous nickname for Germans; «раболепство» (from «раб», slave) means cringing servility. The genitive chain «колбаснического раболепства пред авторитетами» — "sausage-eating servility before authorities" — drips xenophobic scorn.
> Substandard «ихний»: «ихнего» is the genitive of «ихний», a colloquial, non-standard possessive "their" formed from the indeclinable «их». Its grammatically "incorrect" flavor marks Kolya's lapse into looser, racier speech in the heat of his tirade.

Браво, немец!  
Bravo, German!

Хотя все-таки немцев надо душить.  
Though all the same the Germans ought to be throttled.
> Impersonal «надо» + infinitive, genitive object: «надо» ("one must, it is necessary") heads an impersonal construction with the infinitive «душить» and no nominative subject. «немцев» is animate-genitive plural serving as object: "[one] must throttle the Germans."
> Concessive «хотя»: «Хотя» ("although, even though") opens a concessive thought, reinforced by «все-таки» ("all the same, nonetheless"). Kolya undercuts his own praise of the German with a flippant "though all the same the Germans ought to be throttled."

Пусть они там сильны в науках, а их все-таки надо душить…  
Let them be strong in the sciences over there, but all the same they ought to be throttled..."
> Concessive «пусть» + contrastive «а»: «Пусть они… сильны» — "let them be strong" — concedes a point with «пусть» plus the short adjective «сильны» (predicative "are strong"). The contrastive «а» then pivots to the reservation: "but all the same they ought to be throttled."

— За что же душить? — улыбнулся Алеша.  
"But why throttle them?" Alyosha smiled.
> «За что же» + bare infinitive: «За что» asks the grounds ("for what," «за» + acc. «что»), sharpened by «же». The lone infinitive «душить» without a finite verb voices the rhetorical question economically — "but what for, throttle them?".

— Ну я соврал, может быть, соглашаюсь.  
"Well, I made it up, maybe, I grant you that.
> Perfective «соврал» vs reflexive «соглашаюсь»: «соврал» is the perfective ("I told a lie, made it up"), a single completed slip; «соглашаюсь» is the «-ся» verb «соглашаться» (to agree), imperfective present — "I grant it, I agree." The «-ся» here is lexical, the verb existing only in this form.

Я иногда ужасный ребенок, и когда рад чему, то не удерживаюсь и готов наврать вздору.  
Sometimes I'm a terrible child, and when I'm glad about something I can't hold myself in and I'm ready to spout any old rubbish.
> Short adjective «рад» + «когда… то»: «рад» is a short adjective with no long form, "glad" (here «рад чему» — glad at/of something, with dative «чему»). The «когда… то» frame links the condition to «не удерживаюсь» (the «-ся» verb «удерживаться», to restrain oneself).
> «наврать вздору» — "to spout rubbish": «наврать» (perfective, prefix «на-» = "a whole lot") plus «вздору» — the partitive genitive of «вздор» (nonsense) — means to reel off a heap of nonsense. «готов» is the short adjective "ready, liable to."

Слушайте, мы с вами, однако же, здесь болтаем о пустяках, а этот доктор там что-то долго застрял.  
Listen, though, the two of us are standing here gabbling about trifles, while that doctor in there has got stuck for ages over something.
> «болтать» and «пустяки»: «болтать» is colloquial "to chatter, gab"; «пустяки» (from «пустой», empty) are trifles, trivialities. "We're chattering about trifles" — Kolya abruptly deflates the high talk, with «о пустяках» in the prepositional after «о».
> «застрять» — to get stuck: «застрял» (perfective «застрять») literally means to get stuck or jammed; of a person it means to be held up, to linger over-long. "That doctor in there has got stuck for ages over something" — said with impatient familiarity.

Впрочем, он, может, там и «мамашу» осмотрит и эту Ниночку безногую.  
Though perhaps in there he's examining 'mamma' too, and that legless Ninochka.
> «мамаша» — affectionate-folksy "mamma": «мамаша» is a warm, slightly folksy or condescending word for "mother / mamma." Kolya sets it in quotation marks, half-mockingly adopting the household's own name for the captain's invalid wife. The expressive suffix carries the tone.
> «Ниночка» — diminutive of Nina: «Ниночка» is the affectionate diminutive of «Нина» (Nina), conveying tenderness toward the crippled girl. «безногая» ("legless," from «без» + «нога») bluntly names her disability — the warm name set against the harsh adjective.

Знаете, эта Ниночка мне понравилась.  
You know, I took a liking to that Ninochka.
> «понравиться» + dative experiencer: «понравилась» (perfective «понравиться», to come to please) puts the one who likes in the dative («мне») and the thing liked in the nominative («Ниночка») — literally "Ninochka became pleasing to me." This is the standard Russian way to say "I took a liking to her."

Она вдруг мне прошептала, когда я выходил: «Зачем вы не приходили раньше?»  
She suddenly whispered to me as I was leaving: 'Why didn't you come sooner?'
> Perfective whisper against imperfective leaving: «прошептала» (perfective, "whispered [once]") is the punctual event; «когда я выходил» uses the imperfective «выходил» ("as I was going out") for the ongoing background action during which it happened. A textbook aspect pairing of event-against-process.
> «Зачем не…» + imperfective "come": «приходили» is the imperfective prefixed motion verb «приходить» (to come, repeatedly/habitually). Nina's reproach «Зачем вы не приходили раньше?» — "why did you not [ever] come sooner?" — uses the imperfective for the absence of visits over time.

И таким голосом, с укором!  
And in such a voice, with such reproach!
> Instrumental of manner: «таким голосом» ("in such a voice") is a bare instrumental of manner, and «с укором» ("with reproach") is «с» + instrumental. Russian uses the instrumental, with or without «с», to express the manner in which something is done or said.

Мне кажется, она ужасно добрая и жалкая.  
I think she's terribly kind and pitiable."
> Impersonal «мне кажется»: «Мне кажется» ("it seems to me," «казаться» + dative experiencer) is an impersonal frame with no nominative subject. It introduces Kolya's impression, with «ужасно» again as intensifier and the long adjectives «добрая», «жалкая» predicated of Nina.
> «жалкая» — pitiable: «жалкий» (from «жаль», pity) means pitiful, pathetic, evoking compassion — not contempt. Paired with «добрая» (kind), it expresses tender pity: Nina is "terribly kind and pitiable," a key note of Dostoevskian compassion.

— Да, да!  
"Yes, yes!

Вот вы будете ходить, вы увидите, что это за существо.  
Once you start coming, you'll see what sort of creature he is.
> Compound future + a multidirectional verb: «будете» (future of «быть») plus the imperfective infinitive «ходить» forms the imperfective compound future: 'you will [habitually] come/visit'. «ходить» is the multidirectional motion verb — repeated, round-trip visiting, not a single trip — exactly suited to a habit just begun.
> The idiom «что за» — 'what sort of': «что за» plus a nominative noun is a fixed exclamatory-interrogative frame meaning 'what kind of': «что это за существо» = 'what sort of creature this is'. «за» here does not govern its usual case; the whole turn is set.
> «существо» — a creature, a being: A neuter noun meaning 'creature, living being', warmer and more soulful than 'animal'. Used here of the sick boy Ilyusha, it carries tenderness — a small soul to be cherished.

