# The Brothers Karamazov, Not You, Not You!

Братья Карамазовы · Fyodor Dostoevsky · Book XI — Ivan

Source: https://1732studios.com/books/karamazov/b11-c5. Data: https://1732studios.com/books/karamazov/b11-c5.json.


По дороге к Ивану пришлось ему проходить мимо дома, в котором квартировала Катерина Ивановна.  
On his way to Ivan he happened to pass the house in which Katerina Ivanovna had her lodgings.
> Dative subject of necessity: «Пришлось» is an impersonal past — there is no nominative subject. The experiencer «ему» stands in the dative, and the predicate is the neuter past of «прийтись» ('it fell to him to…'): he found himself having to pass by. This dative-experiencer framing is one of Russian's favourite ways to narrate the inner life.
> Relative «который» in the prepositional: «Который» agrees with its antecedent «дома» in gender and number (masculine singular) but takes the case its own clause demands — here prepositional after «в», marking location: 'the house in which…'. The comma sets off the relative clause.
> «квартировать» — to lodge: A slightly bookish, 19th-century verb meaning 'to lodge, rent rooms,' from «квартира» (apartment). It implies renting one's lodgings rather than owning, fitting Katerina Ivanovna's transient situation in the town.

В окнах был свет.  
There was light in the windows.
> Existential word order, locative first: The sentence opens with the location «в окнах» (prepositional after «в») and ends on the new information «свет» — the topic-comment flow that Russian's free word order makes possible. Literally 'In the windows was light,' it weights the light as the news.

Он вдруг остановился и решил войти.  
He suddenly stopped and resolved to go in.
> Reflexive «-ся» as change of state: «Остановиться» (to stop, come to a halt) carries the clitic «-ся», here in its middle/intransitive sense: the action turns back on the subject, who himself comes to a stop. Contrast the transitive «остановить» (to stop something else).
> Two perfectives drive the narrative: Both «остановился» and «решил» are perfective pasts: each is a single completed event moving the story forward — he stopped, then he resolved. The chain of perfectives is how Russian narrates a sequence of discrete actions against an imperfective background.

Катерину Ивановну он не видал уже более недели.  
He had not seen Katerina Ivanovna for more than a week now.
> Object fronted for topic: The object «Катерину Ивановну» (accusative) leads the sentence, with the subject «он» following — a topic-comment inversion. The case endings keep the roles unambiguous, so the fronting only shifts emphasis: 'As for Katerina Ivanovna, he hadn't seen her…'.
> «видал» — colloquial variant of «видел»: «Видал» is a familiar, slightly colloquial past of «видеть» (to see), interchangeable with «видел». It lends the narration an easy, spoken texture characteristic of Dostoevsky's prose.

Но ему теперь пришло на ум, что Иван может быть сейчас у ней, особенно на кануне такого дня.  
But it now occurred to him that Ivan might be with her just at this moment, especially on the eve of such a day.
> «пришло на ум» — impersonal, dative experiencer: Another subjectless construction: «пришло» is neuter (agreeing with the following «что»-clause as notional subject) and «ему» is dative — 'it came into his mind.' Russian repeatedly locates a thought as something that happens to a person rather than something they do.
> Reported clause with «что»: «Что» introduces a subordinate clause reporting plain fact (here the content of his thought), set off by a comma. Note «у ней», an older/colloquial form of «у неё» (genitive after «у» = 'at her place').

Позвонив и войдя на лестницу тускло освещенную китайским фонарем, он увидал спускавшегося сверху человека, в котором, поравнявшись, узнал брата.  
Having rung and stepped onto the staircase, dimly lit by a Chinese lantern, he caught sight of a man coming down from above, in whom, as they drew level, he recognized his brother.
> Perfective gerunds: 'having rung and entered': «Позвонив» and «войдя» are perfective past adverbial participles («деепричастия»), naming completed prior actions that share the main subject: 'having rung and stepped onto the staircase, he saw…'. This dense gerund-chain opening a sentence is a hallmark of literary narration.
> Past active participle as modifier: «Спускавшегося» is a past active participle of «спускаться» (to come down), agreeing with «человека» in the accusative animate: 'a man who was coming down.' It compresses a «который»-clause into a single declined adjective — markedly bookish.
> Gerund + animate accusative «брата»: «Поравнявшись» (having drawn level) is another perfective gerund. «Брата» shows the animate accusative borrowing the genitive ending (-а), the device that keeps 'recognized his brother' unambiguous regardless of word order.

Тот, стало быть, выходил уже от Катерины Ивановны.  
So Ivan, it seemed, was already on his way out from Katerina Ivanovna's.
> Demonstrative «тот» tracking the referent: «Тот» ('that one') here picks out Ivan, the more distant of the two men just mentioned, doing the topic-tracking work that lets Russian reorder words freely. The narrator uses it to switch the focus cleanly to Ivan.
> «стало быть» — 'so, evidently': A fixed parenthetical meaning 'so then, that means, evidently,' drawing an inference. It is conversational and a little old-fashioned, colouring the narration with the inferring voice of an observer.
> Imperfective «выходил» of the action in progress: The imperfective past «выходил» views the leaving as an action caught in progress — he was in the act of coming out — rather than a completed exit (perfective «вышел»). The aspect frames Ivan mid-departure as Alyosha arrives.

— Ах, это только ты, — сказал сухо Иван Федорович. — Ну, прощай. Ты к ней?  
"Ah, it's only you," said Ivan Fyodorovich dryly. "Well, goodbye. You're going up to her?"
> Zero copula in the present: 'It's only you' has no verb 'to be': Russian drops the present-tense copula, leaving «это только ты» with the predicate «ты» in the nominative. The bare nominative complement is normal precisely in the zero-copula present.
> Verbless question with «к» + dative: A clipped spoken question with no verb: «к ней» (to her, «к» + dative) implies a verb of motion — 'You're [going] to her?'. The dative is governed by «к», which always marks direction toward.
> «прощай» — the weighty 'goodbye': Imperative of «прощать/проститься», literally 'forgive [me]' — the parting word for a long or final separation, heavier than the casual «до свидания». Ivan's curt «прощай» carries a note of finality that unsettles the scene.

— Да.  
"Yes."

— Не советую, она «в волнении», и ты еще пуще ее расстроишь.  
"I wouldn't advise it; she's 'in a state,' and you'll only upset her all the more."
> Dropped subject «я»: 'I wouldn't advise it' is just «не советую» — the present-tense ending «-ю» already marks first-person singular, so the pronoun «я» is dropped, as Russian routinely does outside emphasis.
> Perfective future «расстроишь»: «Расстроишь» is a perfective verb conjugated like a present, which yields completed future meaning: 'you will upset her (and it will be done).' No auxiliary is needed — the future sits in the ending.
> «пуще» — archaic 'all the more': An old comparative meaning 'more, worse, all the more so,' now confined to folk and literary speech (as in «пуще прежнего»). Ivan's «еще пуще» lends his warning a colloquial, slightly archaic edge.
> «в волнении» — 'in a state': Literally 'in agitation/turmoil,' set in quotation marks to mark it as a polite euphemism the household uses for Katerina's overwrought condition. We render the scare-quoted phrase as 'in a state.'

— Нет, нет! — прокричал вдруг голос сверху из отворившейся мигом двери. — Алексей Федорович, вы от него?  
"No, no!" a voice suddenly cried out from above, from a door that had been flung open in an instant. "Alexei Fyodorovich, have you come from him?"
> Past active participle of a «-ся» verb: «Отворившейся» is the past active participle of «отвориться» (to open, intransitive), keeping its reflexive «-ся» and agreeing with «двери» in the genitive after «из»: 'from a door that had flung itself open.' The «-ся» gives the door its own opening, as if by itself.
> «мигом» — 'in an instant': Instrumental of «миг» (a blink, instant) frozen into an adverb meaning 'in a flash, instantly.' The instrumental of nouns of time/manner regularly hardens into such adverbs.
> «вы от него?» — 'have you come from him?': A verbless question: «от него» («от» + genitive) implies a verb of motion, 'from him' = 'coming from his place.' Note the switch to formal «вы»: Katerina addresses Alyosha politely, unlike her intimate «ты» to Ivan.

— Да, я был у него.  
"Yes, I was with him."
> «у» + genitive = 'at his place': «У него» («у» + genitive of «он», with the prepositional н-) means 'at his place / with him' — the standard Russian way to say one was at someone's home. 'I was with him' renders the visiting sense.

— Мне что-нибудь прислал сказать? Войдите, Алеша, и вы, Иван Федорович, непременно, непременно воротитесь. Слы-ши-те!  
"Did he send word of anything for me? Come in, Alyosha, and you, Ivan Fyodorovich, you must come back, you absolutely must. Do you hear me!"
> Dative «мне» + indefinite «что-нибудь»: «Мне» is the dative of interest ('for me'); «что-нибудь» is the non-specific indefinite ('anything at all,' formed with the «-нибудь» particle). Together: 'Did he send to tell me anything (whatever)?' — she does not know if there is a message.
> Polite plural imperatives in «-те»: «Войдите» and «воротитесь» are imperatives with the polite/plural «-те» ending, addressed with «вы». «Воротитесь» is a slightly archaic variant of «вернитесь» (come back), reflexive in «-ся».
> «непременно» — 'without fail': An emphatic adverb meaning 'without fail, absolutely, definitely.' Repeated («непременно, непременно»), it conveys Katerina's imperious insistence.

В голосе Кати зазвучала такая повелительная нотка, что Иван Федорович, помедлив одно мгновение, решился, однако же, подняться опять вместе с Алешей.  
There rang in Katya's voice so commanding a note that Ivan Fyodorovich, after a moment's hesitation, made up his mind nonetheless to go back up together with Alyosha.
> Perfective gerund of brief delay: «Помедлив» is a perfective gerund ('having hesitated a moment'), the prefix «по-» giving a short, bounded delay. It tucks Ivan's hesitation into an adverbial phrase sharing the main subject.
> «такая… что» — result clause: The correlative «такая… что» ('so commanding a note that…') sets up a result clause introduced by «что»: the note was so imperious that Ivan, against his will, went back up. The construction links cause and consequence.
> «решиться» — reflexive of resolve: «Решился» (resolved, made up his mind) is the «-ся» form of «решить»; the reflexive turns the verb inward to a decision taken within oneself. Contrast «решил» (decided something). The particle «однако же» ('nonetheless, however') marks his reluctant turn.
> «Катя» — the intimate of Katerina: The narrator's sudden use of the diminutive «Катя» (genitive «Кати») for Katerina Ivanovna draws us close, the affectionate short form replacing the formal full name at a moment of emotional intensity.

— Подслушивала! — раздражительно прошептал он про себя, но Алеша расслышал.  
"She was eavesdropping!" he whispered irritably to himself, but Alyosha caught it.
> «про себя» — the reflexive pronoun: «Себя» is the reflexive pronoun pointing back to the subject (here «он»); «про себя» idiomatically means 'to himself, inwardly.' «Себя» has no nominative and serves any person — 'whoever is speaking, to himself.'
> «подслушивать» — to eavesdrop: «Подслушивала» is the imperfective past ('she was/had been eavesdropping'), the imperfective stressing the ongoing act of listening at the door. The prefix «под-» ('from underneath, on the sly') gives the verb its furtive, accusatory sense.

