# The Brothers Karamazov, The Fatal Day

Братья Карамазовы · Fyodor Dostoevsky · Book XII — A Judicial Error

Source: https://1732studios.com/books/karamazov/b12-c1. Data: https://1732studios.com/books/karamazov/b12-c1.json.


На другой день после описанных мною событий, в десять часов утра, открылось заседание нашего окружного суда и начался суд над Дмитрием Карамазовым.  
On the day after the events I have described, at ten in the morning, our district court opened its session, and the trial of Dmitri Karamazov began.
> Past passive participle + instrumental agent: «Описанных» is the past passive participle of «описать» (to describe), declined in the genitive plural to agree with «событий». The agent — the one who did the describing — stands in the instrumental «мною» (a bookish variant of «мной»), exactly as Russian marks the doer in a passive.
> Reflexive -ся as inchoative middle: Both «открылось» (the session opened) and «начался» (the trial began) carry the clitic «-ся», which here makes the verbs intransitive middles — the session opens and the trial begins of themselves, with no expressed agent.
> «над» + instrumental: a trial 'over' someone: «Суд над кем-то» — 'a trial of/over someone' — uses the preposition «над», which governs the instrumental «Дмитрием Карамазовым». Russian frames standing trial as the court sitting in judgment 'over' the accused.

Скажу вперед, и скажу с настойчивостью: я далеко не считаю себя в силах передать всё то, что произошло на суде, и не только в надлежащей полноте, но даже и в надлежащем порядке.  
Let me say in advance, and say it firmly: I am far from considering myself capable of conveying everything that happened at the trial — not only in its proper fullness, but even in its proper order.
> Perfective present as simple future: «Скажу» is the perfective «сказать» conjugated like a present, which in the perfective yields future meaning: 'I shall say'. The narrator uses it twice to promise a single, decisive utterance — note the contrast with imperfective «говорить» (to speak, ongoing).
> Reflexive себя as object: «Считаю себя в силах» — 'I consider myself capable'. The reflexive pronoun «себя» is the full object pointing back to the subject «я»; it has no nominative and serves for any person. «В силах» is an idiom, literally 'in [one's] powers', i.e. up to the task.
> Correlative то…что: «Всё то, что произошло» — 'everything that happened' — pairs the demonstrative «то» with the relative «что» in a correlative frame, the bookish way to say 'that which'. The relative «что» (not «который») is standard after a neuter «то».
> «вперёд» = 'in advance': Beyond its literal 'forward', «вперёд» here means 'beforehand, in advance' — 'let me say beforehand'. A common idiomatic extension of the spatial adverb into the temporal.

Мне всё кажется, что если бы всё припомнить и всё как следует разъяснить, то потребуется целая книга, и даже пребольшая.  
It seems to me that if one were to recall it all and explain it all as it ought to be explained, it would take a whole book, and a very large one at that.
> Conditional «если бы» with an infinitive protasis: «Если бы … припомнить … разъяснить» builds the irrealis with the particle «бы», but unusually the condition is carried by bare infinitives ('if one were to recall and explain') rather than a past-tense verb — a generalizing, subjectless 'one'. The «то» then introduces the consequence.
> Dative experiencer with «кажется»: «Мне кажется» — 'it seems to me' — is a classic impersonal construction: no nominative subject, the experiencer in the dative «мне», the verb in invariable third-person «кажется». The «всё» here is an adverbial 'keep on' ('it keeps seeming to me').
> Intensifying prefix «пре-»: «Пребольшая» = 'a very large one indeed'. The prefix «пре-» heaps emphasis onto an adjective ('exceedingly, most'), a slightly archaic, expressive intensifier here capping «целая книга» — a whole book, and a huge one at that.

А потому пусть не посетуют на меня, что я передам лишь то, что меня лично поразило и что я особенно запомнил.  
And so let no one reproach me for relating only what struck me personally and what I particularly remember.
> Third-person imperative with «пусть»: «Пусть не посетуют» — 'let [people] not reproach me' — forms a third-person command with the particle «пусть» plus the future-form verb. It is the standard way Russian expresses 'let him/them do', where English needs 'let'.
> Accusative object before its verb: In «что меня … поразило», the animate object «меня» (me) precedes the verb «поразило» (struck), a freedom Russian case marking allows. Word order here foregrounds the speaker as the one acted upon by what 'struck' him.
> «посетовать» — to reproach, complain: «Посетовать на кого-то» is a somewhat bookish verb meaning to grumble at or reproach someone, governing «на» + accusative. Slightly elevated against the everyday «жаловаться».

Я мог принять второстепенное за главнейшее, даже совсем упустить самые резкие необходимейшие черты…  
I may have taken the secondary for the chief thing, may even have left out altogether the sharpest and most necessary features…
> Substantivized adjectives + superlative «-ейш-»: «Второстепенное» ('the secondary') and «главнейшее» ('the chief-most') are neuter adjectives used as nouns. «Главнейшее» carries the bookish superlative suffix «-ейш-», intensifying 'main' to 'most important of all' — a literary flourish over the plain «самое главное».
> Two superlatives stacked: Two superlatives pile up: periphrastic «самые резкие» ('the sharpest', with «самый» declined to agree) and suffixal «необходимейшие» ('the most indispensable'). Both agree with «черты» in the accusative plural; the doubling is deliberate emphatic excess.

А впрочем, вижу, что лучше не извиняться.  
But then, I see it is better not to apologize.
> Impersonal comparative «лучше» + infinitive: «Лучше не извиняться» — 'it is better not to apologize' — is an impersonal predicate: the invariable comparative «лучше» plus a reflexive infinitive, with no subject. The «-ся» on «извиняться» makes it 'to excuse oneself'.
> «а впрочем» — 'but then again': «А впрочем» is a discourse hinge marking a sudden self-correction or change of mind — 'but then again, on second thoughts'. It is a hallmark of Dostoevsky's restless, self-interrupting narrator.

Сделаю как умею, и читатели сами поймут, что я сделал лишь как умел.  
I shall do as best I can, and the readers will understand for themselves that I did only what I could.
> Aspect across present and past of «уметь»: The sentence pivots on perfective «сделаю» ('I shall do', simple future) against imperfective «умею/умел» ('I can / I could', an ability viewed as ongoing state). The shift from present «умею» to past «умел» is the only change carrying the time-frame.
> Intensifier «сами»: «Сами» here is the emphatic intensifier «сам» ('-self'), agreeing with «читатели» in the nominative plural: 'the readers themselves will understand'. Distinct from reflexive «себя», «сам» underlines that they will grasp it on their own.