Вам очень полезно узнавать вот такие существа, чтоб уметь ценить и еще многое другое, что узнаете именно из знакомства с этими существами, — с жаром заметил Алеша.  
It does you a great deal of good to get to know creatures like this — it teaches you how to value things, and much else besides, which you learn precisely from such acquaintance," Alyosha remarked warmly.
> Dative subject of an impersonal predicate: There is no nominative subject: the experiencer «вам» stands in the dative and the predicate is the invariable «полезно» ('[it is] useful/good [for you]') plus an infinitive. This dative-experiencer frame is everywhere in Dostoevsky's inner life.
> Purpose clause «чтоб(ы)» + infinitive: «чтоб» (a clipped «чтобы») introduces purpose — 'in order to be able to value'. When the subject is the same as the main clause, «чтобы» takes a bare infinitive rather than a past-form verb.
> Relative «что» with a fronted «именно»: «что» here functions as a relative pronoun ('which you learn'), and the particle «именно» ('precisely, exactly') sharpens the focus on the source of the learning. The whole is a chain of dependent clauses typical of bookish 19th-century syntax.

— Это лучше всего вас переделает.  
"It will remake you better than anything else."
> Comparative «лучше» as a superlative: «лучше» is the suppletive comparative of «хороший/хорошо» ('better'); combined with the genitive «всего» ('of all') it yields the superlative force 'best of all, better than anything'.
> «переделать» — to remake, do over: Perfective verb with the prefix «пере-» ('re-, anew'): literally 'to make over'. Applied to a person, it means to remake the self — to transform one's character.

— О, как я жалею и браню всего себя, что не приходил раньше! — с горьким чувством воскликнул Коля.  
"Oh, how I reproach myself and curse myself for not having come sooner!" Kolya exclaimed with bitter feeling.
> Reflexive pronoun «себя»: «себя» is the reflexive object pronoun pointing back to the subject ('I curse my whole self'); «всего» intensifies it. «себя» has no nominative and serves any person — distinct from the verbal clitic «-ся».
> Imperfective past of negated repeated motion: «приходил» is the imperfective past of «приходить» ('to come/arrive', prefixed motion). Under negation the imperfective stresses that the coming simply never took place over a stretch of time — 'kept not coming'.
> «бранить» — to scold, berate: A somewhat bookish verb for scolding or upbraiding. Paired with «жалею» ('I regret') it heightens Kolya's self-flagellating outburst.

— Да, очень жаль.  
"Yes, it's a great pity.
> Impersonal «жаль» — 'it's a pity': «жаль» is an invariable predicative ('[it is] a pity, a shame') used in subjectless constructions; the person who feels the pity, if named, goes in the dative. Here it stands alone as a terse impersonal reply.

Вы видели сами, какое радостное вы произвели впечатление на бедного малютку!  
You saw for yourself what a joyful impression you made on the poor little fellow!
> Split noun phrase for exclamatory weight: The adjective «какое радостное» ('what a joyful') is torn from its noun «впечатление» and fronted, with the subject «вы» and verb «произвели» wedged between. Free word order lets the exclamatory adjective lead and the noun land as the comment.
> «малютка» — little one, tiny child: An affectionate diminutive for a small child ('little fellow, mite'), built on «малый». The accusative «малютку» softens the whole sentence with tenderness toward the dying boy.

И как он убивался, вас ожидая!  
And how he wore himself out waiting for you!"
> «убиваться» — to be wracked with grief: Reflexive «убиваться» (literally 'to kill oneself') means to grieve or fret oneself to exhaustion, to pine. The «-ся» gives the violent verb «убить» an intransitive, self-directed emotional sense.
> Imperfective gerund «ожидая» — 'while waiting': «ожидая» is the present (imperfective) деепричастие of «ожидать», naming a simultaneous attendant action: 'as he waited for you'. The object «вас» precedes it, a bookish inversion. The gerund shares the main subject — the boy.

— Не говорите мне!  
"Don't tell me that!
> Negated polite imperative: «говорите» is the imperative with the plural/polite «-те», negated by «не»: 'don't tell me'. Negated commands in Russian normally take the imperfective, viewing the action as one to be wholly avoided.

Вы меня растравляете.  
You're rubbing salt in the wound.
> «растравлять» — to reopen a wound, inflame: Imperfective «растравлять» (perf. «растравить») means to irritate a sore, to reopen and inflame a wound — literally and figuratively. Our English 'rubbing salt in the wound' captures the metaphor of fresh, deliberate pain.

А впрочем, мне поделом: я не приходил из самолюбия, из эгоистического самолюбия и подлого самовластия, от которого всю жизнь не могу избавиться, хотя всю жизнь ломаю себя.  
But I deserve it: I didn't come out of vanity, out of a selfish vanity and a base craving to dominate, which I've been unable to shake off my whole life, though all my life I keep wrestling with myself.
> «поделом» — it serves (me) right: A colloquial adverb meaning 'deservedly, it serves one right'; «мне поделом» = 'it serves me right'. Frozen from an old phrase 'according to deeds', it carries a tone of rueful self-acceptance.
> «из» + genitive of cause: The preposition «из» governs the genitive and here names motive — 'out of vanity'. The repeated «из самолюбия… из… самовластия» piles up genitive causes, a rhetorical insistence on Kolya's tangled motives.
> The «само-» self-words: Three abstract nouns in «само-» ('self-') chime together: «самолюбие» (vanity, amour-propre), «самовластие» (self-will, the craving to dominate), and later «самоосуждение». The repetition stages a soul obsessively turned on itself.
> Relative «который» governed by «избавиться от»: «который» agrees in gender/number with «самовластие» but takes the genitive case «от которого» demanded by «избавиться от» ('to rid oneself of'). The relative pronoun's case is set by its own clause, not its antecedent.

Я теперь это вижу, я во многом подлец, Карамазов.  
I see it now — in a great many ways I'm a scoundrel, Karamazov."
> Zero-copula present + «во многом»: 'I am a scoundrel' needs no verb 'to be' in the present — the nominative «подлец» simply predicates «я». «во многом» ('in many [respects]', prepositional of «многое») qualifies it: 'in many ways a scoundrel'.
> «подлец» — scoundrel, base wretch: A strong term of moral contempt, 'scoundrel, blackguard', from «подлый» ('base, vile'). Kolya turns it on himself — a Dostoevskian gesture of self-accusation before one he admires.