— Позвольте мне остаться в пальто, — проговорил Иван Федорович, вступая в залу. — Я и не сяду. Я более одной минуты не останусь.  
"Allow me to keep my coat on," said Ivan Fyodorovich, stepping into the drawing room. "I won't even sit down. I'll stay no more than a minute."
> Polite imperative + dative «мне»: «Позвольте» is a polite imperative ('allow, permit'), governing dative «мне» and an infinitive: 'Allow me to remain in my coat.' This deferential «позвольте + dative + infinitive» frame is the courteous register of 19th-century drawing-room speech.
> Imperfective gerund of simultaneous action: «Вступая» is an imperfective present gerund in «-я» ('as he stepped in / while entering'), naming an action simultaneous with the main verb «проговорил» — he spoke while entering. «Залу» is an older feminine accusative of «зал/зала» (hall, drawing room).
> Genitive after a negated quantity: «Более одной минуты» uses the genitive («минуты») in a partitive/comparative phrase of quantity ('more than one minute'), and the whole is negated: 'I will not stay more than a minute.' «Останусь» is perfective future.

— Садитесь, Алексей Федорович, — проговорила Катерина Ивановна, сама оставаясь стоя.  
"Sit down, Alexei Fyodorovich," said Katerina Ivanovna, remaining on her feet herself.
> Gerund «оставаясь» + the gerund «стоя»: «Оставаясь» is an imperfective gerund ('remaining'), and «стоя» ('standing') is itself a frozen gerund used adverbially: 'herself remaining standing.' Two adverbial participles stack to paint her pointed refusal to sit while inviting Alyosha to.
> Intensifier «сама»: «Сама» ('herself') is the emphatic intensifier agreeing with the feminine subject, underlining the contrast: she bids Alyosha sit but she herself stays on her feet — a small theatrical assertion of will.

Она изменилась мало за это время, но темные глаза ее сверкали зловещим огнем.  
She had changed little in this time, but her dark eyes glittered with an ominous fire.
> Instrumental of means «огнем»: «Зловещим огнем» is instrumental: her eyes glittered 'with' / by means of an ominous fire — the instrumental marking that with which the glittering is done. Note «глаза ее» with the possessive «ее» placed after the noun, a literary order.
> «измениться» — reflexive change of state: «Изменилась» («-ся» form, feminine past) is the intransitive 'she changed / altered,' the reflexive turning a transitive 'change something' into 'undergo change.' The «-л-» past agrees in feminine gender with «она».

Алеша помнил потом, что она показалась ему чрезвычайно хороша собой в ту минуту.  
Alyosha remembered afterward that she had struck him as extraordinarily beautiful at that moment.
> Dative experiencer + short adjective: «Показалась» ('seemed') takes the dative experiencer «ему» ('to him she seemed…'), and the predicate «хороша» is a short-form adjective (feminine), the predicative form used after such verbs. «Собой» (instrumental of «себя») in «хороша собой» idiomatically means 'good-looking, beautiful.'
> Retrospective frame: «помнил… что»: The imperfective «помнил» ('remembered, kept remembering') plus «потом» ('afterward') opens a memory looking back from later — a narrative frame Dostoevsky uses to lend the moment foreboding weight. «Что» introduces the remembered content.

— Что ж он велел передать?  
"Well, what did he tell you to pass on?"
> Particle «ж» (же) adding pressure: «Ж» is the reduced form of the modal particle «же», pressing the question with impatience and insistence: 'Well, what did he tell you to pass on, then?' Such particles carry the emotional texture English supplies only with intonation.

— Только одно, — сказал Алеша, прямо смотря ей в лицо, — чтобы вы щадили себя и не показывали ничего на суде о том… — он несколько замялся, — что было между вами… во время самого первого вашего знакомства… в том городе…  
"Only one thing," said Alyosha, looking straight into her face, "that you should spare yourself and reveal nothing at the trial about what..." — he faltered a little — "about what passed between you... at the very time of your first acquaintance... in that town..."
> Imperfective gerund «смотря»: «Смотря» is an imperfective present gerund ('looking'), simultaneous with «сказал»: he spoke while gazing straight into her face. «Ей в лицо» pairs dative «ей» (the possessor of the face) with «в лицо» — 'into her face.'
> «чтобы» + past-form: reported command: After conveying an instruction, «чтобы» takes the irrealis past-form verbs «щадили / показывали» — the willed-outcome construction for indirect commands ('that you should spare yourself and reveal nothing'). Note the negative concord: «не показывали ничего» = 'reveal nothing' (не + ничего).
> Negative concord with «ничего»: Russian requires the verb to stay negated even with a negative pronoun: «не показывали ничего» literally 'did not reveal nothing' = 'reveal nothing at all.' «Ничего» is the genitive of «ничто», the case the negative pronoun naturally takes here.
> «замяться» — to falter, grow flustered: A perfective «-ся» verb meaning to hesitate, stumble, become awkwardly embarrassed in speech. The «за-» marks the sudden onset of the faltering — Alyosha catches himself before naming the delicate matter.

— А, это про земной поклон за те деньги! — подхватила она, горько рассмеявшись. — Что ж, он за себя или за меня боится — а? Он сказал, чтоб я щадила — кого же? Его иль себя? Говорите, Алексей Федорович.  
"Ah, this is about the bow to the ground over that money!" she broke in, laughing bitterly. "Well, is he afraid for himself or for me — eh? He told me to spare — whom, then? Himself or me? Speak, Alexei Fyodorovich."
> Perfective gerund «рассмеявшись»: «Рассмеявшись» is a perfective gerund ('having burst out laughing') with «-ся»; the prefix «рас-» marks the sudden outbreak of laughter. It frames her bitter laugh as the circumstance accompanying «подхватила» ('she broke in').
> «себя» vs «его» — the contrast made explicit: Katerina sets the reflexive «себя» ('himself,' pointing back to Mitya as subject of his own sparing) against «его» ('him,' someone else): 'spare — whom? Himself or me?' The very opposition the reflexive pronoun exists to draw is dramatized here. «Иль» is a poetic clipped «или» (or).
> Polite imperative «говорите»: «Говорите» is the polite/plural imperative ('speak, tell me'), matching her formal «вы» to Alyosha. The bare command, addressed by name-and-patronymic, conveys her commanding urgency without rudeness.

Алеша всматривался пристально, стараясь понять ее.  
Alyosha gazed at her intently, trying to understand her.
> Imperfective gerund of purpose: «Стараясь» («-ся» gerund of «стараться», to try) is imperfective and simultaneous: 'trying to understand her,' the attendant effort accompanying «всматривался». Both verbs are imperfective, holding the scene in a steady, unfinished gaze.
> «всматриваться» — to peer intently: «Всматриваться» (imperfective) is to gaze searchingly, to peer hard at, the prefix «в-» giving a sense of looking 'into.' With «пристально» ('fixedly, intently') it stresses Alyosha's effort to read her face.

— И себя, и его, — проговорил он тихо.  
"Both yourself and him," he said quietly.
> Correlative «и… и…» = 'both… and…': Repeated «и» before each item means 'both X and Y': 'both yourself and him.' «Себя» (reflexive) and «его» again stand in pointed contrast — Alyosha's answer collapses Katerina's either/or into both.

— То-то, — как-то злобно отчеканила она и вдруг покраснела. — Вы не знаете еще меня, Алексей Федорович, — грозно сказала она, — да и я еще не знаю себя. Может быть, вы захотите меня растоптать ногами после завтрашнего допроса.  
"There it is," she said, somehow spitefully clipping the words, and suddenly flushed. "You don't know me yet, Alexei Fyodorovich," she said menacingly, "and I don't yet know myself. Perhaps after tomorrow's questioning you'll want to trample me underfoot."
> «меня» vs «себя» — object pronoun vs reflexive: First «меня» (you don't yet know me — me as object), then «себя» (I don't yet know myself — the reflexive pointing back to the subject «я»). The minimal pair shows precisely why Russian keeps a separate reflexive pronoun.
> Perfective future «захотите»: «Захотите» is perfective future (the «за-» marking the onset of wanting): 'you will come to want…'. It governs the perfective infinitive «растоптать» ('to trample, crush underfoot'), a violent, completed image of what she fears she may provoke.
> «отчеканить» — to rap out, clip the words: Literally 'to mint, stamp (a coin)'; figuratively to enunciate each word crisply and forcefully, 'to rap out.' Dostoevsky uses the metallic verb to convey Katerina's hard, clipped, spiteful delivery.

— Вы покажете честно, — сказал Алеша, — только этого и надо.  
"You'll give your testimony honestly," said Alyosha, "that's all that's needed."
> Genitive «этого» + emphatic «и»: «Надо» (impersonal 'is needed') governs the genitive «этого» ('of this'): 'only this is needed.' The particle «и» after «только» reinforces the exclusivity — 'that's all and only what's wanted.' A subjectless, dative-style necessity construction.
> «показать» — to testify: Beyond 'to show,' «показать» is the legal term 'to give testimony, depose' (cf. «показание», a witness statement). 'You'll give your testimony honestly' captures the courtroom sense Alyosha intends.

— Женщина часто бесчестна, — проскрежетала она. — Я еще час тому думала, что мне страшно дотронуться до этого изверга… как до гада… и вот нет, он всё еще для меня человек! Да убил ли он? Он ли убил? — воскликнула она вдруг истерически, быстро обращаясь к Ивану Федоровичу.  
"A woman is often dishonest," she ground out. "Only an hour ago I was thinking that I was afraid to touch that monster... as one would a viper... and now — no, he is still a man to me! But did he kill? Was it he who killed?" she suddenly cried out hysterically, turning quickly to Ivan Fyodorovich.
> Short adjective «бесчестна»: «Бесчестна» is the short (predicative) feminine form of «бесчестный» (dishonourable). The short form, bookish and absolute, states a general truth about woman as such — 'woman is often dishonest' — more sententious than the long form would be.
> Dative «мне» + «страшно» + infinitive: An impersonal construction: «страшно» ('it is frightening') with dative experiencer «мне» and an infinitive — 'I was afraid to touch.' The whole inner state is framed as something happening to her, with no nominative 'I'.
> Interrogative particle «ли»: The enclitic «ли» forms a pointed yes/no question, attached to the focused word: «убил ли он» ('did he kill?') stresses the act, «он ли убил» ('was it he who killed?') stresses the agent. The shift of «ли»'s anchor moves the emphasis between deed and doer.
> «изверг» and «гад» — monster and viper: «Изверг» is a monster, fiend, brute — one cast out of human kind; «гад» is a reptile, viper, 'creepy-crawly,' used as a term of loathing. Both are venomous insults Katerina hurls at Dmitri before recoiling: 'and yet — no, he is still a man to me.'
> Gerund «обращаясь» + «к» dative: «Обращаясь» is an imperfective «-ся» gerund ('turning, addressing oneself'), simultaneous with «воскликнула». It governs «к» + dative «Ивану Федоровичу» — turning toward Ivan — the «к» fixing the dative of direction.

Алеша мигом понял, что этот самый вопрос она уже задавала Ивану Федоровичу, может, всего за минуту пред его приходом, и не в первый раз, а в сотый, и что кончили они ссорой.  
Alyosha understood in a flash that this very question she had already put to Ivan Fyodorovich, perhaps only a minute before his arrival, and not for the first time but for the hundredth, and that they had ended in a quarrel.
> Imperfective «задавала» of repetition: The imperfective past «задавала» ('had been putting/asking') conveys repeated action — confirmed by «не в первый раз, а в сотый» ('not the first time but the hundredth'). Imperfective aspect is the natural choice for an action done over and over.
> Stacked «что»-clauses of perception: «Понял» governs two coordinated «что»-clauses ('understood that… and that…'), each reporting a thing grasped. The repeated subordinator chains Alyosha's instantaneous, multi-part realization into one breath.
> Archaic «пред» + instrumental: «Пред» is the bookish/archaic variant of «перед» ('before'), governing the instrumental «приходом»: 'before his arrival.' The clipped form lends the narration a period-literary tone.