И во-первых, прежде чем мы войдем в залу суда, упомяну о том, что меня в этот день особенно удивило.  
And, first of all, before we enter the courtroom, let me mention something that particularly astonished me on that day.
> «прежде чем» + perfective; motion «войти»: «Прежде чем» ('before') opens a temporal clause with perfective «войдём» ('we enter, will have entered'), a prefixed verb of motion (в- + идти) meaning to go in. The prefix turns the bare motion verb into an ordinary perfective of arrival.
> «зала» — the older feminine 'hall': Modern Russian says «зал» (masculine); Dostoevsky uses the 19th-century feminine «зала», hence the accusative «залу» and later prepositional «в зале». A period flavour, common in his courtroom scene.
> «упомянуть о» + prepositional, with «то, что»: «Упомянуть о чём-то» governs «о» + the prepositional «о том», which is then unpacked by the relative «что». The verb «упомяну» is again a perfective present read as future ('I shall mention').

Впрочем, удивило не одного меня, а, как оказалось впоследствии, и всех.  
It astonished, however, not me alone, but, as turned out afterward, everyone.
> Contrastive «а» with «не … а»: The frame «не одного меня, а … всех» ('not me alone, but everyone') uses the contrastive conjunction «а» to correct and replace — not X but Y. «Одного меня» is the accusative of «один» agreeing with «меня», here 'me alone'.
> Reflexive «оказаться» — 'turn out': «Оказалось» (from «оказаться», -ся verb) is the impersonal 'it turned out', a parenthetical the narrator threads through the chapter to flag hindsight. The «-ся» here gives a middle 'prove to be' sense.

Именно: все знали, что дело это заинтересовало слишком многих, что все сгорали от нетерпения, когда начнется суд, что в обществе нашем много говорили, предполагали, восклицали, мечтали уже целые два месяца.  
Namely this: everyone knew that the case had aroused too many people's interest, that all were burning with impatience for the trial to begin, that in our society there had been a great deal of talk, of conjecture, of exclaiming and dreaming for two whole months already.
> Imperfective past for mounting state; «от» + genitive of cause: «Сгорали от нетерпения» — 'were burning with impatience' — uses the imperfective past for an ongoing, swelling state. «От нетерпения» is «от» + genitive expressing cause ('from/out of impatience'), a standard way to name what a feeling springs from.
> Perfective future in an embedded clause: «Когда начнётся суд» — 'when the trial would begin'. «Начнётся» is the perfective future of reflexive «начаться»; embedded under a past main clause, Russian keeps the future tense where English shifts to 'would'.
> Chain of imperfective pasts: Four imperfective past verbs in a row paint two months of continuous, repeated activity — talking, conjecturing, exclaiming, dreaming. The imperfective is precisely the aspect for this habitual, durative background buzz.

Все знали тоже, что дело это получило всероссийскую огласку, но все-таки не представляли себе, что оно до такой уже жгучей, до такой раздражительной степени потрясло всех и каждого, да и не у нас только, а повсеместно, как оказалось это на самом суде в этот день.  
Everyone knew, too, that the case had gained nationwide notoriety, and yet none of them imagined that it had shaken every last person to such a burning, such an exasperating degree — and not among us alone, but everywhere — as it proved to have done at the trial itself on that day.
> «представить себе» — picture to oneself: «Представлять себе» ('to imagine, picture to oneself') pairs the verb with the dative reflexive «себе» — literally 'to present to oneself'. The dative «себе» is the indirect object pointing back at the subject.
> «до такой степени» + animate accusative: «До такой степени» ('to such a degree', «до» + genitive) measures the intensity of «потрясло» (shook). The object «всех и каждого» is in the animate accusative (= genitive form) — 'everyone and each one', an emphatic totalizing pair.
> «всероссийский» / «огласка»: «Всероссийский» = 'all-Russian, nationwide'; «огласка» = publicity, the becoming-known of something, often with a tinge of scandal ('notoriety'). Together they stress that the parricide case had become a national affair.

К этому дню к нам съехались гости не только из нашего губернского города, но и из некоторых других городов России, а наконец, из Москвы и из Петербурга.  
By that day guests had gathered to us not only from our provincial capital, but also from several other towns of Russia, and finally from Moscow and from Petersburg.
> Prefixed «съехаться» + dative goal: «Съехались» (from «съехаться», -ся reciprocal/collective) means 'gathered, converged from many directions'. The prefix «с-» gathers the motion to one point; «к нам» (к + dative) names that point — 'to us'.

Приехали юристы, приехало даже несколько знатных лиц, а также и дамы.  
Jurists arrived; even a number of distinguished persons arrived, and ladies as well.
> Verb agreement with «несколько» + genitive: Note the agreement split: «приехали юристы» (plural) but «приехало несколько лиц» (neuter singular). A quantifier like «несколько» takes the genitive plural «лиц» and pulls the verb into a default neuter singular — a regular quirk of counting words.
> «знатный» — of high birth: «Знатный» means high-born, of noble rank or distinction (not merely 'famous'). «Лиц» here is 'persons' (gen. pl. of «лицо»), so «знатные лица» = persons of rank, the social elite drawn to the trial.

Все билеты были расхватаны.  
Every ticket had been snapped up.
> Periphrastic passive: «быть» + short past passive participle: «Были расхватаны» is the analytic passive — «быть» in the past plus the short past passive participle of perfective «расхватать» ('to snatch up'). The short form «расхватаны» agrees with «билеты» in number and states a result: every ticket was gone.

Для особенно почетных и знатных посетителей из мужчин отведены были даже совсем уже необыкновенные места сзади стола, за которым помещался суд: там появился целый ряд занятых разными особами кресел, чего никогда у нас прежде не допускалось.  
For the especially honored and distinguished visitors among the men, quite extraordinary places had even been arranged behind the table at which the court was seated: there appeared a whole row of armchairs occupied by various personages, something that had never before been permitted with us.
> Passive with inverted word order: «Отведены были … места» — 'places had been set aside' — is again a periphrastic passive (short participle «отведены» + «были»), but with the participle thrown to the front for rhetorical weight, the auxiliary trailing. This inversion is a stylistic, not grammatical, choice.
> Relative «который» in the instrumental: «За которым помещался суд» — 'behind which the court was seated'. «Который» agrees with its antecedent «стола» (table) in masculine singular, but takes the instrumental case demanded by the preposition «за» ('behind') within its own clause.
> Genitive «чего» + negative concord; -ся passive: «Чего … не допускалось» — 'something which had never been permitted'. The relative «что» appears as genitive «чего» under negation, «никогда … не» shows negative concord (two negatives, one meaning), and «допускалось» is an imperfective -ся passive ('was [being] allowed').

Особенно много оказалось дам — наших и приезжих, я думаю, даже не менее половины всей публики.  
There turned out to be a particularly large number of ladies — our own and the visiting kind — I think no fewer, even, than half the entire audience.
> «не менее» + genitive of quantity: «Не менее половины» — 'no fewer than half' — uses the comparative «менее» ('less/fewer') with the genitive «половины … публики» it quantifies. The whole phrase weighs the crowd: at least half were ladies.
> Impersonal «оказалось» + genitive subject: «Особенно много оказалось дам» reads literally 'there turned out [to be] especially many ladies': impersonal neuter «оказалось», with «много» governing the genitive plural «дам». Russian frequently frames existence and quantity this subjectless way.