— Нет, вы прелестная натура, хотя и извращенная, и я слишком понимаю, почему вы могли иметь такое влияние на этого благородного и болезненно восприимчивого мальчика! — горячо ответил Алеша.  
"No, you have a charming nature, even if a warped one, and I understand only too well why you could have had such an influence on that noble and morbidly sensitive boy!" Alyosha answered ardently.
> «прелестная натура» — a charming nature: «прелестный» means 'charming, delightful, lovely'; «натура» (a Latinate loan) here means a person's nature or temperament. Note «прелесть» also carries, in a religious register, the sense of seductive delusion — a faint irony given the «извращенная» that follows.
> Concessive «хотя и» + past passive participle: «хотя и» ('even though, albeit') concedes a point. «извращенная» is a past passive participle from «извратить» ('to pervert, distort'), here a long-form adjective agreeing with «натура»: 'a warped one'.
> Modal past «могли» + infinitive: «могли» (past of «мочь», agreeing with «вы») plus the infinitive «иметь» states past possibility: 'you could have had'. «такое влияние» is the accusative direct object — «влияние» being inanimate neuter, identical to the nominative.
> «болезненно восприимчивый» — morbidly sensitive: «восприимчивый» means 'receptive, impressionable'; the adverb «болезненно» ('painfully, morbidly', from «болезнь», illness) gives the clinical-emotional shade Dostoevsky loves — a too-receptive, sickly-sensitive soul.

— И это вы говорите мне! — вскричал Коля, — а я, представьте, я думал — я уже несколько раз, вот теперь как я здесь, думал, что вы меня презираете!  
"And it's you who says this to me!" cried Kolya. "Just imagine, I thought — several times already, even now that I'm here, I thought — that you despised me!"
> «представьте» as a discourse imperative: The polite imperative of «представить» ('imagine, picture'), here a parenthetical 'just imagine!' — a conversational appeal to the listener rather than a literal command. Its reflexive partner «представьте себе» appears in later segments.
> Reported thought with «что»: «что» ('that') introduces the content of «думал» — a plain reported clause stating a supposed fact: 'I thought that you despised me'. Contrast «чтобы», which would mark a willed or hypothetical outcome.

Если б вы только знали, как я дорожу вашим мнением!  
"If only you knew how much I value your opinion!"
> Counterfactual «если б … знали»: «если б» (clipped «если бы») plus the past-tense «знали» builds the conditional/subjunctive of an unreal wish: 'if only you knew'. The particle «бы/б» plus a past form is Russia's one irrealis mood; «только» ('only, but') heightens the longing.
> «дорожить» governs the instrumental: «дорожить» ('to value, treasure') takes its object in the instrumental, hence «вашим мнением» ('your opinion'). A small set of verbs of valuing, ruling, and using assign the instrumental rather than the accusative.

— Но неужели вы вправду так мнительны?  
"But can you really be so suspicious?
> The incredulous particle «неужели»: «неужели» introduces a question of disbelief — 'can it really be that…?, surely not?'. Like «разве», it colours the question with the speaker's astonishment, here Alyosha's surprise at Kolya's suspiciousness.
> «мнительный» — suspicious, given to brooding: From «мнить» ('to imagine, suppose'), «мнительный» means prone to imagining slights, anxiously suspicious, a hypochondriac of the feelings. The short predicative form «мнительны» agrees with «вы».

В таких летах!  
At your age!
> «в … летах» — 'at … an age': «летах» is the prepositional plural of the suppletive «лета» ('years, age'), used for age where «год» supplies the singular. «в таких летах» = 'at such an age', a fixed locative phrase.

Ну представьте же себе, я именно подумал там в комнате, глядя на вас, когда вы рассказывали, что вы должны быть очень мнительны.  
Well, just imagine — in that very room, watching you while you were telling your story, I thought to myself that you must be very suspicious."
> «представьте себе» with insistent «же»: The reflexive imperative «представьте себе» ('imagine to yourself') is reinforced by the modal particle «же», which adds urgency and appeal — 'do just imagine!'. «себе» is the dative of the reflexive «себя».
> Gerund «глядя» — 'looking at you': «глядя» is the imperfective present деепричастие of «глядеть» ('to look, gaze'), naming a simultaneous action: 'as I looked at you'. It shares the speaker's subject and frames the moment of his thought.
> «должны быть» + instrumental-less predicate: «должны» ('must, ought', agreeing with «вы») plus «быть» expresses inferential necessity — 'you must be'. With the short adjective «мнительны» as predicate, no instrumental appears; short adjectives stay in their predicative form.

— Уж и подумали?  
"You actually thought that?
> Particles «уж» and «и» for incredulous emphasis: «уж» (a reduced «уже») intensifies, and «и» here is an emphatic particle ('even, actually') rather than 'and'. Together they make a teasing, surprised question: 'You actually thought that?'. The perfective «подумали» views the thought as a single act.

Какой, однако же, у вас глаз, видите, видите!  
What an eye you have, though — you see, you see!
> Exclamatory «какой» with a «у вас» possessive: «Какой … глаз» is an exclamatory nominative ('what an eye!'), and possession is expressed with «у вас» (literally 'at you') — Russian's standard way of saying 'you have'. «однако же» ('though, however') with insistent «же» adds a marvelling aside.
> Reduplicated present «видите»: The 2nd-person plural present of «видеть» ('you see'), repeated for excited insistence. Reduplication is a common spoken device in Dostoevsky's dialogue to convey rising emotion.

Бьюсь об заклад, что это было на том месте, когда я про гуся рассказывал.  
I'd lay a wager it was at the point where I was telling about the goose.
> «биться об заклад» — to bet, lay a wager: A fixed idiom: «бьюсь об заклад» = 'I'll bet, I'd lay a wager'. «заклад» is an old word for a stake or pledge; «биться» here is reflexive in its 'contend, wager' sense. Colloquial and slightly archaic.
> «про» + accusative; imperfective narration: «про» governs the accusative ('about the goose', «про гуся» — animate, so genitive-shaped accusative). «рассказывал» is imperfective past, naming the ongoing act of telling, the backdrop against which the thought arose.

Мне именно в этом месте вообразилось, что вы меня глубоко презираете за то, что я спешу выставиться молодцом, и я даже вдруг возненавидел вас за это и начал нести ахинею.  
Right at that point I got it into my head that you deeply despised me for being in such a hurry to show off as a fine fellow, and I suddenly even hated you for it and began talking nonsense.
> Impersonal reflexive «вообразилось» + dative: «вообразилось» is the reflexive «-ся» form used impersonally: the fancy 'imagined itself' to the experiencer «мне» (dative). This middle-voice construction frames the thought as something that came over Kolya rather than something he willed.
> Causal «за то, что» — 'for the fact that': «за то, что» ('for the reason that, because') names the ground of contempt. «выставиться» is a perfective reflexive ('to show oneself off, put oneself forward'); «спешу выставиться» = 'I hurry to show off'.
> «молодец» — a fine fellow (instrumental of role): «молодец» is a term of praise for a brave or dashing fellow ('well done!, good lad'). The instrumental «молодцом» after «выставиться» marks the role assumed — 'to set oneself up as a fine fellow'.
> «нести ахинею» — to talk drivel: A vivid colloquial idiom: «ахинея» is nonsense, rubbish, gibberish, and «нести» (lit. 'to carry') here means to spout it — 'to talk drivel, blather'. The phrase belongs firmly to spoken, slangy register.