— Я была у Смердякова… Это ты, ты убедил меня, что он отцеубийца. Я только тебе и поверила! — продолжала она, всё обращаясь к Ивану Федоровичу.  
"I went to see Smerdyakov... It was you, you who convinced me that he is the murderer of his father. It was only you I believed!" she went on, still addressing Ivan Fyodorovich.
> Emphatic fronted «ты»: «Это ты, ты убедил…» fronts and doubles the pronoun «ты» for stress: 'It was you, you who convinced me.' Normally dropped, the subject pronoun is here repeated precisely for emphasis and accusation — and it is the intimate «ты».
> Dative «тебе» with «поверить» + emphatic «и»: «Поверить» governs the dative of the person believed («тебе»): 'I believed (in) you.' «Только… и» frames it exclusively — 'it was only you I believed.' The dative-after-verb pattern is lexically fixed for verbs of trust.
> «всё» + gerund = continuing action: «Всё» before the gerund «обращаясь» means 'still, all the while,' marking a continuing, persistent action: she kept addressing herself to Ivan throughout. The imperfective gerund supplies the ongoing accompanying circumstance.

Тот как бы с натуги усмехнулся.  
He gave a sort of strained smirk.
> «тот» tracking Ivan; «как бы» softening: «Тот» again picks out Ivan as the referent. «Как бы» ('as if, as it were') hedges the description — a 'sort of' strained smirk — a favourite Dostoevskian softener that lends the narrator's perception a tentative, observing quality.
> «с натуги» — 'with effort, strainedly': «Натуга» is strain, forced effort; «с натуги» means 'as if with effort, forcedly.' His smile is wrung out of him against the grain — a forced, mirthless smirk.

Алеша вздрогнул, услышав это ''ты''.  
Alyosha started at this "you."
> The intimate "you": Russian distinguishes the familiar «ты» from the formal/polite «вы». Katerina has been addressing Ivan with «ты», the form used between intimates, lovers, or close family. Alyosha 'started' on hearing it because it betrays a degree of intimacy between Katerina and Ivan that he had not suspected. English 'you' cannot mark this, which is why the next sentence spells out that he could not have suspected such a relationship.
> Perfective gerund «услышав»: «Услышав» is a perfective gerund ('on hearing, having heard'), the prior cause of his start. «Это "ты"» turns the pronoun into a quoted object ('this "ty"'), the word itself become the thing that jolts him.

Он и подозревать не мог таких отношений.  
He could not even have suspected such a relationship between them.
> Genitive of negation + emphatic «и»: Under negation the object shifts to genitive: «не мог… таких отношений» ('could not suspect such relations,' genitive «отношений»). The particle «и» before the infinitive intensifies — 'he could not even suspect' — stressing how unthinkable the intimacy was to him.

— Ну, однако, довольно, — отрезал Иван. — Я пойду. Приду завтра. — И тотчас же повернувшись, вышел из комнаты и прошел прямо на лестницу.  
"Well, enough of this," Ivan cut in. "I'm going. I'll come tomorrow." And turning on the spot at once, he walked out of the room and went straight to the staircase.
> Gerund + chain of perfectives: «Повернувшись» (perfective gerund, 'having turned') sets up two perfective pasts «вышел… прошел» ('walked out… went straight') — a crisp sequence of completed actions enacting Ivan's abrupt exit. Aspect and gerund together give the motion its decisive snap.
> «отрезать» — to cut someone short: Literally 'to cut off (a slice)'; in dialogue, 'to retort curtly, snap, cut someone short.' «— …— отрезал Иван» paints Ivan ending the exchange with a sharp, clipped finality.

Катерина Ивановна вдруг с каким-то повелительным жестом схватила Алешу за обе руки.  
Katerina Ivanovna suddenly, with a kind of imperious gesture, seized Alyosha by both hands.
> «схватить за» + accusative: The idiom «схватить кого за что» grabs a person (accusative «Алешу») 'by' a body part (accusative «за обе руки», 'by both hands'). Russian regularly marks the seized limb with «за» + accusative rather than a possessive.
> Indefinite «какой-то» + instrumental «жестом»: «Каким-то» ('some kind of') is the «-то» indefinite marking a specific-but-unnamed quality; «с… жестом» is «с» + instrumental ('with a gesture'). Together: 'with a kind of imperious gesture' — vague yet vivid, a Dostoevskian habit.

— Ступайте за ним! Догоните его! Не оставляйте его одного ни минуты, — быстро зашептала она. — Он помешанный. Вы не знаете, что он помешался? У него горячка, нервная горячка! Мне доктор говорил, идите, бегите за ним…  
"Go after him! Catch up with him! Don't leave him alone for a minute," she whispered rapidly. "He's deranged. Don't you know that he's lost his mind? He has a fever, a nervous fever! The doctor told me so — go, run after him..."
> Imperatives, perfective and imperfective: A volley of polite «-те» imperatives. «Догоните» (perfective, 'catch up [and succeed]') urges a completed result; «не оставляйте» (imperfective, 'don't leave') under negation — a negated command is normally imperfective, prohibiting the ongoing state of leaving him alone.
> «ни минуты» under negation: «Ни минуты» ('not for a single minute') uses intensifying «ни» with the genitive «минуты», reinforcing the negated «не оставляйте»: negative concord again. The «ни»-phrase pushes the prohibition to its absolute extreme.
> «горячка» — fever, brain-fever: «Горячка» is a fever, specifically the 19th-century 'brain-fever' or delirium of overwrought nerves («нервная горячка»). It is a recurring Dostoevskian diagnosis for characters in mental crisis — here Katerina's verdict on Ivan's unravelling mind.

Алеша вскочил и бросился за Иваном Федоровичем.  
Alyosha leapt up and rushed after Ivan Fyodorovich.
> Reflexive «броситься» + «за» instrumental: «Бросился» («-ся», 'flung himself, rushed') governs «за» + instrumental «Иваном Федоровичем» — 'rushed after Ivan.' «За» with the instrumental here means 'after, in pursuit of,' distinct from «за» + accusative for direction toward.

Тот не успел отойти и пятидесяти шагов.  
Ivan had not managed to get fifty paces off.
> Genitive of negation with the count: Under negation the quantified object goes genitive: «не успел отойти… пятидесяти шагов» ('had not managed to get fifty paces off'). «Пятидесяти шагов» is genitive (numeral + genitive plural «шагов»), and the emphatic «и» means 'even' — not even fifty paces.
> Prefixed verb of motion «отойти»: «Отойти» is the perfective of «отходить», the prefix «от-» ('away from') giving 'to walk off, move away.' Adding the directional prefix to «идти» both fixes the direction and makes an ordinary perfective — here 'to get [fifty paces] away.'

— Чего тебе? — вдруг обернулся он к Алеше, видя, что тот его догоняет, — велела тебе бежать за мной, потому что я сумасшедший. Знаю наизусть, — раздражительно прибавил он.  
"What do you want?" he suddenly turned on Alyosha, seeing that he was catching up. "She told you to run after me because I'm out of my mind. I know it by heart," he added irritably.
> Genitive «чего» + dative «тебе»: An elliptical question, verbless: «чего» (genitive of «что», the partitive/negative-leaning case) plus dative of interest «тебе» (2nd person, 'to/of you') — 'What [do you want] of you? / What is it to you?'. The genitive of «что» here is idiomatic for 'what do you want.'
> Gerund «видя» + «тот»: «Видя» is an imperfective present gerund ('seeing'), simultaneous with «обернулся». «Тот» tracks Alyosha (the more distant participant) as subject of the «что»-clause: 'seeing that the other was catching up to him.'
> Dative «тебе» + causal «потому что»: «Велеть» ('to order') governs dative «тебе» and an infinitive: 'she ordered you to run.' «Потому что» ('because') opens a causal subordinate clause. «Сумасшедший» ('mad, out of one's mind') is a long-form adjective used predicatively without a copula.

— Она, разумеется, ошибается, но она права, что ты болен, — сказал Алеша. — Я сейчас смотрел у ней на твое лицо; у тебя очень больное лицо, очень, Иван!  
"She's mistaken, of course, but she's right that you're ill," said Alyosha. "I was just now looking at your face in there; you have a very sick face, very, Ivan!"
> Short adjectives «права» and «болен»: Two predicative short forms: «права» ('is right,' feminine) and «болен» ('is ill,' masculine). The short form is the idiomatic predicate in such judgments ('she is right… you are ill'), bookish and stating a current state, as 19th-century prose favours.
> «у тебя» possessive + long adjective: «У тебя… лицо» ('you have a face,' lit. 'at you [there] is a face') is the standard «у» + genitive possessive frame. Here «больное лицо» uses the long-form attributive adjective ('a sick face') — contrast the short «болен» of the person just above.

Иван шел не останавливаясь. Алеша за ним.  
Ivan walked on without stopping. Alyosha followed him.
> Negated imperfective gerund: «Не останавливаясь» ('without stopping') is a negated imperfective «-ся» gerund modifying «шел»: he kept walking, the stopping never happening. Both walking and the negated gerund are imperfective, holding the continuous, unbroken motion.
> Verbless «Алеша за ним»: The second clause «Алеша за ним» has no verb, the motion verb 'followed' supplied by context: «за ним» («за» + instrumental, 'after/behind him'). Russian freely drops a verb recoverable from the parallel preceding clause.

— А ты знаешь, Алексей Федорович, как сходят с ума? — спросил Иван совсем вдруг тихим, совсем уже не раздражительным голосом, в котором внезапно послышалось самое простодушное любопытство.  
"And do you know, Alexei Fyodorovich, how people go out of their mind?" Ivan asked all at once, in a voice quite soft, no longer at all irritable, in which there suddenly sounded the most artless curiosity.
> Impersonal 'one' via 3rd-plural: «Сходят» (3rd-person plural, no subject) expresses a generic 'one / people': 'how do people go out of their mind?' Russian's subjectless 3rd-plural is a standard way to state what happens generally. The idiom «сходить с ума» = 'to go mad' («с» + genitive «ума», 'off one's mind').
> Relative «в котором» + reflexive «послышаться»: «В котором» (relative, prepositional after «в») refers to the voice. «Послышалось» («-ся», 'made itself heard, there sounded') is an impersonal-ish reflexive: in the voice 'there suddenly sounded the most artless curiosity.' «Любопытство» is the grammatical subject following its verb.
> «простодушный» — artless, guileless: «Простодушный» («простой» simple + «душа» soul) means simple-hearted, naive, guileless. Applied to Ivan's sudden curiosity, it is a startling, poignant note — the tormented intellect speaking for a moment with a child's openness.

— Нет, не знаю; полагаю, что много разных видов сумасшествия.  
"No, I don't; I suppose there are many different kinds of madness."
> «много» + genitive plural: «Много» ('many, much') governs the genitive: «много разных видов сумасшествия» ('many different kinds of madness'), with genitive plural «видов» and genitive «сумасшествия». Quantity words regularly take the genitive of what they measure.
> «полагать» — to suppose: A somewhat formal, considered verb for 'to suppose, presume, reckon,' more measured than «думать». It suits Alyosha's careful, tentative reply about the kinds of madness.

— А над самим собой можно наблюдать, что сходишь с ума?  
"And can a man observe in himself that he's going mad?"
> Impersonal «можно» + reflexive «собой»: «Можно» ('one can, it is possible') heads an impersonal construction with no subject — the implied agent is generic 'one.' «Над самим собой» («над» + instrumental of the reflexive «себя», intensified by «сам») = 'over oneself': can one observe oneself going mad?
> 2nd-singular «сходишь» as generic 'one': The 2nd-person singular «сходишь» ('you go mad') here is generic-impersonal — 'that one is going mad' — a common Russian way to speak of anyone, not Alyosha in particular. English 'a man / one' captures it.