Одних только съехавшихся отовсюду юристов оказалось так много, что даже не знали уж, где их и поместить, так как все билеты давно уже были розданы, выпрошены и вымолены.  
Of the jurists alone who had gathered from every quarter there proved to be so many that they no longer even knew where to seat them, since every ticket had long since been handed out, begged for, and wheedled away.
> Past active participle as modifier: «Съехавшихся» is the past active participle of «съехаться» ('who had gathered'), declined in the genitive plural to agree with «юристов» and retaining the reflexive «-ся». It compresses a whole «которые съехались» clause into one word — a literary economy.
> Infinitive of deliberation after «где»: «Не знали, где их поместить» — 'they no longer knew where to seat them' — uses a bare infinitive after «где» to express deliberation ('where one should...'). The particle «и» before «поместить» adds an exasperated 'even where to put them'.
> Three short passive participles in series: A triple passive: «розданы, выпрошены, вымолены» — tickets 'handed out, begged for, and wheedled away' — all short past passive participles sharing the one «были». The escalating verbs («выпросить», «вымолить» = to obtain by begging, by pleading) build a small crescendo of desperation.

Я видел сам, как в конце залы, за эстрадой, была временно и наскоро устроена особая загородка, в которую впустили всех этих съехавшихся юристов, и они почли себя даже счастливыми, что могли тут хоть стоять, потому что стулья, чтобы выгадать место, были из этой загородки совсем вынесены, и вся набравшаяся толпа простояла всё «дело» густо сомкнувшеюся кучей, плечом к плечу.  
I saw for myself how, at the back of the hall, behind the dais, a special enclosure had been knocked together temporarily and in haste, into which all these jurists who had gathered were let in, and they counted themselves fortunate even to be able to stand there, for the chairs had been carried entirely out of that enclosure to make room, and the whole assembled crowd stood through the whole "case" in a densely packed mass, shoulder to shoulder.
> Passive setup + indefinite-personal verb: The clause shifts from a passive ('an enclosure had been set up', «была устроена») to an indefinite-personal active 'they let in' («впустили», a bare 3rd-plural with no stated subject = 'people/someone let in'). Russian toggles fluidly between the two impersonal strategies.
> «счесть себя» + instrumental predicate: «Почли себя счастливыми» — 'counted themselves fortunate'. The predicate adjective «счастливыми» takes the instrumental, the case Russian uses for a state ascribed via verbs like «счесть/считать». «Почли» is the archaic perfective past of «почесть» (to deem).
> Purpose clause «чтобы» + infinitive: «Чтобы выгадать место» — 'in order to make room' — is a purpose clause; «чтобы» plus an infinitive (one subject throughout) expresses the goal. «Выгадать» = to gain, save, contrive (here, space).
> Participle in the archaic instrumental «-ою»: «Сомкнувшеюся кучей» — 'in a densely closed-up mass' — is the past active participle of «сомкнуться» modifying «кучей» (instrumental of manner). The ending «-ою» is the older, bookish instrumental feminine (modern «-ой»), lending period gravity.
> «плечом к плечу» — shoulder to shoulder: A set idiom: instrumental «плечом» ('with shoulder') governed by «к плечу» (to shoulder), meaning packed tightly, shoulder to shoulder. The frozen case forms are part of its fixed shape.

Некоторые из дам, особенно из приезжих, явились на хорах залы чрезвычайно разряженные, но большинство дам даже и о нарядах забыло.  
Some of the ladies, especially the visiting ones, appeared in the gallery of the hall exceedingly decked out, but the majority of the ladies had even forgotten about their dress.
> «большинство» takes a singular verb: «Большинство дам … забыло» — 'the majority of the ladies had forgotten' — pairs the collective «большинство» (+ genitive «дам») with a neuter singular verb «забыло». The collective noun, not the plural «дам», governs agreement.
> «разряженный» — decked out: «Разряженные» means dressed up to the nines, gaudily adorned (from «разрядиться», to deck oneself out). Faintly ironic against the «но» that follows: the visiting ladies are overdressed, while the locals have forgotten dress entirely.

На их лицах читалось истерическое, жадное, болезненное почти любопытство.  
On their faces could be read a hysterical, greedy, almost morbid curiosity.
> -ся passive «читалось» with fronted locative: «На их лицах читалось … любопытство» — 'on their faces could be read … a curiosity'. «Читалось» is an imperfective -ся passive ('was [to be] read'); the subject «любопытство» sits at the very end, after a fronted prepositional «на их лицах», for atmospheric build-up.
> Triple attributive agreement: Three neuter adjectives — «истерическое, жадное, болезненное» — all agree with «любопытство» (neuter nominative), with «почти» ('almost') hedging the last. The accumulation of epithets is a signature of Dostoevsky's feverish description.

Одна из характернейших особенностей всего этого собравшегося в зале общества и которую необходимо отметить, состояла в том, что, как и оправдалось потом по многим наблюдениям, почти все дамы, по крайней мере огромнейшее большинство их, стояли за Митю и за оправдание его.  
One of the most characteristic features of this whole company assembled in the hall, and one that must be noted, consisted in the fact that — as was indeed borne out afterward by many observations — almost all the ladies, or at least the overwhelming majority of them, stood for Mitya and for his acquittal.
> Past active participle modifying «общества»: «Собравшегося … общества» — 'of the company that had assembled' — is the past active participle of «собраться» in the genitive (after «особенностей … общества»). It packs a relative clause into one agreeing word, very much the literary register.
> «состоять в том, что» — consist in the fact that: «Состояла в том, что …» is the formal frame 'consisted in the fact that', with «в том» (prepositional) unpacked by a «что»-clause. «Стоять за кого-то» (+ accusative «за Митю») idiomatically means to take someone's side, to be 'for' them.
> «Митя» — the diminutive of Дмитрий: «Митя» (accusative «Митю») is the affectionate short form of Дмитрий — the same Dmitri Karamazov named formally in s1. The ladies' use of the warm diminutive already signals their partisanship toward the defendant.

Может быть, главное, потому, что о нем составилось представление как о покорителе женских сердец.  
Chiefly, perhaps, because a notion had formed of him as a conqueror of women's hearts.
> -ся middle «составиться» — a notion 'formed itself': «Составилось представление» — 'a notion had formed'. The «-ся» makes «составиться» a middle/inchoative: the impression came together of itself, with no agent named. «О нём» (о + prepositional) marks the topic — 'about him'.
> «покоритель сердец» — conqueror of hearts: «Покоритель женских сердец» — literally 'subduer of women's hearts', i.e. a lady-killer, a Don Juan. A slightly elevated, novelistic cliché the narrator deploys with light irony about Mitya's reputation.

Знали, что явятся две женщины-соперницы.  
It was known that two rival women would appear.
> Dropped subject + perfective future «явятся»: «Знали» ('[people] knew') has no subject — an indefinite-personal 3rd-plural. The embedded «явятся» is the perfective future of «явиться» (to appear), kept in the future though governed by a past 'knew', where English needs 'would appear'.