Потом мне вообразилось (это уже сейчас, здесь) на том месте, когда я говорил: «Если бы не было бога, то его надо выдумать», что я слишком тороплюсь выставить мое образование, тем более что эту фразу я в книге прочел.  
Then I imagined (this was just now, here) — at the point where I said, "If God did not exist, he would have to be invented" — that I was being too quick to flaunt my education, all the more so since I'd read that phrase in a book.
> Counterfactual «если бы не было» + genitive of negation: «если бы … не было» is the unreal conditional ('if there were no God'); the negated existential «не было» forces its subject «бога» into the genitive. «надо выдумать» is a dative-less impersonal of necessity: 'one would have to invent him'.
> «тем более что» — 'all the more so since': A fixed correlative connective introducing a strengthening reason: 'especially as, all the more because'. It links Kolya's worry to the damning fact that «эту фразу я в книге прочёл» — he'd merely read the phrase.

Но клянусь вам, я торопился выставить не от тщеславия, а так, не знаю отчего, от радости, ей-богу как будто от радости… хотя это глубоко постыдная черта, когда человек всем лезет на шею от радости.  
But I swear to you, I was hurrying to show off not out of conceit, but just so, I don't know why, out of joy — by God, as if out of sheer joy… though it's a deeply shameful trait, when a person throws himself on everyone's neck out of joy.
> The «не … а» correction with «от» + genitive: «не … а» sets up a corrective contrast: 'not out of X, but out of Y'. The motive-marking «от» governs the genitive throughout («от тщеславия… от радости»). «а» is the contrastive coordinator that pivots between the rejected and the true cause.
> «ей-богу» — by God, honestly: A worn-down oath, 'by God, honest to God, I swear', from an old «ей, богу» ('yea, to God'). It is colloquial asseveration, not blasphemy — a marker of earnest, heated speech.
> «лезть на шею» — to throw oneself on someone: An idiom: «лезть (всем) на шею» literally 'to climb onto everyone's neck', i.e. to fling oneself effusively on people, to impose one's affection. «всем» is the dative of «все» ('on everyone').

Я это знаю.  
I know that.

Но я зато убежден теперь, что вы меня не презираете, а всё это я сам выдумал.  
But now, on the other hand, I'm convinced that you don't despise me — I made the whole thing up myself.
> Short passive participle «убеждён» as predicate: «убеждён» is the short (predicative) form of the past passive participle of «убедить» ('to convince'); with implied «я [есть]» it states a resulting state: 'I am convinced'. «зато» ('but on the other hand, to make up for it') pivots the contrast.
> Emphatic «сам» + contrastive «а»: «сам» ('myself, on my own') intensifies the subject — 'I made it all up myself'. The contrastive «а» joins this as a corrective afterthought to the convinced clause; «всё это» is the accusative object.

О Карамазов, я глубоко несчастен.  
Oh, Karamazov, I'm deeply unhappy.
> Short adjective «несчастен»: «несчастен» is the short masculine form of «несчастный» ('unhappy, wretched'), used predicatively after the zero copula. The short form lends a heightened, almost absolute, confessional weight — 'I am [utterly] unhappy'.

Я воображаю иногда бог знает что, что надо мной все смеются, весь мир, и я тогда, я просто готов тогда уничтожить весь порядок вещей.  
Sometimes I imagine God knows what — that everyone is laughing at me, the whole world, and then I'm simply ready to wipe out the entire order of things."
> «бог знает что» — God knows what: A fixed colloquial expression, 'God knows what, all sorts of things', where «бог знает» ('God knows') fronts an indefinite. It conveys wild, uncontrolled imaginings — fitting Kolya's confession of paranoid fancies.
> «смеяться над» + instrumental: «смеяться над» ('to laugh at, mock') governs the instrumental, hence «надо мной» ('at me'). «смеяться» is a verb existing only in the reflexive «-ся» form. The «что»-clause reports the content of his imagining.
> «готов» + perfective infinitive: Short adjective «готов» ('ready') plus the perfective infinitive «уничтожить» ('to destroy [completely]') states readiness for a single, total act — 'ready to wipe out the entire order of things'. The perfective stresses the wholeness of the imagined destruction.

— И мучаете окружающих, — улыбнулся Алеша.  
"And you torment those around you," Alyosha said with a smile.
> Substantivized participle «окружающие»: «окружающих» is the accusative/genitive plural of «окружающие» ('those around one'), a present active participle of «окружать» ('to surround') used as a noun. Such participial nouns are markedly bookish. Note the elliptical «И…», picking up Alyosha's thread mid-sentence.

— И мучаю окружающих, особенно мать.  
"And I torment those around me, especially my mother.
> Animate accusative «мать»: «мать» ('mother', a 3rd-declension feminine in soft «-ь») is the object of «мучаю», in the accusative — which for this noun is identical to the nominative. The bare «особенно мать» ('especially my mother') completes the verb elliptically.

Карамазов, скажите, я очень теперь смешон?  
Karamazov, tell me, am I being very ridiculous just now?"
> Short adjective «смешон» as predicate: «смешон» is the short masculine of «смешной» ('ridiculous, laughable'), used predicatively: 'am I [being] very ridiculous?'. The fleeting vowel «о» appears in the short masculine («смешон», cf. fem. «смешна»).

— Да не думайте же про это, не думайте об этом совсем! — воскликнул Алеша.  
"Don't even think about that — don't think about it at all!" cried Alyosha.
> Imperative framed by «да … же»: The opening «да» here is not 'yes' but an exhortative particle ('come now, do'), and «же» reinforces the negated imperative «не думайте» — together an urgent 'don't even think about it!'. «про это» = «об этом», 'about that'.

— Да и что такое смешон?  
"And anyway, what does ridiculous mean?
> «что такое …» — 'what does … mean?': «что такое X» is the idiom for 'what is X?, what does X mean?'. The opening «Да и» ('and besides, and anyway') links it loosely to the prior turn. The short adjective «смешон» is quoted as the very word under examination.

Мало ли сколько раз бывает или кажется смешным человек?  
How many times does a man turn out to be, or merely seem, ridiculous?
> «мало ли» — 'no end of, who knows how often': «мало ли» (literally 'is it few?') is a fixed idiom meaning 'plenty, no end of, you never know how many' — here with «сколько раз» ('how many times') it shrugs off the question: 'how often does a man seem ridiculous!'. The «ли» is the interrogative particle frozen into the idiom.
> «бывает» (iterative) and predicate instrumental: «бывает» is the iterative imperfective of «быть» ('to be [repeatedly], happen to be'). «кажется … смешным» ('seems ridiculous') takes the predicate in the instrumental — «смешным» — the standard case after «казаться».