— Я думаю, нельзя ясно следить за собой в таком случае, — с удивлением отвечал Алеша.  
"I think one can't watch oneself clearly in such a case," Alyosha answered in surprise.
> Impersonal «нельзя» + «следить за» + reflexive: «Нельзя» ('one cannot, it is impossible') is impersonal, subjectless. «Следить за собой» pairs «за» + instrumental of the reflexive «себя»: 'to watch oneself.' 'One can't watch oneself clearly in such a case.'
> Imperfective «отвечал» + manner phrase: «Отвечал» (imperfective past) views Alyosha's reply as it unfolds, with «с удивлением» ('with surprise,' «с» + instrumental) describing the manner. The instrumental of accompaniment colours how he answered.

Иван на полминутки примолк.  
Ivan fell silent for half a minute.
> Perfective «примолкнуть» — fell briefly silent: «Примолк» is the perfective past of «примолкнуть» (to fall silent for a while); the prefix «при-» gives a momentary, bounded quieting. A single completed event — Ivan goes quiet — set against the dialogue's flow. «На полминутки» uses the diminutive «полминутки» ('a little half-minute').

— Если ты хочешь со мной о чем говорить, то перемени, пожалуйста, тему, — сказал он вдруг.  
"If you want to talk to me about something, then change the subject, please," he said abruptly.
> «если… то…» conditional: A real (indicative) conditional: «если» ('if') with the present «хочешь», answered by «то» ('then') plus the imperative «перемени» ('change'). This is plain conditional logic, not the «бы»-irrealis — the condition is taken as actual.
> «о» + prepositional «чём»: «О чём» ('about what') is «о» + the prepositional of «что», the case «о» always governs for the topic of speech. 'If you want to talk about something' — «о чём» here doubling as indefinite 'about anything.'

— А вот, чтобы не забыть, к тебе письмо, — робко проговорил Алеша и, вынув из кармана, протянул к нему письмо Лизы.  
"Oh, before I forget — there's a letter for you," Alyosha said timidly, and drawing it from his pocket, he held out to him Liza's letter.
> «чтобы» + infinitive of purpose: When the purpose-clause shares the main subject, «чтобы» takes a bare infinitive: «чтобы не забыть» ('so as not to forget'). Only with a different subject would «чтобы» switch to the past-form irrealis.
> Perfective gerund «вынув» before «протянул»: «Вынув» (perfective gerund, 'having drawn out') names the prior action; «протянул» (perfective past, 'held out') the next. The gerund + perfective sequence renders the two quick motions — pulling the letter out, then extending it.
> «робко» — timidly: An adverb from «робкий» (timid, shy), 'timidly, diffidently.' It marks Alyosha's hesitancy in handing over Liza's letter — he half-expects Ivan's contempt.

Они как раз подошли к фонарю.  
They had just come up to a streetlamp.
> Prefixed motion «подойти» + «к» dative: «Подошли» is the perfective of «подходить» (to come up to, approach), prefix «под-» plus «к» + dative «фонарю» ('up to the lamp'). The prefixed motion verb with «к»+dative is the standard 'approach' frame; «как раз» means 'just then.'

Иван тотчас же узнал руку.  
Ivan recognized the handwriting at once.
> Perfective «узнать» of instant recognition: «Узнал» (perfective past) marks a single, momentary act — he recognized it at once («тотчас же»). «Руку» here means 'the hand[writing]' (accusative), a metonymy for the script he knows.

— А, это от того бесенка! — рассмеялся он злобно и, не распечатав конверта, вдруг разорвал его на несколько кусков и бросил на ветер.  
"Ah, this is from that little imp!" he laughed spitefully, and without breaking the seal of the envelope, he suddenly tore it into several pieces and tossed them to the wind.
> Negated gerund + chain of perfectives: «Не распечатав» (negated perfective gerund, 'without breaking the seal') governs genitive «конверта» (genitive of negation). It precedes two perfective pasts «разорвал… бросил» ('tore… tossed') — a swift sequence of completed, violent acts.
> «бесёнок» — little imp, little devil: A diminutive of «бес» (demon, imp), «бесёнок» means 'little devil, imp,' here said of Liza — half-affectionate, half-contemptuous. The diminutive suffix «-ёнок» (used for young creatures) makes it a 'demon-child,' an emotionally loaded epithet.
> Perfective «рассмеяться» + manner adverb: «Рассмеялся» («-ся», perfective, 'burst out laughing') with «злобно» ('spitefully, malignantly') — the prefix «рас-» again marking the sudden eruption of the laugh, here a cruel one.

Клочья разлетелись.  
The scraps scattered.
> Prefix «раз-» of scattering + «-ся»: «Разлетелись» (perfective «-ся» past of «разлететься») means 'flew apart, scattered,' the prefix «раз-» conveying dispersal in all directions. The terse two-word sentence lets the torn scraps simply fly off. «Клочья» is the plural of «клок» (a tuft, shred).

— Шестнадцати лет еще нет, кажется, и уж предлагается! — презрительно проговорил он, опять зашагав по улице.  
"Not yet sixteen, by the look of it, and already offering herself!" he said contemptuously, striding off down the street again.
> Genitive of age + «нет»: An impersonal age construction: «нет» ('there isn't') governs the genitive «шестнадцати лет» ('sixteen years'): 'she isn't yet sixteen.' The negated existential «нет» obligatorily takes the genitive, here of the numeral phrase.
> Reflexive «предлагается» + particle «уж»: «Предлагается» («-ся») is the middle/reflexive 'offers herself, throws herself at [a man].' The particle «уж» (reduced «уже», 'already') drips with contempt: 'and already offering herself!'
> Inceptive «за-» gerund «зашагав»: «Зашагав» is a perfective gerund of «зашагать» (to start striding), the prefix «за-» marking the onset of the action. «По улице» («по» + dative) means 'along the street.' 'Having set off striding down the street again.'

— Как предлагается? — воскликнул Алеша.  
"Offering herself how?" exclaimed Alyosha.
> Echo question with «как»: Alyosha echoes Ivan's «предлагается» as an incredulous question: «как предлагается?» ('offering herself how?'). The reflexive «-ся» verb is repeated verbatim, the interrogative «как» fronting his bewildered challenge.

— Известно, как развратные женщины предлагаются.  
"The way dissolute women offer themselves, of course."
> Impersonal «известно» + generic plural: «Известно» ('[it is] known') is an impersonal predicate — 'it's well known how…'. «Развратные женщины предлагаются» uses the generic plural to state the type's behaviour. Ivan's curt sentence assumes the answer needs no spelling out.
> «развратный» — depraved, dissolute: «Развратный» (from «разврат», debauchery, vice) means morally depraved, dissolute, licentious. Hurled at a teenage girl's letter, it is brutally unfair — part of Ivan's feverish cruelty in the scene.

— Что ты, Иван, что ты? — горестно и горячо заступился Алеша. — Это ребенок, ты обижаешь ребенка! Она больна, она сама очень больна, она тоже, может быть, с ума сходит… Я не мог тебе не передать ее письма… Я, напротив, от тебя хотел что услышать… чтобы спасти ее.  
"What are you saying, Ivan, what are you saying?" Alyosha came to her defense, grieved and ardent. "She's a child, you're insulting a child! She's ill, she herself is very ill, perhaps she too is going out of her mind... I couldn't help passing on her letter to you... On the contrary, I wanted to hear something from you... so as to save her."
> Double negative = could not but: The construction «не мог не» + infinitive (literally 'I could not not hand over') is a Russian double negative that expresses unavoidable obligation: 'I had no choice but to give you her letter.' Russian stacks negatives where English collapses them. We render the literal force as 'I couldn't help passing it on / I could not but pass it on.'
> Idiom «что ты!» — 'what are you saying!': «Что ты!» is a fixed exclamation of protest or alarm — 'come now! / what are you saying! / how can you!' — not a literal question. Doubled here, it conveys Alyosha's distressed, pleading remonstrance.
> Short adjective «больна» repeated: «Больна» is the short (predicative) feminine of «больной» ('ill'), the idiomatic form after a zero copula: 'she is ill.' The repetition with «сама… очень» ('she herself, very [ill]') drives home Alyosha's plea on Liza's behalf.
> Purpose «чтобы» + infinitive: «Чтобы спасти её» ('so as to save her') is a same-subject purpose clause with the infinitive «спасти» (perfective, a completed rescue). Alyosha's whole motive is folded into this purpose phrase.

— Нечего тебе от меня слышать. Коль она ребенок, то я ей не нянька. Молчи, Алексей. Не продолжай. Я об этом даже не думаю.  
"There's nothing for you to hear from me. If she's a child, then I'm not her nursemaid. Be quiet, Alexei. Don't go on. I don't even think about it."
> Negative «нечего» + dative + infinitive: «Нечего» ('there is nothing to') is a fused negative-existential pronoun governing dative «тебе» and an infinitive: 'there is nothing for you to hear from me.' This «не́чего + dative + infinitive» pattern is the standard impersonal way to say 'one has nothing to do X.'
> Archaic «коль» conditional: «Коль» (also «коли») is a folk/archaic 'if,' equivalent to «если», answered by «то»: 'if she's a child, then I'm not her nursemaid.' «Я ей не нянька» drops the copula and puts «ей» in the dative ('to her / her nursemaid').
> Singular imperatives, intimate «ты»: «Молчи» ('be quiet') and «не продолжай» ('don't go on') are singular (no «-те») imperatives, matching Ivan's intimate «ты» to his brother. The negated «не продолжай» is imperfective, the usual aspect for a prohibition.

Помолчали опять с минуту.  
Again they were silent for a minute.
> Subjectless «помолчали» + «с» + accusative of approximation: «Помолчали» (perfective, 'they were silent a while,' prefix «по-» bounding the spell) has its subject only implied ('they'), recoverable from context. «С минуту» («с» + accusative) means 'about a minute, for a minute or so' — «с» here marking approximate measure.

— Она теперь всю ночь молить божию матерь будет, чтоб указала ей, как завтра на суде поступить, — резко и злобно заговорил он вдруг опять.  
"She'll spend the whole night now praying to the Mother of God to show her how to act tomorrow at the trial," he suddenly began again, sharply and spitefully.
> Compound imperfective future: «Будет молить» is the imperfective compound future: «будет» (future of «быть») + the imperfective infinitive «молить» ('to pray'), naming an ongoing future action — she will spend the whole night praying. The auxiliary and infinitive are split by «всю ночь… божию матерь» for emphasis.
> «чтоб» + past-form irrealis: «Чтоб» (reduced «чтобы») with a different subject takes the past-form irrealis «указала» ('that [the Mother of God] might show her'). The dative «ей» is the indirect object ('show her'). This is the willed-outcome construction for a prayer's content.

— Ты… ты об Катерине Ивановне?  
"You... you mean Katerina Ivanovna?"
> Verbless 'about' question, «об» + prepositional: An elliptical question with no verb: «об Катерине Ивановне» («об», the pre-vowel form of «о», + prepositional) means '[do you mean / are you speaking] about Katerina Ivanovna?'. The repeated «ты» conveys Alyosha's startled hesitation.