Одна из них, то есть Катерина Ивановна, особенно всех интересовала; про нее рассказывалось чрезвычайно много необыкновенного, про ее страсть к Мите, несмотря даже на его преступление, рассказывались удивительные анекдоты.  
One of them, namely Katerina Ivanovna, interested everyone particularly; a great deal that was extraordinary was told about her, and astonishing anecdotes were related about her passion for Mitya, in spite even of his crime.
> -ся passive, impersonal vs. agreeing: Two -ся passives: impersonal «рассказывалось» ('it was told', no subject) and agreeing «рассказывались анекдоты» ('anecdotes were told', plural subject). Russian uses the -ся passive freely for hearsay and rumour, foregrounding the talk over any teller.
> «несмотря на» + accusative: «Несмотря на» ('in spite of') governs the accusative «его преступление» — literally 'not looking at', a frozen gerundive preposition. The «даже» ('even') intensifies the concession: her passion held despite his crime.
> «анекдот» — anecdote, not 'joke': A false friend: 19th-century «анекдот» means a striking little story or piece of gossip about a real person, not a 'joke' (its modern colloquial sense). Here: the remarkable tales circulating about Katerina Ivanovna.

Особенно упоминалось об ее гордости (она почти никому в нашем городе не сделала визитов), об «аристократических связях».  
Particular mention was made of her pride (she had paid calls on almost no one in our town) and of her "aristocratic connections."
> Impersonal -ся passive «упоминалось»: «Упоминалось об …» — 'mention was made of …' — is an impersonal -ся passive with no subject, the topic carried by «об» + prepositional «её гордости». «Об» (not «о») appears before the vowel of «её».
> Negative concord with «никому»: «Никому … не сделала» — 'paid calls on no one' — shows Russian negative concord: the negative pronoun «никому» (dative) co-occurs obligatorily with «не» on the verb. «Визитов» is genitive plural, a partitive/negated object.

Говорили, что она намерена просить правительство, чтоб ей позволили сопровождать преступника на каторгу и обвенчаться с ним где-нибудь в рудниках под землей.  
It was said that she intended to petition the government for permission to accompany the convict to penal servitude and to be wed to him somewhere down in the mines, underground.
> «чтобы» + dative + past-form: indirect request: «Чтоб ей позволили» — 'that she be permitted'. After a verb of wishing/asking, «чтобы» (here colloquial «чтоб») takes a past-form verb in irrealis; «ей» is the dative recipient of permission, «позволили» an indefinite 3rd-plural ('they would allow her').
> Reflexive «обвенчаться» + indefinite «-нибудь»: «Обвенчаться» (to get married, in church) is reflexive/reciprocal in «-ся», taking «с ним» (instrumental of accompaniment). «Где-нибудь» is the non-specific indefinite 'somewhere or other', stressing the vague, desperate romanticism of the plan.

С не меньшим волнением ожидали появления на суде и Грушеньки, как соперницы Катерины Ивановны.  
With no less agitation was awaited the appearance at the trial of Grushenka as well, as the rival of Katerina Ivanovna.
> «ожидать» + genitive object: «Ожидать» ('to await') governs the genitive: «ожидали появления … Грушеньки» — 'awaited the appearance of Grushenka'. The instrumental «с … волнением» ('with agitation') is fronted for emphasis; the negated comparative «не меньшим» means 'no less'.
> «Грушенька» — diminutive of Аграфена: «Грушенька» is the tender diminutive (от «Груша», from Аграфена), with the affectionate «-енька» suffix. The narrator's use of it — versus Katerina's formal name-and-patronymic — quietly marks the warmer, more popular figure.

С мучительным любопытством ожидали встречи пред судом двух соперниц — аристократической гордой девушки и «гетеры»; Грушенька, впрочем, была известнее нашим дамам, чем Катерина Ивановна.  
With tormenting curiosity people awaited the meeting before the court of the two rivals — the proud aristocratic girl and the "hetaera"; Grushenka, however, was better known to our ladies than Katerina Ivanovna.
> Genitive object «встречи» + genitive of '2': «Ожидали встречи … двух соперниц» — 'awaited the meeting of the two rivals'. «Встречи» is genitive after «ожидать»; «двух соперниц» pairs the numeral «два/две» in the genitive «двух» with the noun, the count phrase itself in the genitive of the larger frame.
> Comparative «известнее» + dative: «Известнее нашим дамам» — 'better known to our ladies'. The predicative comparative «известнее» (from «известный») is invariable, and 'known to' takes the dative «нашим дамам», the case of the one to whom something is known.

Ее, «погубительницу Федора Павловича и несчастного сына его», видали наши дамы и прежде, и все, почти до единой, удивлялись, как в такую «самую обыкновенную, совсем даже некрасивую собой русскую мещанку» могли до такой степени влюбиться отец и сын.  
Her, "the ruin of Fyodor Pavlovich and of his unhappy son," our ladies had seen before as well, and all of them, almost to a woman, marveled how a father and son could have fallen so deeply in love with such "a perfectly ordinary, even quite plain Russian townswoman."
> Fronted object + multidirectional «видать»: «Её … видали … и прежде» throws the accusative object «её» to the front for topic emphasis ('Her … our ladies had seen before too'). «Видали» is the iterative/colloquial «видать», imperfective, fitting a repeated, habitual seeing.
> «влюбиться в» + accusative; reflexive: «Влюбиться в кого-то» ('to fall in love with') is reflexive in «-ся» and governs «в» + accusative — here the long noun phrase «такую … русскую мещанку». The verb «могли … влюбиться» splits modal past + perfective infinitive across the clause.
> «мещанка» — townswoman of the petty-burgher estate: «Мещанин/мещанка» named a member of the «мещанство», the legal estate of small townsfolk below the merchants — petty bourgeois. In the ladies' usage it is faintly contemptuous: a 'common' townswoman, no lady at all.

Словом, толков было много.  
In a word, there was a great deal of talk.
> Genitive of quantity with «много»: «Толков было много» — literally 'of talk there was much'. «Много» governs the genitive «толков» (gen. pl. of «толк», 'talk, rumour'), and the verb is impersonal neuter «было». Fronting «толков» gives the summary 'as for talk — there was plenty'.
> «словом» — 'in a word': Instrumental «словом» ('with a word') functions as a summarizing discourse marker, 'in short, in a word'. A frozen case form turned conjunction, gathering up the foregoing rumours.

Мне положительно известно, что собственно в нашем городе произошло даже несколько серьезных семейных ссор из-за Мити.  
I know for a positive fact that in our town itself several serious family quarrels even broke out on Mitya's account.
> Dative + short adjective «известно»: «Мне … известно, что …» — 'it is known to me that …' — is an impersonal predicate: the dative experiencer «мне» with the short neuter adjective «известно» ('known'), opening a «что»-clause. The short form is the predicative norm here.
> «из-за» + genitive of cause: «Из-за Мити» — 'because of/on account of Mitya' — is «из-за» + genitive, marking a cause with a faintly negative tinge (it's his fault). «Несколько … ссор» again pulls a neuter singular verb «произошло».