Притом же нынче почти все люди со способностями ужасно боятся быть смешными и тем несчастны.  
Besides, nowadays nearly all gifted people are terribly afraid of being ridiculous, and that's what makes them miserable.
> «бояться» + infinitive; predicate instrumental: «боятся» (3rd pl. of «бояться», a «-ся»-only verb 'to fear') plus the infinitive «быть» plus the instrumental predicate «смешными» = 'are afraid of being ridiculous'. The instrumental marks the predicate of «быть» in the infinitive.
> Instrumental «тем» of cause + short adjective: «тем» (instrumental of «то») means 'by that, thereby': 'and are thereby miserable'. The short adjective «несчастны» predicates the gifted people — a compact, bookish way to state cause and result.
> «нынче» — nowadays: A slightly old-fashioned adverb for 'nowadays, these days, today'. Repeated through this passage («нынче… нынче»), it gives Alyosha's social diagnosis the cadence of a sermon on the age.

Меня только удивляет, что вы так рано стали ощущать это, хотя, впрочем, я давно уже замечаю это и не на вас одних.  
The only thing that surprises me is that you began to feel this so early — though, for that matter, I've long been noticing it, and not in you alone.
> Accusative experiencer with «удивляет»: «удивляет» ('surprises') puts its experiencer in the accusative «меня», with the «что»-clause as grammatical subject: 'the only thing that surprises me is that…'. Verbs of emotion like «удивлять, радовать, беспокоить» take an accusative experiencer.
> «один» as 'alone' + «на» + prepositional: «одних» is «один» in the sense 'alone, only' (here prepositional plural agreeing with «вас»): 'not in you alone'. «замечать на ком-то» frames the trait as observed 'on/in' a person; «на вас» is locative prepositional.

Нынче даже почти дети начали уж этим страдать.  
Nowadays even children, almost, have begun to suffer from it.
> «страдать» + instrumental of the ailment: «страдать» ('to suffer [from]') governs the instrumental of the affliction — «этим» ('from this'). «начали … страдать» ('have begun to suffer') uses the perfective «начать» with an imperfective infinitive, the normal phasal pattern.
> «почти дети» — 'children, almost': «почти» ('almost, nearly') here qualifies «дети» ('children'), with «уж» ('already') adding alarm: 'even children, almost, have already begun'. The hedging captures Alyosha's grieved sense of how young the malaise now strikes.

Это почти сумасшествие.  
It's practically a madness.
> Demonstrative «это» as sentence subject: «Это» ('this, it') serves as an invariable pointing subject summing up the whole prior thought, with zero copula before the nominative predicate «сумасшествие» ('madness'): 'this is practically a madness'.

В это самолюбие воплотился черт и залез во всё поколение, именно черт, — прибавил Алеша, вовсе не усмехнувшись, как подумал было глядевший в упор на него Коля.  
The devil has taken on flesh in this vanity and crept into the whole generation — the devil, precisely," Alyosha added, not smiling at all, as Kolya, who had been staring point-blank at him, had supposed he would.
> Fronted «в это самолюбие» + reflexive «воплотился»: Word order puts the goal phrase «в это самолюбие» ('into this vanity') first, with the subject «чёрт» ('the devil') last as the dramatic comment. «воплотился» is the reflexive «-ся» middle of «воплотить» — 'took flesh, became incarnate'.
> Past active participle modifying «Коля»: «глядевший» is the past active participle of «глядеть» ('who had been staring'), agreeing with «Коля» and standing before its noun — a dense bookish modifier replacing a «который»-clause. «в упор» = 'point-blank, straight at'.
> The particle «было» of an aborted action: «было» after a perfective past («подумал было») marks an action begun or supposed but then undone or unrealized: Kolya had started to suppose Alyosha would smile, but he did not. This rare construction signals a thwarted or reversed intention.

— Вы, как и все, — заключил Алеша, — то есть как очень многие, только не надо быть таким, как все, вот что.  
"You're like everyone else," Alyosha concluded, "that is, like a great many people, only one shouldn't be like everyone else — that's the thing."
> «как и все» — 'like everyone else too': «как» introduces a comparison ('like'), and «и» adds 'too, as well' — 'you, like everyone else'. The phrase recurs as a refrain through Alyosha's exhortation, contrasting «все» (everyone) with the call to be «не такой».
> Impersonal «не надо» + instrumental predicate: «не надо» is an impersonal of (negated) necessity — 'one shouldn't'. «быть таким» takes the predicate in the instrumental «таким» ('such, like that'), agreeing in the comparison «как все». The whole is subjectless, a general moral 'one'.

— Даже несмотря на то, что все такие?  
"Even in spite of the fact that everyone is like that?"
> Concessive «несмотря на то, что»: «несмотря на то, что» is the standard concessive connective 'in spite of the fact that, although'; «несмотря на» literally 'not looking at' governs the accusative «то». «даже» ('even') sharpens Kolya's challenge.

— Да, несмотря на то, что все такие.  
"Yes, in spite of the fact that everyone is like that.
> Predicative «такие» — 'everyone is like that': «такие» ('such, like that', nom. pl.) predicates «все» with zero copula: 'everyone is like that'. The demonstrative adjective stands in for a whole described quality, a compact way to refer back to the vanity just discussed.

Один вы и будьте не такой.  
You be the one who isn't.
> Emphatic «один … и будьте»: «Один вы» ('you alone') is fronted for emphasis, and «и» before the imperative «будьте» underscores it: 'you, of all, be the one who isn't [like that]'. «будьте» is the imperative of «быть», with «не такой» ('not such') as predicate.

Вы и в самом деле не такой, как все: вы вот теперь не постыдились же признаться в дурном и даже в смешном.  
And you really aren't like everyone else: just now you weren't ashamed to confess to something bad, and even to something ridiculous.
> «в самом деле» — really, indeed: A fixed adverbial phrase, 'really, in fact, indeed', literally 'in the very deed'. It affirms that Kolya truly is «не такой, как все» — unlike everyone else.
> Reflexive «постыдиться» + «же»; «признаться в»: «постыдились» is the perfective reflexive «постыдиться» ('to be ashamed [to]'), here negated with insistent «же». «признаться в» ('to confess to') governs the prepositional «в дурном… в смешном» — confessing 'to something bad… to something ridiculous'.

А нынче кто в этом сознается?  
And these days who ever admits to that?
> Interrogative «кто» + reflexive «сознаться в»: «кто» ('who') governs masculine singular agreement on its verb. «сознается» is the perfective reflexive «сознаться в» ('to own up to, admit'), governing the prepositional «в этом» ('to that'). A rhetorical question expecting 'no one'.

Никто, да и потребность даже перестали находить в самоосуждении.  
No one — people have even stopped feeling any need for self-reproach.
> Negative pronoun «никто» and negative concord: «Никто» ('no one') answers the prior question. The continuation «перестали находить потребность … в самоосуждении» ('have stopped finding any need for self-reproach') would normally pair with «не»; here the sentence carries the negative sense forward from «никто». «да и» = 'and indeed, and besides'.
> «самоосуждение» — self-condemnation: Another «само-» abstraction ('self-judgement, self-reproach'), in the prepositional after «в». It names the spiritual self-accusation Dostoevsky prizes — and which Alyosha laments the age has abandoned.