— Да. Спасительницей или губительницей Митеньки ей явиться? О том молить будет, чтоб озарило ее душу. Сама еще, видите ли, не знает, приготовиться не успела. Тоже меня за няньку принимает, хочет, чтоб я ее убаюкал!  
"Yes. Whether she should appear as Mitenka's savior or his destroyer. That's what she'll be praying about, that her soul be enlightened. She doesn't even know yet, you see, she hasn't managed to prepare. She takes me for a nursemaid too, she wants me to lull her to sleep!"
> Instrumental of the predicate after «явиться»: «Явиться» ('to appear [as]') takes its predicate noun in the instrumental: «спасительницей или губительницей» ('as savior or destroyer'). The dative «ей» is the experiencer ('for her to appear…'). The instrumental frames the role she might assume — a part to be played at the trial.
> «спасительница / губительница» + «Митенька»: Paired feminine agent-nouns: «спасительница» (she who saves) and «губительница» (she who ruins/destroys), pointedly antithetical. «Митеньки» is the genitive of «Митенька», a tender double diminutive of Dmitri (Митя → Митенька) — Ivan's mockingly affectionate name for his brother in Katerina's mouth.
> Impersonal «озарило» in a «чтоб» clause: «Чтоб озарило её душу» ('that her soul be enlightened') uses an impersonal neuter past «озарило» ('[that something] might illumine her soul') in the irrealis after «чтоб» — no named subject, the divine light implied. «Душу» is the accusative object.
> Reflexive «приготовиться» under negation: «Приготовиться» («-ся», 'to prepare oneself, get ready') after «не успела» ('did not manage'): 'she hasn't managed to prepare.' The «-ся» turns 'prepare something' inward to 'ready oneself.' «Видите ли» ('you see') is a parenthetical with the «ли» softener.
> «чтоб» + past-form for a different subject: «Хочет, чтоб я… убаюкал» ('she wants me to lull her') uses «чтоб» + the past-form irrealis «убаюкал» because the wished-for action has a different subject (я) from the wanting (она). «Убаюкать» is 'to lull/rock to sleep' — Ivan's bitter image of being asked to soothe her.

— Катерина Ивановна любит тебя, брат, — с грустным чувством проговорил Алеша.  
"Katerina Ivanovna loves you, brother," said Alyosha with sorrowful feeling.
> Name-and-patronymic; accusative «тебя»: «Катерина Ивановна» is the respectful name-plus-patronymic mode of address used about her even in intimate talk. «Любит тебя» puts the personal pronoun «ты» in its accusative form «тебя» as direct object of «любить».
> Instrumental of manner: «С грустным чувством» (with sorrowful feeling) is «с» plus the instrumental case, here marking the manner in which Alyosha speaks. The adjective «грустным» agrees with «чувством» in the instrumental.

— Может быть. Только я до нее не охотник.  
"Perhaps. Only I'm not partial to her."
> «охотник до» — to be keen on: «Охотник» literally means 'hunter,' but in «охотник до чего-либо» it means one who is fond of or partial to something. «Я до нее не охотник» — 'I'm not keen on her,' a dismissive, slightly coarse idiom that undercuts Alyosha's tender claim that she loves him.
> Genitive «нее» after «до»: The preposition «до» governs the genitive, so «она» appears as «нее» (with the н- prefix that third-person pronouns take after a preposition). Idiomatically «охотник до неё» frames her as the object of his (lacking) appetite.

— Она страдает. Зачем же ты ей говоришь… иногда… такие слова, что она надеется? — с робким упреком продолжал Алеша, — ведь я знаю, что ты ей подавал надежду, прости, что я так говорю, — прибавил он.  
"She suffers. Then why do you say to her... sometimes... such words that give her hope?" Alyosha went on with timid reproach. "For I know that you held out hope to her — forgive me for speaking like this," he added.
> The particle «же» pressing the question: «Зачем же…» adds the modal particle «же» to the question word, lending an insistent, almost reproachful 'why on earth' — exactly the gentle pressure Dostoevsky names in the next clause («с робким упреком»).
> Result clause with «такие… что»: «Такие слова, что она надеется» is the correlative pattern «такой… что» (such… that), where «что» opens a subordinate result clause set off by a comma. The imperfective present «надеется» (she hopes) gives the ongoing state those words produce.
> «ведь» appealing to shared knowledge: «Ведь» is the modal particle of appeal — 'after all, you know.' Alyosha softens an accusation by framing it as something both already understand: «ведь я знаю, что ты ей подавал надежду» (for I know you held out hope to her).
> Imperfective «подавал»: a repeated kindling of hope: «Подавал» is the imperfective past of «подавать» (to give, hold out). Its imperfective aspect frames the act not as one event but as something Ivan did more than once, repeatedly giving her hope. «Ей» is the dative — to her — the indirect object.

— Не могу я тут поступить как надо, разорвать и ей прямо сказать! — раздражительно произнес Иван. — Надо подождать, пока скажут приговор убийце. Если я разорву с ней теперь, она из мщения ко мне завтра же погубит этого негодяя на суде, потому что его ненавидит и знает, что ненавидит. Тут всё ложь, ложь на лжи! Теперь же, пока я с ней не разорвал, она всё еще надеется и не станет губить этого изверга, зная, как я хочу вытащить его из беды. И когда только придет этот проклятый приговор!  
"I can't act here as I ought, break it off and tell her straight out!" Ivan said irritably. "One has to wait until they pronounce the verdict on the murderer. If I break with her now, then out of revenge against me she'll ruin that scoundrel at the trial tomorrow, because she hates him and knows that she hates him. It's all lies here, lies upon lies! But for now, as long as I haven't broken with her, she still hopes and won't go ruining that monster, knowing how I want to drag him out of trouble. And when, oh when, will that cursed verdict ever come!"
> Inverted word order for stress: Fronting the negated verb — «Не могу я…» rather than the neutral «Я не могу…» — throws the rhetorical weight onto the impossibility. Russian's free word order lets Ivan lead with his frustration.
> Impersonal «надо» plus «пока»: «Надо подождать» is a subjectless necessity construction: invariable «надо» plus an infinitive, with no nominative subject. «Пока скажут приговор» — 'until they pronounce the verdict' — uses «пока» with a perfective future and an unspecified 'they' («скажут»), the standard way Russian phrases an impersonal 'until X happens.'
> Real conditional in the perfective future: A real (not hypothetical) condition: «если» plus the perfective future «разорву» in the if-clause, answered by another perfective future «погубит» (she will ruin). Both verbs name single completed future acts — the rupture, the ruin — with no «бы».
> «из мщения» — genitive of motive: «Из мщения» (out of revenge) uses «из» plus the genitive of the bookish noun «мщение» to express motive. «Ко мне» is «к» plus the dative, here 'against / toward me' — the target of that revenge.
> «негодяй» and «изверг» — scoundrel and monster: «Негодяй» is a scoundrel, a good-for-nothing; «изверг» is far stronger — a monster, a fiend, literally one 'cast out' of humankind. Ivan hurls both at his own brother Dmitri, and the narrator marks in s65 how these words wound Alyosha.
> «не станет» + imperfective: won't take to ruining: «Станет» (perfective future of «стать») plus an imperfective infinitive «губить» is the idiomatic 'will (not) take to / set about' doing something. The negative «не станет губить» means she won't go about ruining him — the imperfective stressing the ongoing process she will refrain from.
> Gerund «зная» — attendant circumstance: «Зная» is the imperfective present gerund («деепричастие») of «знать», meaning 'knowing / while knowing.' It shares the subject «она» of the main clause and compresses a whole simultaneous circumstance into one word — a hallmark of literary Russian.
> «когда только» as an exclamation of longing: «Когда только…!» is an exclamatory 'when, oh when…!' — impatient longing rather than a real question. The perfective future «придёт» views the verdict's arrival as the single awaited event Ivan cannot wait for.

Слова «убийца» и «изверг» больно отозвались в сердце Алеши.  
The words "murderer" and "monster" echoed painfully in Alyosha's heart.
> Reflexive «отозвались» — echoed: «Отозвались» is the perfective past of the reflexive verb «отозваться» (to resound, echo, find an answering response). The clitic «-сь» here gives the middle, intransitive sense: the words 'echoed' of themselves in his heart. «В сердце» is prepositional case of location.

— Да чем таким она может погубить брата? — спросил он, вдумываясь в слова Ивана. — Что она может показать такого, что прямо могло бы сгубить Митю?  
"But by what means can she ruin our brother?" he asked, pondering Ivan's words. "What can she testify to that could directly destroy Mitya?"
> Instrumental «чем» of means; opening «да»: The question 'by what means?' is carried by «чем» — the instrumental of «что», the case of the instrument or means — reinforced by «таким» (instrumental of «такой»). The sentence-initial «да» is a colloquial connective, here 'but, well' rather than 'yes.'
> Gerund «вдумываясь» — pondering as he asks: «Вдумываясь» is the imperfective present gerund of «вдумываться» (to ponder, think one's way into), a reflexive verb in «-ся». It runs simultaneously with «спросил он» — he asked while pondering Ivan's words.
> Conditional «могло бы»: «Могло бы» is the conditional/subjunctive — past-tense «могло» plus the particle «бы» — expressing a hypothetical 'could / might.' Alyosha asks what she could possibly testify that 'might directly destroy' Mitya. «Митю» is the accusative of the diminutive «Митя».
> «Митя» — the diminutive of Dmitri: «Митя» is the warm, familiar diminutive of «Дмитрий» (Dmitri). Alyosha's use of it against Ivan's cold «изверг» quietly insists on their brother's humanity.

— Ты этого еще не знаешь. У нее в руках один документ есть, собственноручный, Митенькин, математически доказывающий, что он убил Федора Павловича.  
"You don't yet know about that. She has in her hands a document, in his own handwriting, Mitenka's own, mathematically proving that he killed Fyodor Pavlovich."
> «собственноручный» — in one's own hand: A compound of «собственный» (own) and «рука» (hand): a document written 'with one's own hand,' i.e. an autograph original. The forensic weight of the word matters — it is what makes the paper 'mathematically' incriminating.
> «Митенькин» — the tender double diminutive, made possessive: «Митенькин» is a possessive adjective ('Mitenka's') built from «Митенька», itself the doubly affectionate diminutive of «Дмитрий» (Дмитрий → Митя → Митенька). The cooing form clashes bitterly with the murder the document is said to prove.
> Present active participle «доказывающий»: «Доказывающий» is the present active participle of «доказывать» (to prove), agreeing with «документ» and condensing a «который»-clause ('a document which proves…') into one bookish modifier. The «что»-clause reports the fact it proves.

— Этого быть не может! — воскликнул Алеша.  
"That cannot be!" exclaimed Alyosha.
> Genitive of negation in «этого быть не может»: In the impossibility formula «этого быть не может» (this cannot be), the subject of the negated existential stands in the genitive — «этого», not nominative «это». It is the same genitive-of-negation logic that governs «нет» and «не было.»

— Как не может? Я сам читал.  
"How can it not? I read it myself."
> Intensifier «сам» — 'myself': «Сам» intensifies the subject: 'I myself read it.' It agrees with «я» here as masculine singular and emphasizes that Ivan's testimony is first-hand. The imperfective «читал» states the bare fact of having read it.

— Такого документа быть не может! — с жаром повторил Алеша. — Не может быть, потому что убийца не он. Не он убил отца, не он!  
"There can be no such document!" Alyosha repeated heatedly. "It can't be, because he is not the murderer. It was not he who killed our father, not he!"
> Genitive of negation: «такого документа»: Again the negated 'cannot be' forces its subject into the genitive: «такого документа быть не может» — 'there can be no such document,' literally 'of such a document there cannot be.' Both adjective and noun take the genitive ending.
> Negation focused on the pronoun: «не он»: «Не» is placed not before the verb but before «он» — 'it was not HE who killed.' Negating the subject rather than the predicate puts the whole emphasis on identity, the very point that becomes the chapter's refrain «не ты».
> «с жаром» — heatedly: «Жар» is heat, fever, ardour; «с жаром» means 'with heat, fervently.' A common adverbial of manner (instrumental after «с») for impassioned speech.