Многие дамы горячо поссорились со своими супругами за разность взглядов на всё это ужасное дело, и естественно после того, что все мужья этих дам явились в залу суда уже не только нерасположенными к подсудимому, но даже озлобленными против него.  
Many ladies fell out hotly with their husbands over a difference of views on this whole dreadful affair, and naturally, after that, all the husbands of these ladies came into the courtroom not merely ill-disposed toward the defendant, but even embittered against him.
> Reciprocal «-ся» + свой + instrumental: «Поссорились со своими супругами» — 'quarrelled with their husbands'. «Поссориться» is reciprocal in «-ся», governing «с» + instrumental «супругами»; «своими» is the reflexive possessive 'their own', referring back to the subject «дамы».
> Instrumental predicate participles after «явились»: After «явились» ('came/appeared'), the state is given in the instrumental: «нерасположенными … озлобленными» — 'ill-disposed … embittered'. These are past passive participles used predicatively in the instrumental, the case for a role or state taken on.

И вообще положительно можно было сказать, что, в противоположность дамскому, весь мужской элемент был настроен против подсудимого.  
In general one could positively say that, in contrast to the ladies, the entire male element was set against the defendant.
> Short passive participle «настроен» + «против» + genitive: «Был настроен против …» — 'was set/disposed against …' — uses the short past passive participle «настроен» with «был» (a stative passive), and «против» governs the genitive «подсудимого». «Подсудимый» itself is a substantivized adjective, 'the one on trial'.
> «в противоположность» + dative: «В противоположность дамскому» — 'in contrast to the ladies'' — is a compound preposition governing the dative «дамскому» (a substantivized adjective, 'the female [element]'). It explicitly sets the men against the women.

Виднелись строгие, нахмуренные лица, другие даже совсем злобные, и это во множестве.  
One saw stern, frowning faces, others even downright malicious, and that in great number.
> -ся middle «виднеться» with delayed subject: «Виднелись … лица» — 'there showed / one saw … faces'. «Виднеться» (-ся) is a middle 'to be visible, show'; the plural subject «лица» follows the verb, an existential-presentational order ('there were visible …').
> «нахмуренный» — frowning, knit: «Нахмуренные» (past passive participle of «нахмурить») describes brows drawn together — scowling, frowning faces. Used adjectivally before «лица», it adds to the grim catalogue of the hostile male crowd.

Правда и то, что Митя многих из них сумел оскорбить лично во время своего у нас пребывания.  
It was also true that Mitya had managed to insult many of them personally during his time among us.
> «суметь» + perfective infinitive; partitive genitive: «Сумел оскорбить» — 'managed to insult' — joins «суметь» (to succeed in) with the perfective infinitive «оскорбить». The object «многих из них» ('many of them') is the animate accusative «многих» (= genitive form) with partitive «из них».
> Reflexive «своего» framing «пребывания»: «Во время своего … пребывания» — 'during his stay'. «Своего» is the reflexive possessive (his own, = Mitya's), and the colloquial insertion «у нас» ('among us') splits the noun phrase — a spoken-style intrusion into the bookish frame «во время … пребывания».

Конечно, иные из посетителей были почти даже веселы и весьма безучастны собственно к судьбе Мити, но всё же опять-таки не к рассматривающемуся делу; все были заняты исходом его, и большинство мужчин решительно желало кары преступнику, кроме разве юристов, которым дорога была не нравственная сторона дела, а лишь, так сказать, современно-юридическая.  
Of course, certain of the visitors were almost cheerful, even, and quite indifferent to Mitya's fate as such — though again, not to the case under examination; all were taken up with its outcome, and the majority of the men decidedly wished the criminal punished, save perhaps for the jurists, who cared not for the moral side of the case, but only, so to speak, for its modern-legal one.
> «желать» + genitive object + dative recipient: «Желать кары преступнику» — 'to wish punishment upon the criminal'. «Желать» governs the genitive «кары» (the thing wished), while the one it is wished for stands in the dative «преступнику». «Большинство … желало» again takes a neuter singular verb.
> Present participle of a -ся verb: «Рассматривающемуся делу» — 'the case under examination' — is the present active participle of the -ся verb «рассматриваться» (to be examined), in the dative to agree with «делу». It keeps both the participial «-ющ-» and the reflexive «-ся»: a doubly marked, very bookish form.
> «разве» as a hedging 'except perhaps': Here «разве» is not the interrogative 'really?' but a hedging particle 'perhaps, save maybe' — «кроме разве юристов» = 'except perhaps the jurists'. A subtle softening of the sweeping generalization.

Всех волновал приезд знаменитого Фетюковича.  
Everyone was stirred by the arrival of the celebrated Fetyukovich.
> Object-first order: «всех» before the subject: «Всех волновал приезд …» — literally 'everyone, the arrival … stirred'. The animate accusative object «всех» leads, the nominative subject «приезд» comes last (the new information), a topic-comment inversion impossible without case marking.

Талант его был известен повсеместно, и это уже не в первый раз, что он являлся в провинции защищать громкие уголовные дела.  
His talent was known far and wide, and this was by no means the first time that he had come down to the provinces to defend notorious criminal cases.
> Imperfective past for a repeated occasion: «Являлся … защищать» — the imperfective past of «являться» marks this as a recurring event ('he had appeared more than once'), reinforced by «не в первый раз». The imperfective is precisely the aspect for an action repeated over time.
> «громкое дело» — a sensational case: «Громкий» literally 'loud', here means notorious, sensational, much-talked-of — «громкие уголовные дела» are high-profile criminal cases. «Уголовный» = criminal (penal), as opposed to civil.

И после его защиты таковые дела всегда становились знаменитыми на всю Россию и надолго памятными.  
And after his defense such cases always became famous throughout the whole of Russia and long remembered.
> «становиться» + instrumental predicate: «Становились знаменитыми … памятными» — 'became famous … memorable'. The link verb «становиться» (to become) takes its predicate adjectives in the instrumental, the regular case after становиться/быть/стать for a state entered into.
> «таковой» — bookish 'such, the said': «Таковые» is an elevated, official-sounding equivalent of «такие» ('such, the aforesaid'). It belongs to the chancery-literary register Dostoevsky lends his narrator's summarizing voice.

Ходило несколько анекдотов и о нашем прокуроре, и о председателе суда.  
Several anecdotes were also going around about our prosecutor and about the presiding judge.
> Idiomatic «ходить» — to circulate: «Ходило … анекдотов» — anecdotes 'went around', i.e. circulated. The multidirectional motion verb «ходить» here is used figuratively of rumours making the rounds; «несколько анекдотов» (gen. pl.) pulls the neuter singular «ходило».