Будьте же не такой, как все; хотя бы только вы один оставались не такой, а все-таки будьте не такой.  
Be unlike everyone else, then; even if you alone remained unlike them, still be unlike them."
> Imperative «будьте» with insistent «же»: The imperative of «быть» ('be!') is pressed home by «же», which adds urgency and appeal — 'be unlike everyone, then!'. The exhortation is the rhetorical climax of Alyosha's counsel.
> Concessive «хотя бы» + conditional «оставались»: «хотя бы» ('even if, if only') with the past-form «оставались» builds a concessive-hypothetical: 'even if you alone remained [the only one]'. The «бы» plus past form is the irrealis; «а всё-таки» ('and yet, still') answers it.

— Великолепно!  
"Splendid!
> «великолепно» — splendid, magnificent: An emphatic exclamation of approval, 'splendid! magnificent!', from «великий» + «лепый» (an old word for 'fair, comely'). Kolya's bookish enthusiasm shows in his reach for the grand word.

Я в вас не ошибся.  
I wasn't mistaken in you.
> Reflexive «ошибиться в» + prepositional: «ошибся» is the perfective reflexive «ошибиться» ('to be mistaken, err'), a «-ся» verb; «ошибиться в ком-то» ('to be wrong about someone') governs the prepositional «в вас». 'I wasn't mistaken in you.'

Вы способны утешить.  
You know how to comfort a person.
> Short adjective «способны» + infinitive: «способны» is the short plural of «способный» ('able, capable'); with the infinitive «утешить» ('to comfort, console') it means 'you are able to comfort'. The short form predicates «вы» directly after the zero copula.

О, как я стремился к вам, Карамазов, как давно уже ищу встречи с вами!  
Oh, how I longed to come to you, Karamazov, how long I've been seeking a meeting with you!
> Exclamatory «как» + aspect contrast: Two «как»-exclamations ('how I longed… how long I've been seeking'). «стремился к» (imperf. past + dative after «к») names sustained yearning; «ищу» is imperfective present for an ongoing search continuing into now — 'I have long been seeking'.
> «искать» + genitive of the abstract object: «искать» ('to seek') takes the genitive for abstract or sought-after objects, hence «встречи» ('a meeting') rather than accusative. «с вами» ('with you') uses «с» + instrumental of accompaniment.

Неужели и вы обо мне тоже думали?  
Did you really think about me too?
> «неужели» + «обо мне» (prepositional of topic): «неужели» frames an incredulous question ('did you really…?'). «думать о» ('to think about') governs the prepositional, with the buffer form «обо мне» before the consonant cluster. «и… тоже» = 'you too, as well'.

Давеча вы говорили, что вы обо мне тоже думали?  
Just now you said that you'd thought about me too?"
> «давеча» — a little while ago: A colloquial, now archaic adverb for 'a short while ago, earlier today, just now'. It belongs to spoken 19th-century Russian and lends Kolya's eager recollection a homely, period flavour.

— Да, я слышал об вас и об вас тоже думал… и если отчасти и самолюбие заставило вас теперь это спросить, то это ничего.  
"Yes, I'd heard about you, and I'd thought about you too… and even if it was partly vanity that made you ask me this just now, that's nothing."
> Archaic «об вас» for «о вас»: Standard modern usage is «о вас»; «об вас» (with the buffer «об» before a vowel-less pronoun) is a 19th-century/colloquial variant. «слышать о» and «думать о» both take the prepositional of the topic.
> Conditional «если … то» + accusative object: «если … то это ничего» is a real conditional ('even if … that's nothing'). «заставило вас» ('made you', from «заставить» + accusative + infinitive) puts the compelled person in the accusative; «и» here = 'even'.

— Знаете, Карамазов, наше объяснение похоже на объяснение в любви, — каким-то расслабленным и стыдливым голосом проговорил Коля.  
"You know, Karamazov, our talk is rather like a declaration of love," Kolya said in a voice gone somehow limp and bashful.
> «объяснение в любви» — a declaration of love: A set phrase: «объяснение в любви» is the formal 'declaration of love'. The same word «объяснение» ('explanation, talk, having-it-out') opens the sentence in its plainer sense, so Kolya's quip turns on the double meaning — their earnest 'talk' resembling a love-declaration.
> Instrumental of manner + indefinite «каким-то»: «голосом» is the instrumental of manner ('in a voice'), with the adjectives «расслабленным… стыдливым» agreeing in the instrumental. «каким-то» (от «-то») marks a specific-but-hard-to-name quality — 'in a somehow limp and bashful voice'.

— Это не смешно, не смешно?  
"That isn't ridiculous, is it — not ridiculous?"
> Negated short adjective as anxious tag: «не смешно» (negated short neuter «смешно» predicating «это») is repeated as an anxious self-checking question — 'it's not ridiculous, is it, not ridiculous?'. The doubling renders Kolya's vulnerable need for reassurance.

— Совсем не смешно, да хоть бы и смешно, так это ничего, потому что хорошо, — светло улыбнулся Алеша.  
"Not ridiculous at all, and even if it were, that's nothing, because it's good," Alyosha said with a bright smile.
> Concessive «хоть бы и» — 'even if it were': «хоть бы и» ('even if, suppose it were') concedes the worst case: 'even if it were ridiculous'. The «бы» carries hypothetical force; «да» opens with a conversational 'and even'. The reassurance lands in «так это ничего».
> Causal «потому что» + impersonal «хорошо»: «потому что» ('because') introduces the reason, and «хорошо» ('[it is] good') is an impersonal predicative standing alone — 'because it's good'. Alyosha's verdict is delivered in the simplest, warmest subjectless form.

— А знаете, Карамазов, согласитесь, что и вам самим теперь немного со мною стыдно… Я вижу по глазам, — как-то хитро, но и с каким-то почти счастьем усмехнулся Коля.  
"And you know, Karamazov, you must admit that even you yourself feel a little embarrassed with me now… I can see it in your eyes," Kolya said with a sly grin, yet with a kind of almost happy look.
> Dative «вам самим» of the embarrassed experiencer: «стыдно» ('[it is] embarrassing/shameful') is an impersonal predicative whose experiencer stands in the dative — «вам самим» ('to you yourself', with intensifying «сам» also dative). «согласитесь» is the polite imperative 'you must admit'.
> «усмехнуться» — to smirk, give a half-smile: «усмехнуться» (perfective reflexive) is a knowing, slight smile or smirk — distinct from open «улыбнуться». The adverb «хитро» ('slyly, cunningly') sharpens it into Kolya's shrewd, half-delighted grin.

— Чего же это стыдно?  
"Embarrassed about what?"
> Genitive «чего» with impersonal «стыдно»: «стыдно чего-то» ('ashamed/embarrassed of something') governs the genitive, hence the interrogative «чего» ('of what?'). The particle «же» adds challenge — 'embarrassed about what, then?'. An impersonal, subjectless retort.