Иван Федорович вдруг остановился.  
Ivan Fyodorovich suddenly stopped.
> Perfective «остановился» — a single sudden halt: «Остановился» is the perfective past of the reflexive «остановиться» (to stop, come to a halt). Its perfective aspect captures the abrupt, completed action, reinforced by «вдруг» (suddenly); the «-ся» marks the intransitive, self-directed stop.

— Кто же убийца, по-вашему, — как-то холодно по-видимому спросил он, и какая-то даже высокомерная нотка прозвучала в тоне вопроса.  
"Who, then, is the murderer, in your opinion?" he asked with a kind of cold air, and a note that was almost haughty rang in the tone of the question.
> Zero copula and the particle «же»: «Кто же убийца?» has no verb 'to be': the present-tense copula is unexpressed, so «убийца» stands as a bare nominative predicate. «Же» sharpens the challenge — 'who, then, is the murderer?'
> «по-вашему» and the formal «вы»: «По-вашему» means 'in your opinion / your way,' built on the formal/plural possessive «ваш». Tellingly, Ivan is already drifting toward «вы» here, foreshadowing the cold switch from «ты» to «вы» he makes explicit at s103.
> Adjective–noun agreement; perfective «прозвучала»: «Высокомерная нотка» (a haughty note) shows full feminine-singular-nominative agreement of adjective with noun. «Прозвучала» is perfective past, feminine to agree with «нотка» — a single note that 'rang out.'

— Ты сам знаешь кто, — тихо и проникновенно проговорил Алеша.  
"You yourself know who," Alyosha said softly and penetratingly.
> Intensifier «сам» and elliptical «кто»: «Сам» intensifies — 'you yourself know.' «Кто» trails as a clipped indirect question ('[who it is]'), its verb left unspoken. The bare, weighted line becomes Alyosha's refrain, repeated verbatim at s76.
> «проникновенно» — penetratingly, with deep feeling: From «проникнуть» (to penetrate): an adverb describing speech that goes straight to the heart — heartfelt, earnest, soul-reaching. It marks the quiet spiritual gravity of Alyosha's tone.

— Кто? Эта басня-то об этом помешанном идиоте эпилептике? Об Смердякове?  
"Who? That fairy tale about this crazed epileptic idiot? About Smerdyakov?"
> The emphatic clitic «-то»: The hyphenated «-то» on «басня-то» is the topic-emphasizing clitic — 'that fairy tale of yours, of all things' — dripping with scorn. It is distinct from the indefinite «-то» of «кто-то»; here it underlines a known, dismissed topic.
> «басня» — fable, here 'tall tale': «Басня» properly is a fable (an Aesop or Krylov tale with a moral), but colloquially it means a fabrication, a cock-and-bull story. Ivan uses it contemptuously of the theory that Smerdyakov is the killer.
> Locative «об» + prepositional case: «Об этом… идиоте», «об Смердякове» — the preposition «о/об» ('about') governs the prepositional case, the case used only after prepositions. «Об» (rather than «о») appears before a vowel sound.

Алеша вдруг почувствовал, что весь дрожит.  
Alyosha suddenly felt himself trembling all over.
> Perfective «почувствовал» + «весь» (all over): «Почувствовал» (perfective past of «почувствовать») marks the instantaneous onset of feeling. «Весь дрожит» — 'is trembling all over' — uses «весь» adverbially to mean the whole body; the imperfective present «дрожит» renders the ongoing shaking inside the «что»-clause.

— Ты сам знаешь кто, — бессильно вырвалось у него.  
"You yourself know who," broke from him feebly.
> Reflexive «вырвалось» — it broke from him: «Вырвалось» is the perfective past of «вырваться» (to break free, escape). With «у него» (from him) and a neuter subject (the words), the «-ся» verb gives an involuntary 'it broke / burst out of him' — speech he could not hold back.

Он задыхался.  
He could scarcely breathe.
> Imperfective «задыхался» — ongoing breathlessness: «Задыхался» is the imperfective past of «задыхаться» (to gasp, choke, be unable to breathe), a reflexive verb. The imperfective gives a continuous state — he 'could scarcely breathe,' was gasping — rather than a single completed act.

— Да кто, кто? — уже почти свирепо вскричал Иван.  
"But who, who?" Ivan cried out, by now almost ferociously.
> Emphatic opening «да»: Sentence-initial «да» here is not 'yes' but an impatient intensifier — 'but who, who?!' — venting Ivan's mounting fury. Russian dialogue leans on «да» this way to launch an agitated question.
> «свирепо» — ferociously: «Свирепо» (from «свирепый», fierce, savage) describes a ferocious, predatory vehemence. With «вскричал» (perfective 'cried out') it tracks Ivan's collapse from cold control into raw violence.

Вся сдержанность вдруг исчезла.  
All his restraint had suddenly vanished.
> Agreement and perfective «исчезла»: «Вся сдержанность» — 'all the restraint' — shows «весь» and the verb agreeing as feminine singular with «сдержанность» (a soft -ь noun that is feminine). «Исчезла» is perfective past: the restraint vanished all at once.

— Я одно только знаю, — всё так же почти шепотом проговорил Алеша. — Убил отца ''не ты''.  
"I know only one thing," Alyosha said, still almost in a whisper. "The one who killed our father was not you."
> Topic–comment: «не ты» as the stressed comment: The killing is the given topic (placed first: «убил отца»), and the focus falls on the final, negated «не ты» — 'the one who killed our father was NOT you.' Russian's free word order lets the new, weighted information land last; this is the chapter's title and refrain.

— «Не ты»! Что такое не ты? — остолбенел Иван.  
"'Not you'! What do you mean, not you?" Ivan was dumbfounded.
> «Что такое…?» — what is meant by…?: «Что такое X?» is the fixed frame 'what is X? / what do you mean by X?' Ivan turns the phrase «не ты» itself into the thing questioned, recoiling from the words.
> «остолбенеть» — to be turned to stone: «Остолбенел» (perfective past) comes from «столб», a post or pillar: to be rooted to the spot, dumbstruck, as if turned into a pillar. A vivid verb for Ivan's stunned reaction.

— Не ты убил отца, не ты! — твердо повторил Алеша.  
"It was not you who killed our father, not you!" Alyosha repeated firmly.
> Repeated subject-negation as refrain: Alyosha repeats the structure of s80 with «не» again fixed on «ты»: it is not the act but the agent that is denied, bracketing the line with «не ты … не ты!». The perfective «убил» names the single completed deed.

С полминуты длилось молчание.  
For half a minute the silence held.
> Accusative of duration; imperfective «длилось»: «С полминуты» ('for about half a minute') expresses approximate duration. «Длилось» is the imperfective past of the reflexive «длиться» (to last, go on), apt for a stretch of time that 'held' — the imperfective renders the silence as an ongoing state.

— Да я и сам знаю, что не я, ты бредишь? — бледно и искривленно усмехнувшись, проговорил Иван.  
"But I know myself that it wasn't me — are you raving?" said Ivan, with a wan, contorted smirk.
> Stacked particles «да… и… сам»: «Да я и сам знаю» piles up emphatic words: opening «да» (but/well), the additive «и» here meaning 'too / even,' and the intensifier «сам» — 'but I know that myself too.' This dense particle texture is the heart of Dostoevsky's spoken voice.
> Past gerund «усмехнувшись» — having smirked: «Усмехнувшись» is the perfective past gerund («деепричастие») of «усмехнуться» (to give a smirk), with «-ся». In «-вшись» it frames a completed action accompanying the main verb — he spoke, having (and while) twisting his face into a wan smirk.

Он как бы впился глазами в Алешу.  
He seemed to fasten his eyes on Alyosha.
> «как бы» softening; instrumental «глазами»: «Как бы» ('as if, as it were') is a recurring hedge in this passage, lending a dreamlike uncertainty to Ivan's acts. «Впился глазами» (fastened his eyes) uses «глаза» in the instrumental — the means by which he 'fixed onto' Alyosha.

Оба опять стояли у фонаря.  
The two of them were standing by the streetlamp again.
> «оба» (both) and «у» + genitive of place: «Оба» is the masculine numeral 'both,' taking a plural verb «стояли». «У фонаря» — 'by the streetlamp' — is «у» plus the genitive, the standard way to say 'beside / at.' The recurring lamp anchors the brothers' confrontation in space.

— Нет, Иван, ты сам себе несколько раз говорил, что убийца ты.  
"No, Ivan, you yourself have said several times that you are the murderer."
> «сам» + reflexive «себе» (to yourself): «Сам себе говорил» layers the intensifier «сам» with the dative of the reflexive pronoun «себя» — «себе», 'to yourself.' The imperfective «говорил» plus «несколько раз» (several times) frames it as a repeated act of self-accusation.
> Comment-final «ты» again: Inside the reported clause «что убийца ты», the predicate is fronted and «ты» falls last as the stressed identification — 'that the murderer is you.' Zero copula, nominative predicate, with focus carried by position.

— Когда я говорил?.. Я в Москве был… Когда я говорил? — совсем потерянно пролепетал Иван.  
"When did I say it?... I was in Moscow... When did I say it?" Ivan stammered, utterly at a loss.
> Prepositional «в Москве» of location: «В Москве» is «в» plus the prepositional case, marking location (where, not whither). Ivan's broken protest — 'I was in Moscow' — uses the past «был» with the imperfective sense of a state during that time.
> «пролепетать» — to babble, stammer: From «лепетать» (to babble, as a child does): «пролепетал» means he stammered out the words faintly and helplessly («совсем потерянно» — utterly at a loss). Dostoevsky chooses such expressive speech-verbs to register Ivan's disintegration.

— Ты говорил это себе много раз, когда оставался один в эти страшные два месяца, — по-прежнему тихо и раздельно продолжал Алеша.  
"You said it to yourself many times when you were left alone during these dreadful two months," Alyosha went on, as before, quietly and distinctly.
> Imperfective «оставался»; accusative of duration: «Оставался» (imperfective past, reflexive «-ся») describes the recurring state of being left alone. «В эти страшные два месяца» puts the time-span in the accusative of duration — 'during these dreadful two months' — with «два» governing the genitive singular «месяца».

Но говорил он уже как бы вне себя, как бы не своею волей, повинуясь какому-то непреодолимому велению. — Ты обвинял себя и признавался себе, что убийца никто как ты. Но убил не ты, ты ошибаешься, не ты убийца, слышишь меня, не ты! Меня бог послал тебе это сказать.  
But he was already speaking as if beside himself, as if not of his own will, obeying some irresistible command. "You accused yourself and confessed to yourself that no one but you was the murderer. But it was not you who killed, you are mistaken, you are not the murderer, do you hear me, not you! God has sent me to tell you this."
> Gerund «повинуясь» + dative object: «Повинуясь» is the imperfective present gerund of «повиноваться» (to obey), which governs the dative — «велению» (to a command). The gerund stacks attendant circumstance onto «говорил он»: he spoke as if obeying some irresistible command.
> «никто как ты» — none but you: «Никто как ты» is an idiomatic 'no one but you / none other than you.' Note the negative concord that governs «никто» elsewhere; here the «как»-comparison frames the exclusive identification Ivan confessed to himself. «Себе» is the reflexive dative.
> Negation pinned on «ты»; reflexive «ошибаешься»: The refrain returns with «не» fixed on «ты» — agent-negation, not act-negation. «Ошибаешься» is the imperfective present of the reflexive «ошибаться» (to be mistaken), a verb that exists only with «-ся».
> Fronted object «меня»; dative «тебе»: «Меня бог послал…» fronts the object «меня» for weight — 'it is ME God has sent.' «Тебе» is the dative ('to you'), «послал» the perfective past of a single divine commissioning. The line gives Alyosha's word its prophetic authority.