Рассказывалось, что наш прокурор трепетал встречи с Фетюковичем, что это были старинные враги еще с Петербурга, еще с начала их карьеры, что самолюбивый наш Ипполит Кириллович, считавший себя постоянно кем-то обиженным еще с Петербурга, за то что не были надлежаще оценены его таланты, воскрес было духом над делом Карамазовых и мечтал даже воскресить этим делом свое увядшее поприще, но что пугал его лишь Фетюкович.  
It was said that our prosecutor trembled at the prospect of meeting Fetyukovich, that they were old enemies from way back in Petersburg, from the very beginning of their careers; that our vain Ippolit Kirillovich, who had constantly considered himself slighted by someone ever since Petersburg, on the grounds that his talents had not been properly appreciated, had revived in spirit over the Karamazov case and even dreamed of resurrecting his withered career by means of this case — but that Fetyukovich alone frightened him.
> Past active participle + instrumental predicate + indefinite «кем-то»: «Считавший себя … обиженным» — 'who considered himself wronged'. The past active participle «считавший» modifies «Ипполит Кириллович»; «себя» is the reflexive object; «обиженным» (passive participle) is the instrumental predicate; «кем-то» is the indefinite 'by someone or other' (specific but unknown agent).
> Negated periphrastic passive: «Не были … оценены … таланты» — 'his talents had not been appreciated'. A negated past passive: «не» + «были» + short participle «оценены», agreeing with «таланты». «Надлежаще» ('duly, properly') is a bookish adverb.
> The particle «было» of a thwarted action: «Воскрес было духом» uses the rare past particle «было», which signals an action just begun or attempted, then arrested or reversed — 'he had revived in spirit (only for it to come to nothing)'. The repetition «воскрес … воскресить» ('revived … to resurrect') is a deliberate echo around his withered career.

Но насчет трепета пред Фетюковичем суждения были не совсем справедливы.  
But as for the trembling before Fetyukovich, these judgments were not altogether just.
> «насчёт» + genitive; archaic «пред» + instrumental: «Насчёт» ('as regards', + genitive «трепета») opens the topic. «Пред Фетюковичем» uses the archaic/poetic «пред» (modern «перед», 'before') governing the instrumental — a slightly elevated variant favoured in 19th-century prose.
> Short adjective predicate «справедливы»: «Были … справедливы» — 'were just/fair'. The short-form adjective «справедливы» (vs. long «справедливые») is the predicative norm, agreeing in number with «суждения». «Не совсем» hedges it: 'not altogether'.

Прокурор наш был не из таких характеров, которые падают духом пред опасностью, а, напротив, из тех, чье самолюбие вырастает и окрыляется именно по мере возрастания опасности.  
Our prosecutor was not of those characters who lose heart in the face of danger, but, on the contrary, of those whose self-regard grows and takes wing precisely in proportion to the mounting of the danger.
> Relative «который» + idiom «падать духом»: «Которые падают духом» — 'who lose heart'. The relative «которые» agrees with «характеров» in number, here nominative as subject of its clause. «Падать духом» ('to fall in spirit') is the idiom for losing courage; «пред опасностью» = before danger (instrumental).
> Relative «чьё» + «по мере» + genitive: «Чьё самолюбие» — 'whose self-regard' — uses the possessive relative «чей», agreeing in gender/number with «самолюбие». «По мере возрастания опасности» ('in proportion to the growth of danger') is the correlative construction «по мере» + genitive.
> «окрыляться» — to be given wings: «Окрыляться» (from «крыло», wing) literally 'to grow wings', figuratively to be inspired, elated, emboldened. A vivid metaphor for the prosecutor's vanity soaring precisely as the danger mounts.

Вообще же надо заметить, что прокурор наш был слишком горяч и болезненно восприимчив.  
In general, it must be noted that our prosecutor was too ardent and morbidly sensitive.
> Impersonal «надо» + infinitive: «Надо заметить» — 'it must be noted' — is a subjectless modal predicate: the invariable «надо» ('one must/should') plus a perfective infinitive. No nominative subject appears, the hallmark of Russian impersonal necessity.
> Short adjectives in predicate: «Горяч … восприимчив» are short-form adjectives ('ardent … sensitive') used predicatively after «был». The short form, more bookish, suits the narrator's clipped character-summary; «болезненно» is an adverb modifying «восприимчив».

В иное дело он клал всю свою душу и вел его так, как бы от решения его зависела вся его судьба и всё его достояние.  
Into one case or another he would put his whole soul, and conduct it as though his entire fate and all his fortune hung upon its decision.
> Comparative irrealis «как бы … (past)»: «Как бы … зависела» — 'as though … depended' — builds a hypothetical comparison with «как бы» + a past-tense verb, the irrealis mood. It frames his all-out conduct of a case as if his whole fate hung on it, though it did not.
> Imperfective «класть» + reflexive «свою»: «Клал всю свою душу» — 'put his whole soul'. Imperfective «класть» (to put) marks the habitual 'he would put', and «свою» is the reflexive possessive 'his own', pointing back to the prosecutor. «В иное дело» ('into one case or another') sets the recurring frame.

В юридическом мире над этим несколько смеялись, ибо наш прокурор именно этим качеством своим заслужил даже некоторую известность, если далеко не повсеместно, то гораздо большую, чем можно было предположить ввиду его скромного места в нашем суде.  
In the legal world this was rather laughed at, for it was precisely by this quality of his that our prosecutor had earned a certain renown — if far from everywhere, then a far greater one than might have been supposed in view of his modest post in our court.
> Archaic causal conjunction «ибо»: «Ибо» is the bookish, somewhat archaic conjunction 'for, because', loftier than «потому что» — a marker of elevated 19th-century literary prose, threaded through the narrator's more sententious passages.
> Instrumental of means + reflexive «своим»: «Этим качеством своим» — 'by this quality of his' — is the instrumental of means (the agent's instrument), with the reflexive possessive «своим» and the demonstrative «этим» both agreeing in the instrumental. «Именно» ('precisely') sharpens the focus.
> Comparative «чем» + impersonal modal past: «Большую, чем можно было предположить» — 'greater than could have been supposed'. «Чем» introduces the standard of comparison; «можно было предположить» is an impersonal modal ('one could have supposed'), with «было» giving the past frame.

Особенно смеялись над его страстью к психологии.  
His passion for psychology was laughed at especially.
> «смеяться над» + instrumental; «-ся» only verb: «Смеяться над кем/чем» ('to laugh at') exists only in the reflexive «-ся» form and governs «над» + instrumental «его страстью». «Страсть к психологии» ('passion for psychology') takes «к» + dative for the object of the passion.

По-моему, все ошибались: наш прокурор, как человек и характер, кажется мне, был гораздо серьезнее, чем многие о нем думали.  
In my opinion, they were all mistaken: our prosecutor, as a man and a character, was, it seems to me, far more serious than many supposed him to be.
> Comparative «серьёзнее» intensified by «гораздо»: «Гораздо серьёзнее» — 'far more serious'. The predicative comparative «серьёзнее» is intensified by «гораздо» ('by far'); «чем … думали» supplies the standard of comparison ('than people thought'). «Многие» ('many') is a substantivized adjective subject.
> Parenthetical dative «кажется мне»: «Кажется мне» — 'it seems to me' — is dropped in as a parenthetical, the impersonal verb with the dative experiencer «мне». Such interjected first-person hedges are central to the narrator's intimate, uncertain voice.