— А зачем вы покраснели?  
"Then why did you blush?"
> «зачем» + perfective «покраснели»: «зачем» asks 'why, what for?'. «покраснели» is the perfective past of «покраснеть» ('to blush, redden'), viewing the blush as a single completed event Kolya pounces on. The opening «А» is the contrastive conversational hinge — 'then why…?'.

— Да это вы так сделали, что я покраснел! — засмеялся Алеша и действительно весь покраснел.  
"Why, it's you who made me blush!" Alyosha laughed, and indeed he went quite red.
> «да» as a particle, and a result clause: Here «да» is not 'yes' but an emphatic opening particle ('Why, ...!'), colouring the retort. The «что я покраснел» clause is a result: «так сделали… что» = 'did it in such a way that…', with «что» the subordinator opening a dependent clause.
> Fronted «вы» for emphasis: The cleft-like word order throws «вы» (you) into focus — 'it's YOU who made me blush'. Free case-marked word order lets Russian foreground the new, accusing information rather than fix it by position.
> «покраснеть» — to redden, blush: Perfective of «краснеть», literally 'to go red'; built on «красный» (red). The prefix «по-» marks the completed onset of the blush. Echoed deliberately by «весь покраснел» — 'went quite red all over'.

— Ну да, немного стыдно, бог знает отчего, не знаю отчего… — бормотал он, почти даже сконфузившись.  
"Well, yes, I am a little embarrassed, God knows why, I don't know why…" he muttered, almost flustered now.
> Impersonal «стыдно» — the experiencer construction: «стыдно» ('it is shameful / I feel ashamed') is an impersonal predicative with no nominative subject; the person who feels it stands implied in the dative. Dostoevsky's characters live inside exactly this dative-experiencer frame of half-conscious feeling.
> Perfective past gerund «сконфузившись»: A «деепричастие» in «-вшись» from the reflexive «сконфузиться» (to get flustered), meaning 'having become flustered'. It compresses an attendant circumstance — 'he muttered, [by now] almost flustered' — sharing the subject of «бормотал».
> «бормотать» — to mutter: Imperfective, onomatopoeic — to mumble indistinctly under one's breath. The imperfective past paints the manner of speech as an ongoing texture rather than a single completed utterance.

— О, как я вас люблю и ценю в эту минуту, именно за то, что и вам чего-то стыдно со мной!  
"Oh, how I love you and prize you at this moment, precisely because you too feel embarrassed about something with me!
> «за то, что» — causal correlative + another dative-experiencer: «за то, что» ('for the very fact that') is the demonstrative «то» governed by «за» plus the subordinator «что». Inside it sits another impersonal «вам… стыдно» — 'you too feel embarrassed', the experiencer «вам» in the dative.
> «чего-то» — genitive after «стыдно», plus indefinite «-то»: «стыдно» governs the genitive of what one is ashamed of, here «чего-то» ('of something'). The clitic «-то» makes it a specific-but-unnamed something, not 'anything at all'.
> Imperfective present of strong feeling: «люблю… ценю» (I love… I prize) are imperfective presents — the only present Russian has — naming a standing state of the heart held «в эту минуту», 'at this very moment'.

Потому что и вы точно я! — в решительном восторге воскликнул Коля.  
Because you're exactly like me!" Kolya exclaimed in utter rapture.
> Zero copula: «вы точно я»: 'You're exactly like me' has no verb 'to be' — the present-tense copula is simply absent, and both pronouns sit bare in the nominative. «точно» here is the comparative 'just like / exactly'.
> Inverted order: adverbial-verb-subject: The dialogue tag leads with the prepositional phrase «в решительном восторге» ('in utter rapture'), then the perfective «воскликнул», then the subject «Коля» last. Inversion is the standard rhythm of Russian narrative attribution.
> «восторг» — rapture, ecstasy: A keyword of Dostoevsky's emotional register: not mere delight but overpowering, almost spiritual exaltation. «в решительном восторге» = caught up in sheer, decisive rapture — fitting for the boy Kolya's hero-worship of Alyosha.

Щеки его пылали, глаза блестели.  
His cheeks were burning, his eyes were shining.
> Imperfective past for vivid description: Two imperfective pasts, «пылали» (were burning) and «блестели» (were shining), hold a state open before the eye — the standing background that imperfective aspect supplies, not events that move the story on.
> Postposed possessive «его»: The frozen genitive pronoun «его» ('his') follows its noun — «щеки его» rather than «его щёки» — a mildly elevated, literary placement that adds weight and rhythm to the description.
> «пылать» — to blaze, flame: Stronger and more poetic than «гореть» (to burn): to flame up, be aflame. Applied to cheeks it conveys a feverish, passionate flush — Kolya is literally lit up with feeling.

— Послушайте, Коля, вы, между прочим, будете и очень несчастный человек в жизни, — сказал вдруг отчего-то Алеша.  
"Listen, Kolya, among other things, you're going to be a very unhappy man in life," Alyosha said suddenly, for some reason.
> Compound future of «быть» as full predicate: «будете» is the future of «быть»; here it stands not as an auxiliary but as the copula proper — 'you will be a very unhappy man'. With a present-tense or future copula the predicate noun can remain nominative, as «несчастный человек» does here.
> «отчего-то» — indefinite 'for some reason': «отчего-то» is the interrogative «отчего» (why / from what) plus the specific-indefinite clitic «-то»: 'for some reason [unknown even to himself]'. The narrator marks Alyosha's prophecy as welling up mysteriously.
> «между прочим» — by the way, incidentally: A set adverbial phrase, literally 'among the other (things)', softening a remark as if it were a passing aside — though here it ushers in a startlingly grave prophecy.

— Знаю, знаю.  
"I know, I know.
> Dropped subject, doubled verb: No «я» is needed: the 1st-person present ending of «знаю» (I know) already carries the subject. The repetition is emphatic — instant, breathless agreement.

Как вы это всё знаете наперед! — тотчас же подтвердил Коля.  
How is it you know all this beforehand!" Kolya at once confirmed.
> Exclamatory «как» with imperfective present: «как» heads an exclamation of wonder ('How is it you…!'). «знаете» is imperfective present — the habitual, repeated capacity to know things «наперёд», in advance.
> Emphatic particle «же» and perfective «подтвердил»: «же» fastens onto «тотчас» to insist on the immediacy — 'that very instant'. «подтвердил» is perfective: a single completed act of confirmation, snapping the dialogue forward.
> «наперёд» — beforehand, in advance: A slightly colloquial-archaic adverb for 'ahead of time, in advance' (modern speech often prefers «заранее»). Its repetition across the scene (s188, s200) hammers Kolya's awe at Alyosha's foreknowledge.

— Но в целом все-таки благословите жизнь.  
"But on the whole, all the same, you'll bless life."
> Imperative «благословите» as prophecy: «благословите» is the polite/plural imperative of perfective «благословить» (to bless). Used here less as a command than a prediction-cum-exhortation — 'you will [come to] bless life'. «жизнь» stands in the accusative as its direct object.
> «благословить» — to bless: A Church-Slavonic-flavoured word (root «благо» 'good' + «слово» 'word', a calque of Greek eu-logein): to speak well of, to bless. Alyosha's choice of this sacred verb to frame Kolya's future is quietly characteristic of the novice.