Оба замолчали. Целую длинную минуту протянулось это молчание. Оба стояли и всё смотрели друг другу в глаза. Оба были бледны.  
Both fell silent. A whole long minute the silence dragged on. Both stood and kept looking each other in the eyes. Both were pale.
> Accusative of duration; reflexive «протянулось»: «Целую длинную минуту» (a whole long minute) is the accusative of duration, with adjectives agreeing feminine-singular. «Протянулось» is the perfective past of the reflexive «протянуться» (to stretch out, drag on) — the silence 'dragged on.'
> «друг другу» — the reciprocal 'each other': «Друг друга / друг другу» is the fixed reciprocal expression 'one another,' here in the dative-plus-«в глаза» idiom 'looked each other in the eyes.' The imperfective «смотрели» holds the gaze open and continuous.
> Short-form adjective «бледны»: «Бледны» is the short (predicative) form of «бледный» (pale). Short adjectives can stand only as predicates and carry a clipped, bookish weight common in 19th-century prose — here, the bare statement 'both were pale.'

Вдруг Иван весь затрясся и крепко схватил Алешу за плечо.  
Suddenly Ivan began to shake all over and gripped Alyosha hard by the shoulder.
> Inceptive «затрясся»; «схватить за плечо»: The prefix «за-» on «затрясся» (reflexive «трястись», to shake) gives an inceptive sense — 'began to shake'; perfective aspect marks the sudden onset. «Схватил Алешу за плечо» uses the «хватать за + accusative» pattern — to seize someone BY a body part.

— Ты был у меня! — скрежущим шепотом проговорил он. — Ты был у меня ночью, когда он приходил… Признавайся… ты его видел, видел?  
"You were at my place!" he said in a grating whisper. "You were at my place that night, when he came... Confess it... you saw him, you saw him?"
> Imperfective «приходил» — round-trip visiting: «Приходил» is the imperfective of the prefixed motion verb «приходить/прийти» (to come). The imperfective here signals a completed visit understood as a there-and-back event ('when he came [and went]') — the multidirectional logic of prefixed motion verbs.
> Imperfective imperative «признавайся»: «Признавайся» is the imperative of the reflexive imperfective «признаваться» (to confess), built on the present stem with «-йся». The imperfective imperative urges Ivan into the act now, insistently — 'confess it!'

— Про кого ты говоришь… про Митю? — в недоумении спросил Алеша.  
"Whom are you talking about... about Mitya?" Alyosha asked, bewildered.
> «про» + accusative for 'about': «Про кого» — 'about whom' — uses the preposition «про» with the accusative «кого» (animate, so genitive-like form). «Про» is a more colloquial alternative to «о» + prepositional for the topic of speech.
> «недоумение» — bewilderment: «Недоумение» is perplexity, the state of not being able to make sense of something («не» + «доуметь»). «В недоумении» — 'in bewilderment' — captures Alyosha's confusion as Ivan's questions turn strange.

— Не про него, к черту изверга! — исступленно завопил Иван. — Разве ты знаешь, что он ко мне ходит? Как ты узнал, говори!  
"Not about him, the monster be damned!" Ivan screamed frantically. "Do you really know that he comes to me? How did you find out — tell me!"
> «к чёрту» — 'to the devil with…': «К чёрту» (literally 'to the devil,' «к» + dative «чёрту») is a dismissive curse — 'to hell with him.' Here it governs «изверга» (the monster, accusative/genitive of the animate noun): 'the monster be damned.'
> «разве» of incredulity; multidirectional «ходит»: «Разве» opens an incredulous question — 'do you really / can it be that…?' «Ходит» is the multidirectional motion verb «ходить» (to go habitually), so «он ко мне ходит» means 'he comes to me [repeatedly],' a recurring visitation.
> Perfective «узнал»; imperative «говори»: «Узнал» is the perfective past of «узнать» (to find out, learn) — a single completed discovery. «Говори» is the imperative of «говорить», urging immediate speech: 'tell me!'

— Кто ''он''? Я не знаю, про кого ты говоришь, — пролепетал Алеша уже в испуге.  
"Who is 'he'? I don't know whom you're talking about," Alyosha stammered, by now frightened.
> Genitive of negation with «не знаю»: «Не знаю» typically draws its complement into the genitive, and the embedded question «про кого ты говоришь» reflects this uncertainty of reference. Alyosha cannot grasp who 'he' is — the unnamed visitor being the devil who haunts Ivan.
> «испуг» — fright: «Испуг» is sudden fright, a start of fear. «Уже в испуге» — 'by now frightened' — tracks Alyosha's shift from bewilderment (s94) to alarm as Ivan's mind seems to give way.

— Нет, ты знаешь… иначе как же бы ты… не может быть, чтобы ты не знал…  
"No, you do know... otherwise how could you... it can't be that you didn't know..."
> Conditional «бы» with «же» — broken hypothetical: Ivan trails off into an unfinished conditional: «как же бы ты…» — 'otherwise how could you…' — where «бы» signals the hypothetical and «же» presses it. The thought breaks off mid-sentence, mirroring his unraveling.
> «чтобы» + past in negative concord: «Не может быть, чтобы ты не знал» — 'it can't be that you didn't know' — uses «чтобы» with the past-form verb «не знал» (the irrealis built on «чтобы»). The double negation («не может… не знал») is normal Russian negative logic, not a cancellation.

Но вдруг он как бы сдержал себя.  
But suddenly he seemed to check himself.
> Reflexive pronoun «себя» vs. «-ся»: «Сдержал себя» uses the full reflexive object pronoun «себя» (himself) with «сдержать» (to restrain) — distinct from a bound «-ся» verb. «Как бы» again hedges: he 'seemed to' check himself.

Он стоял и как бы что-то обдумывал.  
He stood there and seemed to be turning something over in his mind.
> Indefinite «что-то»; imperfective «обдумывал»: «Что-то» is 'something' specific but unidentified, formed with the clitic «-то» on «что». «Обдумывал» is imperfective past — the ongoing process of turning something over, not a finished decision.

Странная усмешка кривила его губы.  
A strange smile twisted his lips.
> Imperfective «кривила» — an ongoing twist: «Кривила» is imperfective past of «кривить» (to twist, distort), so the smile 'kept twisting' his lips rather than twisting them once. The subject «усмешка» and verb agree as feminine singular.

— Брат, — дрожащим голосом начал опять Алеша, — я сказал тебе это потому, что ты моему слову поверишь, я знаю это. Я тебе на всю жизнь это слово сказал: ''не ты!'' Слышишь, на всю жизнь. И это бог положил мне на душу тебе это сказать, хотя бы ты с сего часа навсегда возненавидел меня…  
"Brother," Alyosha began again in a trembling voice, "I told you this because you'll believe my word, I know it. I have told you this word for your whole life: 'not you!' Do you hear, for your whole life. And it is God who laid it on my soul to tell you this, even though from this very hour you should hate me forever..."
> «поверить» governs the dative: «Поверить» (perfective, to believe / trust) takes its object in the dative: «моему слову» — 'my word.' Perfective future «поверишь» views the believing as a single act Alyosha is sure of. «Моему» agrees with «слову» in the dative.
> «положить на душу» — to lay upon the soul: «Бог положил мне на душу… сказать» is an idiom of divine prompting: God 'laid it on my soul' to say this. «Мне» is the dative of the affected person, «на душу» the accusative of motion onto. The phrasing gives the words a sacred, involuntary weight.
> Concessive «хотя бы» + conditional: «Хотя бы… возненавидел» is a concessive conditional — 'even though / even if you should come to hate me.' «Бы» plus the past-form «возненавидел» (perfective, inceptive «воз-»: to come to hate) builds the hypothetical concession.
> «сего» — archaic 'this': «Сего» is the genitive of «сей», the bookish, elevated demonstrative 'this' that survives in fixed and solemn phrases. «С сего часа» — 'from this hour' — lifts Alyosha's vow into a deliberately scriptural register; Ivan will echo «сей» mockingly at s103.

Но Иван Федорович, по-видимому, совсем уже успел овладеть собой.  
But Ivan Fyodorovich had by now, it seemed, entirely managed to master himself.
> «овладеть собой» — to master oneself: «Овладеть» (to take possession of, master) governs the instrumental: «собой» is the instrumental of the reflexive «себя» — 'to master oneself.' «Успел» (managed, had time to) plus the infinitive frames the regaining of control as accomplished.

— Алексей Федорович, — проговорил он с холодною усмешкой, — я пророков и эпилептиков не терплю; посланников божиих особенно, вы это слишком знаете. С сей минуты я с вами разрываю и, кажется, навсегда. Прошу сей же час, на этом же перекрестке, меня оставить. Да вам и в квартиру по этому проулку дорога. Особенно поберегитесь заходить ко мне сегодня! Слышите?  
"Alexei Fyodorovich," he said with a cold smirk, "I cannot abide prophets and epileptics; messengers of God especially, as you know all too well. From this minute I break with you, and, it seems, forever. I ask you to leave me this very instant, at this very crossroads. And besides, this is your road home, down this lane. Above all, beware of coming to see me today! Do you hear?"
> Switching from ты to вы: Throughout the chapter Ivan and Alyosha address each other with the intimate «ты». Here Ivan deliberately switches to the formal «вы» («вы это знаете», «я с вами разрываю», «меня оставить») and to the cold address by full name and patronymic, «Алексей Федорович». The shift from «ты» to «вы» between brothers is a pointed act of distancing that signals the rupture Ivan is declaring. English 'you' hides this, so the chill must be read in the formal name and in our 'I break with you.'
> Genitive plural of negated objects: Under the negated «не терплю» (I cannot abide), the objects shift to the genitive: «пророков», «эпилептиков», «посланников» are all genitive plural — the genitive of negation operating across a list.
> «посланник божий» — messenger of God: «Посланник» is an envoy or messenger; «божий» is the possessive adjective 'of God / divine.' «Посланников божиих» (genitive plural, with the bookish ending «-иих») throws Alyosha's claim «меня бог послал» (s90) back as sarcasm — the religious register weaponized.
> Archaic «сей» with insistent «же»: Ivan piles on the bookish demonstrative «сей» ('this') — «с сей минуты», «сей же час» — laced with the particle «же» for emphasis ('this very hour,' 'this very crossroads'). The elevated «сей» mimics and mocks Alyosha's solemn «с сего часа», sealing the formal rupture.
> Imperative «поберегитесь» (polite plural): «Поберегитесь» is the imperative of the reflexive «поберечься» (to take care, beware), with the «-те-сь» that makes it plural/polite — consistent with Ivan's new «вы». It governs the imperfective «заходить» — 'beware of dropping in on me.'

Он повернулся и, твердо шагая, пошел прямо, не оборачиваясь.  
He turned and, striding firmly, walked straight ahead without looking back.
> Two gerunds framing the exit: Two imperfective present gerunds bracket «пошёл прямо»: «шагая» (striding) and the negated «не оборачиваясь» (not looking back, reflexive «-ясь»). Both run simultaneously with the main verb, painting the manner of Ivan's cold departure.

— Брат, — крикнул ему вслед Алеша, — если что-нибудь сегодня с тобой случится, подумай прежде всего обо мне!..  
"Brother," Alyosha called after him, "if anything happens to you today, think of me before anything else!.."
> Non-specific «что-нибудь»; real conditional: «Что-нибудь» is 'anything at all,' the non-specific indefinite (clitic «-нибудь»), fitting an open future possibility. «Если… случится» is a real conditional with perfective future — 'if anything should happen to you.'
> Imperative «подумай» + «о» + prepositional: «Подумай» is the perfective imperative of «подумать» (to think, give a thought). «Обо мне» is «о» (here «обо» before «мне») plus the prepositional — 'think of me first of all.' A final, pleading appeal across the rupture.