Но уж так не умел поставить себя этот болезненный человек с самых первых своих шагов еще в начале поприща, а затем и во всю свою жизнь.  
But this sickly man simply could not manage to establish himself, from his very first steps at the outset of his career, and thereafter throughout his whole life.
> Verb-first emphasis + reflexive «себя»: «Не умел поставить себя» — 'could not establish himself' — fronts the negated predicate before the subject «этот … человек», an emphatic inversion. «Поставить себя» ('to set oneself [up]', i.e. win a position/standing) uses reflexive «себя» as object.
> Intensifying particle «уж»: «Уж» (a clipped «уже») here is not temporal but an emphatic modal particle, lending a resigned, insistent colouring — 'he simply just could not'. It is one of the small particles that carry the texture of the spoken narrator's voice.

Что же до председателя нашего суда, то о нем можно сказать лишь то, что это был человек образованный, гуманный, практически знающий дело и самых современных идей.  
As for the presiding judge of our court, one can say only this of him: that he was an educated man, humane, with a practical grasp of his business, and of the most modern ideas.
> Topic-shifting frame «что же до … то»: «Что (же) до … то …» — 'as for …, [then] …' — is a fixed correlative that lifts a new topic to the front ('as for the presiding judge'). The particle «же» adds a shift-of-topic emphasis; «то» picks up the comment.
> Genitive of quality «самых современных идей»: After the attributive adjectives, «самых современных идей» ('of the most modern ideas') is a genitive of description — a person characterized by the ideas he holds. The genitive of quality attaches a defining trait to «человек».

Был он довольно самолюбив, но о карьере своей не очень заботился.  
He was vain enough, but did not greatly trouble himself about his career.
> Verb-first order + short adjective «самолюбив»: «Был он … самолюбив» fronts the verb «был» before the pronoun «он» — a topic-continuing inversion typical of character description. «Самолюбив» is the short predicative form of «самолюбивый» ('vain, proud').
> «заботиться о» + prepositional; reflexive «своей»: «Заботиться о чём-то» ('to be concerned about') is a «-ся» verb governing «о» + prepositional «карьере». «Своей» is the reflexive possessive ('his own'), and word order puts the topic «о карьере своей» before the negated verb.

Главная цель его жизни заключалась в том, чтобы быть передовым человеком.  
The chief aim of his life lay in being a progressive man.
> «заключаться в том, чтобы» + infinitive: «Цель … заключалась в том, чтобы быть …» — 'the aim consisted in being …'. The frame «в том, чтобы» + infinitive states the content of a goal. The predicate noun «передовым человеком» stands in the instrumental after «быть».

Притом имел связи и состояние.  
Besides, he had connections and means.
> Dropped subject + transitive «иметь»: «Имел связи и состояние» — 'he had connections and means' — drops the pronoun «он» (clear from context and the gendered «имел»). Note that here Dostoevsky uses transitive «иметь» rather than the usual «у него были» — a slightly bookish, terse construction.
> «состояние» — fortune, means: Among its senses, «состояние» here means a fortune, wealth, financial standing ('means'), not 'condition/state'. Paired with «связи» (connections), it sketches the judge's comfortable independence.

На дело Карамазовых, как оказалось потом, он смотрел довольно горячо, но лишь в общем смысле.  
On the Karamazov case, as turned out later, he looked rather ardently, but only in the general sense.
> Fronted «на дело» + «смотреть на» + accusative: «Смотреть на дело» ('to look at / view the case') governs «на» + accusative «дело», here thrown to the front as topic. «Горячо» ('ardently') is an adverb of manner; «как оказалось потом» is the recurring hindsight aside.

Его занимало явление, классификация его, взгляд на него как на продукт наших социальных основ как на характеристику русского элемента, и проч., и проч.  
What occupied him was the phenomenon, its classification, the view of it as a product of our social foundations, as a characteristic of the Russian element, and so on, and so on.
> Object-first impersonal «его занимало»: «Его занимало явление …» — literally 'him there occupied the phenomenon …': the accusative «его» fronts, the nominative subjects («явление, классификация, взгляд») trail as the new information. Russian's verb «занимать» ('to occupy [someone's mind]') naturally yields this object-experiencer order.
> «и прочее» — 'and so forth': «И проч.» abbreviates «и прочее» ('and the rest, etcetera'); doubled, «и проч., и проч.» = 'and so on, and so on'. The narrator's weary repetition gently mocks the judge's taste for abstract sociological generality.

К личному же характеру дела, к трагедии его, равно как и к личностям участвующих лиц, начиная с подсудимого, он относился довольно безразлично и отвлеченно, как, впрочем, может быть, и следовало.  
To the personal character of the case, to its tragedy, as also to the personalities of those taking part, beginning with the defendant, he related rather indifferently and abstractly — as, indeed, was perhaps as it should be.
> «относиться к» + dative: «Относиться к чему-то» ('to relate to, regard') governs «к» + dative — here a long fronted series «к … характеру … к трагедии … к личностям». The verb «относился» plus adverbs «безразлично и отвлечённо» reports his detached attitude.
> Impersonal «следовало» — 'as one ought': «Как … следовало» — 'as it ought to have been'. «Следовало» is the impersonal past of «следовать» ('to be fitting/proper'), subjectless, expressing what was appropriate. The hedges «впрочем, может быть» soften the narrator's concession.

Задолго до появления суда зала была уже набита битком.  
Long before the court appeared, the hall was already packed to overflowing.
> Short passive participle «набита» + intensifier: «Была … набита битком» — 'was packed to overflowing'. «Набита» is the short past passive participle of «набить» agreeing with «зала», a stative passive with «была». «Битком» is a frozen instrumental intensifier ('chock-full'), used only in this idiom.
> «задолго до» + genitive: «Задолго до появления суда» — 'long before the court's appearance' — uses «до» (+ genitive «появления») reinforced by «задолго» ('long before'). A neat nominalization of 'before the court appeared'.

У нас зала суда лучшая в городе, обширная, высокая, звучная.  
Our courtroom is the best in town — spacious, high-ceilinged, resonant.
> Zero copula in the present: «Зала … лучшая в городе» — 'the courtroom [is] the best in town'. The present 'is' is simply absent: Russian uses no copula in the present, juxtaposing subject and predicate directly. «Лучшая» is the suppletive superlative of «хороший».
> Asyndetic string of attributes: Three nominative adjectives without conjunctions — «обширная, высокая, звучная» ('spacious, high, resonant') — agree with «зала» and tumble out asyndetically, a terse, almost appraising rhythm. «Звучная» = acoustically resonant, sound-carrying.