— Именно!  
"Exactly!
> «именно» — exactly, precisely: A one-word emphatic affirmation: 'Precisely!' / 'That's just it!'. It pins down and endorses what was just said with total agreement.

Ура!  
Hurrah!
> «Ура!» — Hurrah!: The Russian cheer, borrowed and now native, shouted in triumph or charge. From a boy like Kolya it carries a slightly military, schoolboy bravado.

Вы пророк!  
You're a prophet!
> Zero-copula equation: 'You are a prophet!' needs no verb: in the present Russian simply juxtaposes subject «вы» and predicate noun «пророк», both nominative, with the 'to be' understood.

О, мы сойдемся, Карамазов.  
Oh, we shall get on together, Karamazov.
> Perfective future «сойдёмся»: «сойдёмся» is conjugated like a present but, being perfective, means a completed future — 'we shall come together / hit it off'. The reflexive «-ся» here is reciprocal: the two of them converging on each other.
> «сойтись» — to get on, become close: A prefixed motion verb («с-» + «идти» = come together) that idiomatically means to hit it off, to become friends or grow intimate. The literal 'converging' image underlies the social meaning.

Знаете, меня всего более восхищает, что вы со мной совершенно как с ровней.  
You know, what delights me most of all is that you treat me completely as an equal.
> Genitive object of «восхищать» + superlative «всего более»: «меня» is the accusative object of «восхищает» ('delights me'), fronted for focus. «всего более» is the bookish superlative of «много» — 'most of all', literally 'more than everything', with «всего» in the genitive of comparison.
> Instrumental «с ровней» after «как»: '[you treat me] as [you would] an equal': «с» (with) governs the instrumental, so «ровня» appears as «ровней». The comparative «как» supplies the 'as if with an equal' sense.
> «ровня» — an equal, a peer: A colloquial noun for someone of equal rank or standing (from «ровный», 'even, level'). For a schoolboy to be treated «как с ровней» by the older Alyosha is precisely the honour that thrills Kolya.

А мы не ровня, нет, не ровня, вы выше!  
But we're not equals, no, not equals — you're higher!
> Contrastive «а» and negated zero-copula: «а» pivots the thought against the previous line — 'but/and yet'. 'We are not equals' needs no verb: «не» simply negates the bare nominative predicate «ровня».
> Predicative comparative «выше»: «выше» is the invariable comparative of «высокий» (high) used predicatively — 'you are higher'. No copula appears, and the comparative form itself never declines.

Но мы сойдемся.  
Still, we shall get on together.
> Adversative «но» resuming the future: «но» marks real opposition ('still, nevertheless') against the just-confessed inequality, and «сойдёмся» returns — the perfective future of «сойтись», insisting they will yet come together.

Знаете, я весь последний месяц говорил себе: «Или мы разом с ним сойдемся друзьями навеки, или с первого же разу разойдемся врагами до гроба!»  
You know, this whole past month I've been telling myself: "Either he and I will come together at once as friends forever, or from the very first we'll part as enemies to the grave!"
> Reflexive pronoun «себе» as indirect object: «себе» is the dative of «себя», pointing back to the subject — 'I kept telling myself'. Unlike the verbal clitic «-ся», «себя/себе» is a full pronoun standing as a real object. The imperfective «говорил» conveys the repeated, month-long muttering.
> «или… или…» antithesis with paired perfective futures: The correlative «или… или…» ('either… or…') frames a stark fork, mirrored by an antonymic verb pair: «сойдёмся» (come together) vs «разойдёмся» (part), one «с-» the other «раз(о)-». Both are perfective futures, both reciprocal in «-ся».
> Instrumental of the resulting state: «друзьями» and «врагами» stand in the instrumental: 'come together [as] friends' / 'part [as] enemies'. After verbs of becoming or parting, the role one ends up in takes the instrumental, framing it as an assumed condition.
> «до гроба» — to the grave, till death: Idiom: «гроб» is 'coffin/grave', so «до гроба» = 'until death, for life'. Paired with «навеки» ('forever'), it gives Kolya's vow its melodramatic, all-or-nothing boyish absolutism.

— И говоря так, уж, конечно, любили меня! — весело смеялся Алеша.  
"And saying so, you already loved me, of course!" Alyosha laughed merrily.
> Imperfective present gerund «говоря»: «говоря» is the present «деепричастие» of «говорить» — 'while saying [this]', a simultaneous attendant action sharing the subject of «любили». It compactly fuses the two: even as you said it, you already loved me.
> Particle «уж» softening certainty: «уж» (a reduced «уже») is here a modal particle, not 'already' — it lends an assured, knowing emphasis: 'you most certainly already loved me'. Such particles carry the speaker's attitude that English leaves to intonation.

— Любил, ужасно любил, любил и мечтал об вас!  
"I did, I loved you terribly, I loved you and dreamed about you!
> Imperfective past, anaphora, and the heart's habit: The drumbeat of imperfective pasts — «любил… любил… мечтал» — renders feeling as an ongoing, sustained state across the past month, not a single act. The triple repetition is pure emotional anaphora.
> Archaic «об вас» for «о вас»: The preposition «о» ('about', governing the prepositional) here appears as «об» before «вас» — a 19th-century / colloquial variant where modern usage would write «о вас». «мечтать о» = to dream of, daydream about.

И как это вы знаете всё наперед?  
And how is it you know everything beforehand?
> Exclamatory-interrogative «как это»: «как это…?» ('how is it that…?') voices astonishment more than a real question. «знаете» stays imperfective present — the recurring, uncanny ability to foresee, again «наперёд», 'beforehand'.

Ба, вот и доктор.  
Ah, here's the doctor.
> Interjection «ба» and presentative «вот и»: «ба» is an interjection of surprised recognition ('Ah! / Well!'). «вот и доктор» — 'here's the doctor [at last]' — uses the presentative «вот» with «и» to announce an awaited arrival now realised.

Господи, что-то скажет, посмотрите, какое у него лицо!  
Lord, what's he going to say — look at his face!"
> Vocative «Господи» — O Lord: «Господи» is the surviving Church-Slavonic vocative of «Господь» (the Lord), here a reflexive exclamation ('Good Lord!'). The old vocative case is otherwise dead in modern Russian, kept alive in such prayer-rooted exclamations.
> «что-то» + perfective future «скажет»: «что-то» is the indefinite 'something' (specific but unknown) — 'what on earth is he going to say'. «скажет» is the perfective future of «сказать», a single anticipated utterance.
> Imperative «посмотрите» + «у него» possession: «посмотрите» is the polite/plural imperative of «посмотреть» (to take a look). «у него лицо» uses the «у + genitive» possessive frame — literally 'at him [there is] a face', i.e. 'his face / the face he has'; «какое» exclaims at what kind.
---

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.