Но Иван не ответил.  
But Ivan made no reply.

Алеша стоял на перекрестке у фонаря, пока Иван не скрылся совсем во мраке.  
Alyosha stood at the crossroads by the streetlamp until Ivan had vanished entirely into the dark.
> «пока не» + perfective — 'until': «Пока… не скрылся» is the 'until' construction: «пока не» plus a perfective verb names the point up to which the standing action lasts. The «не» here is not a true negation — 'until Ivan had vanished.' «Скрылся» is reflexive perfective («скрыться», to disappear).
> «мрак» — gloom, darkness: «Мрак» is a heavier, more literary word for darkness than «темнота» — gloom, murk, often with spiritual or ominous overtones. «Скрылся во мраке» — vanished into the gloom — closes the scene on a fittingly bleak note.

Тогда он повернул и медленно направился к себе по переулку.  
Then he turned and made his way slowly home down the lane.
> «к себе» (homeward); «по» + dative: «К себе» literally 'to oneself,' idiomatically 'to one's own place / home.' «По переулку» is «по» plus the dative, expressing motion along the lane. «Направился» is the reflexive perfective «направиться» (to set off, head).

И он, и Иван Федорович квартировали особо, на разных квартирах: ни один из них не захотел жить в опустевшем доме Федора Павловича.  
Both he and Ivan Fyodorovich lodged separately, in different quarters: neither of them had wanted to live in the now-deserted house of Fyodor Pavlovich.
> «ни один… не» — negative concord: «Ни один из них не захотел» is textbook negative concord: «ни один» ('not a single one') requires «не» on the verb as well — 'neither of them wanted.' Russian piles negatives that English collapses into one.
> Past active participle «опустевшем»: «Опустевшем» is the past active participle of «опустеть» (to become empty, deserted), in the prepositional to agree with «доме». It compresses 'the house that had become empty' into one word — the now-deserted Karamazov house.

Алеша нанимал меблированную комнату в семействе одних мещан; Иван же Федорович жил довольно от него далеко и занимал просторное и довольно комфортное помещение во флигеле одного хорошего дома, принадлежавшего одной небедной вдове чиновнице.  
Alyosha rented a furnished room with a family of tradespeople; Ivan Fyodorovich, however, lived a fair distance from him and occupied a spacious and fairly comfortable set of rooms in the wing of a good house belonging to a not-poor widow, the wife of an official.
> Contrastive «же» linking the two brothers: Here «же» is the lightly adversative connective 'however / for his part,' setting Ivan's lodging against Alyosha's just described — «Алёша нанимал… Иван же Фёдорович жил…». Wedged between name and patronymic, it threads the contrast.
> «мещане» — the petty-bourgeois townsfolk: «Мещане» (genitive plural «мещан») was a legal estate («сословие») of the Russian Empire: the urban lower-middle class — small tradesmen and townspeople below the merchant guilds. «В семействе одних мещан» locates Alyosha modestly among such townsfolk.
> «флигель» — a detached wing or annex: A «флигель» (from German Flügel, 'wing') is an outbuilding or detached wing of a manor or large house, often rented out. Ivan occupies rooms «во флигеле» — in the wing — a typical genteel-but-separate lodging.
> Past active participle «принадлежавшего» + dative: «Принадлежавшего» is the past active participle of «принадлежать» (to belong), agreeing with «дома» (genitive). The verb governs the dative of the owner — «вдове чиновнице» — 'belonging to a widow.'

Но прислуживала ему в целом флигеле всего только одна древняя, совсем глухая старушонка, вся в ревматизмах, ложившаяся в шесть часов вечера и встававшая в шесть часов утра.  
But the only one to wait on him in the whole wing was a single ancient little old woman, quite deaf and racked with rheumatism, who went to bed at six in the evening and rose at six in the morning.
> «старушонка» — pejorative diminutive of old woman: From «старуха» (old woman) → «старушка» (little old woman) → «старушонка», where the suffix «-онка» adds a shade of pity or disparagement: a wretched, scrawny little crone. The expressive suffix colours the whole portrait of Ivan's sole, decrepit servant.
> Paired imperfective participles for habit: «Ложившаяся… встававшая» are two imperfective past active participles (from «ложиться», «вставать»), agreeing with «старушонка». Their imperfective stems give habitual sense — the old woman who 'used to go to bed' and 'rise' at six — folding her daily routine into one long modifier.
> Telling time: «в» + accusative, «часов» genitive plural: Clock time uses «в» plus the accusative hour. With «шесть» (5+) the noun goes to the genitive plural «часов»; «вечера» / «утра» (genitive: 'of the evening / morning') specify the half of the day — 'at six in the evening / morning.'

Иван Федорович стал до странности в эти два месяца нетребователен и очень любил оставаться совсем один.  
Over these two months Ivan Fyodorovich had grown undemanding to the point of strangeness, and was very fond of being left entirely alone.
> Inceptive «стал» + short adjective; «до странности»: «Стал нетребователен» pairs «стать» (to become) with the short-form adjective «нетребователен» (undemanding) — short forms favour predicate position after «стать». «До странности» — 'to the point of strangeness' — is «до» plus genitive of degree.
> «оставаться один» — to be left alone: «Оставаться» (imperfective, reflexive «-ся», to remain/be left) with «один» (alone) gives the habitual 'to be left entirely alone.' The imperfective infinitive after «любил» suits a settled fondness for solitude over these two months.

Даже комнату, которую занимал, он сам убирал, а в остальные комнаты своего помещения даже и заходил редко.  
He even tidied the room he occupied himself, and rarely so much as set foot in the other rooms of his lodging.
> Relative «которую» + fronting for emphasis: «Которую» agrees with «комнату» in gender/number but takes the accusative its own clause needs (object of «занимал»). The whole object phrase is fronted before «он сам убирал» to stress the contrast — even THAT room he tidied himself.
> Multidirectional «заходил» for habitual visiting: «Заходил» is the imperfective of the prefixed motion verb «заходить/зайти» (to drop in, step into). The imperfective with «редко» (rarely) gives the habitual: he 'rarely even set foot' in the other rooms. «Даже и» intensifies — 'even.'

Дойдя до ворот своего дома и уже взявшись за ручку звонка, он остановился.  
Having reached the gate of his house and already taken hold of the bell-pull, he stopped.
> Two past gerunds: «дойдя» and «взявшись»: «Дойдя» (perfective past gerund of «дойти», having reached) and «взявшись» (of «взяться», having taken hold) are «деепричастия» chaining completed prior actions before the main «он остановился». «Взяться за + accusative» — to grasp by — governs «ручку».
> «ручка звонка» — the bell-pull: A 19th-century gate had a «звонок» (bell) worked by a «ручка» — a handle or pull. «Взявшись за ручку звонка» pictures Ivan with his hand already on the bell-pull at his gate, the small physical pause before his fateful change of mind.

Он почувствовал, что весь еще дрожит злобною дрожью.  
He felt that he was still trembling all over with a spiteful shudder.
> Cognate instrumental «дрожью»: «Дрожит… дрожью» is a figura etymologica — the verb «дрожать» (to tremble) takes its own cognate noun «дрожь» (a shudder) in the instrumental of manner, qualified by «злобною» (spiteful). The bookish «-ою» ending on the adjective is a literary variant of «-ой».

Вдруг он бросил звонок, плюнул, повернул назад и быстро пошел опять совсем на другой, противоположный конец города, версты за две от своей квартиры, в один крошечный, скосившийся бревенчатый домик, в котором квартировала Марья Кондратьевна, бывшая соседка Федора Павловича, приходившая к Федору Павловичу на кухню за супом и которой Смердяков пел тогда свои песни и играл на гитаре.  
Suddenly he let go of the bell, spat, turned back, and walked quickly off again to the entirely opposite end of town, some two versts from his own lodging, to a tiny, lopsided log cottage in which lived Marya Kondratyevna, the former neighbor of Fyodor Pavlovich, who used to come to Fyodor Pavlovich's kitchen for soup, and to whom Smerdyakov had sung his songs and played the guitar in those days.
> Versts, an old Russian distance: A «верста» (verst) is a pre-metric Russian unit of distance equal to about 1.07 km (two-thirds of a mile). «Версты за две от своей квартиры» means roughly two versts away; we render it 'some two versts.' You will meet «верста» constantly in 19th-century Russian prose for measuring travel.
> Perfective chain driving the action forward: A string of perfectives — «бросил, плюнул, повернул, пошёл» — fires off Ivan's abrupt reversal event by event. The perfective aspect moves the narrative forward in discrete completed acts, the opposite of the imperfective description that frames the passage.
> «бревенчатый домик» — a little log cottage: «Бревенчатый» means built of logs («бревно»); «домик» is the diminutive of «дом», a little house. «Скосившийся» (a reflexive past participle of «скоситься», to go askew) adds 'lopsided' — a tiny, sagging log hut, the humble dwelling Smerdyakov has come to.
> Past active participle + «за» + instrumental of purpose: «Приходившая» (past active participle of «приходить», agreeing with Marya) opens a participial relative — 'who used to come.' «За супом» is «за» plus the instrumental in its 'to fetch / for' sense — coming 'for soup,' a quietly humiliating detail of her poverty.
> Relative «которой» in the dative: «Которой» refers to Marya but takes the dative its clause demands — «пел… которой» (sang TO whom). «Свои песни» uses the reflexive possessive «свои» ('his own songs'), pointing back to Smerdyakov, the subject of the relative clause.

Прежний домик свой она продала и теперь проживала с матерью почти в избе, а больной, почти умирающий Смердяков, с самой смерти Федора Павловича поселился у них.  
Her former little house she had sold, and now lived with her mother in what was almost a peasant hut, while the sick, all but dying Smerdyakov had settled in with them ever since the death of Fyodor Pavlovich.
> Fronted object + reflexive possessive «свой»: «Прежний домик свой» is fronted before the verb for topical weight — 'her former little house, she had sold.' «Свой» is the reflexive possessive ('her own'), referring to the subject «она»; placing it after the noun is a bookish flourish.
> «изба» — the peasant log hut: An «изба» is the traditional Russian peasant's log house — the very emblem of rural poverty. «Почти в избе» ('in what was almost a peasant hut') marks how far Marya and her mother have come down in the world.
> Present active participle «умирающий»; perfective «поселился»: «Умирающий» is the present active participle of «умирать» (to be dying), agreeing with «Смердяков» — 'the all-but-dying Smerdyakov.' «Поселился» is reflexive perfective («поселиться», to take up residence) — a single completed settling-in.

Вот к нему-то и направился теперь Иван Федорович, влекомый одним внезапным и непобедимым соображением.  
It was to him, then, that Ivan Fyodorovich now made his way, drawn by a single sudden and irresistible impulse.
> Emphatic «вот… -то и» framing the goal: «Вот к нему-то и направился» wraps the destination in emphasis: presentative «вот», the topic-clitic «-то» on «нему», and «и' before the verb all spotlight Smerdyakov ('it was to HIM that…'). Heavy front-loading of the goal is characteristic of Dostoevsky's narrative tension.
> Present passive participle «влекомый» + instrumental agent: «Влекомый» is a rare present passive participle (from «влечь», to draw, drag), bookish in the extreme — 'being drawn.' Its agent stands in the instrumental: «соображением» (by an impulse), with the adjectives «внезапным», «непобедимым» agreeing. This learned passive crowns the chapter's closing sentence.
---

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.