Направо от членов суда, помещавшихся на некотором возвышении, был приготовлен стол и два ряда кресел для присяжных заседателей.  
To the right of the members of the court, who were seated on a slight elevation, a table and two rows of armchairs had been made ready for the jurors.
> Imperfective past active participle: «Помещавшихся» — 'who were seated/situated' — is the imperfective past active participle of «-ся» verb «помещаться», in the genitive plural to agree with «членов». The imperfective stem gives an ongoing, durative state rather than a single act.
> Passive with delayed compound subject: «Был приготовлен стол …» — 'a table … had been made ready' — is a periphrastic passive (short participle «приготовлен» + «был») whose subject «стол и два ряда кресел» follows, an existential-presentational order. The verb agrees with the nearest singular «стол».

Налево было место подсудимого и его защитника.  
To the left was the place for the defendant and his counsel.
> Existential «было» + genitive of possession: «Было место подсудимого и его защитника» — 'there was the place of the defendant and his counsel'. The fronted adverb «налево» sets the scene, «было» is the existential past, and «подсудимого … защитника» are genitives of belonging ('the place belonging to…').
> «защитник» — defence counsel: «Защитник» (from «защищать», to defend) is the defence advocate — here the great Fetyukovich. The reformed courts created this adversarial role of the sworn attorney for the defence, a profession that scarcely existed in Russia before 1864.

На средине залы, близ помещения суда стоял стол с «вещественными доказательствами».  
In the middle of the hall, near the court's seats, stood a table with the "material evidence."
> "Material evidence": A legal term of art: «вещественные доказательства» are physical exhibits — the things produced in court as proof, as opposed to testimony. The narrator's scare-quotes lend the bureaucratic phrase a faint irony in the solemn setting.
> Verb before subject: Russian fronts the locative setting («На средине залы…») and places the verb «стоял» ahead of its subject «стол», so the new item — the table of evidence — lands last as the comment. The free word order, licensed by the case endings, is doing the work English does with "there stood."

На нем лежали окровавленный шелковый белый халат Федора Павловича, роковой медный пестик, коим было совершено предполагаемое убийство, рубашка Мити с запачканным кровью рукавом, его сюртук весь в кровавых пятнах сзади на месте кармана, в который он сунул тогда свой весь мокрый от крови платок, самый платок, весь заскорузлый от крови, теперь уже совсем пожелтевший, пистолет, заряженный для самоубийства Митей у Перхотина и отобранный у него тихонько в Мокром Трифоном Борисовичем, конверт с надписью, в котором были приготовлены для Грушеньки три тысячи, и розовая тоненькая ленточка, которою он был обвязан, и прочие многие предметы, которых и не упомню.  
On it lay Fyodor Pavlovich's bloodstained white silk dressing gown; the fatal brass pestle with which the supposed murder had been committed; Mitya's shirt with its blood-spattered sleeve; his frock coat, all stained with blood at the back over the pocket into which he had then thrust his handkerchief soaked through with blood; the very handkerchief, all stiff with blood and by now turned quite yellow; the pistol that Mitya had loaded for suicide at Perkhotin's and that Trifon Borisovich had quietly taken from him at Mokroye; the envelope, inscribed, in which the three thousand had been made ready for Grushenka, and the thin pink ribbon with which it had been tied; and many other objects besides, which I no longer recall.
> Existential inversion piling up a list: The whole vast sentence hangs on one inverted frame: «На нем лежали…» ("On it lay…"), verb before a long chain of nominative subjects. Topic-first, comment-last word order lets Dostoevsky line up exhibit after exhibit as a single accumulating sweep.
> Archaic «коим» for «которым»: «коим» is the bookish/archaic instrumental of «кой» ("which"), equivalent to modern «которым» — "with which." It belongs to the elevated 19th-century legal-narrative register that colours this whole inventory.
> Passive with the instrumental of means: «было совершено» is a periphrastic passive — «быть» plus the short past passive participle «совершено» ("was committed"). The instrument «коим» ("with which") sits in the instrumental case, the natural case of the means by which something is done.
> «пестик» — the pestle: «пестик» is the heavy pestle (of a mortar-and-pestle), here the murder weapon — «роковой медный пестик», "the fatal brass pestle." The diminutive-looking ending is lexicalised; this is simply the ordinary word for the object.
> A cascade of past participles: The exhibits are described through stacked past participles — active «пожелтевший» ("having turned yellow") and passive «заряженный» ("loaded"), «отобранный» ("taken away") — each agreeing with its noun like an adjective and compressing a whole который-clause into a word. This participial density is a hallmark of literary Russian.
> Relative «которою» in the instrumental: «которою» (archaic instrumental of «который», = modern «которой») takes the instrumental because the ribbon is the means by which the envelope «был обвязан» ("was tied round") — again a passive whose agent-or-instrument sits in the instrumental.
> Genitive of negation under «не»: «не упомню» ("I won't recall") pulls its object «которых» into the genitive — the genitive of negation, the case a negated verb so often imposes on what would otherwise be its accusative object.
> «халат» — dressing gown: Here «халат» is Fyodor Pavlovich's dressing gown / house robe, the bloodstained garment he wore at home — not a hospital gown. The word covers any loose, untailored robe.

На некотором расстоянии дальше, в глубь залы, начинались места для публики, но еще пред балюстрадой стояло несколько кресел для тех свидетелей, уже давших свое показание, которые будут оставлены в зале.  
Some distance farther off, deeper into the hall, the places for the public began, but in front of the balustrade there still stood several chairs for those witnesses who, having already given their testimony, were to remain in the hall.
> Reflexive «-ся» for an intransitive 'began': «начинались» ("began, came into being") carries the clitic «-сь/-ся», here in its middle/intransitive sense: the public seating simply "began" at that point, with no one beginning it. The «-ся» turns a transitive verb into a subjectless change-of-state.
> Past active participle replacing a clause: «давших» is the past active participle of «дать» ("who had given"), in the genitive plural agreeing with «свидетелей». It packs "witnesses who had already given their testimony" into one modifier — the bookish alternative to a который-clause.
> Compound future passive: «будут оставлены» = future of «быть» («будут») + short past passive participle «оставлены» ("will be left/kept"). The auxiliary supplies the future tense; the participle supplies the passive sense.
> «балюстрада» — the courtroom railing: A «балюстрада» is the low balustrade or rail separating the working part of the courtroom from the public gallery — the "bar" in the literal architectural sense.

В десять часов появился суд в составе председателя, одного члена и одного почетного мирового судьи.  
At ten o'clock the court appeared, consisting of the presiding judge, one associate member, and one honorary justice of the peace.
> Perfective entrance, verb-first: «появился» is the perfective past of «появиться» ("to appear"), an event that moves the narration forward at the stroke of ten. Placed before its subject «суд», it announces the court's entrance with the same flourish as English "in came the court."

Разумеется, тотчас же появился и прокурор.  
Naturally, the prosecutor appeared at once as well.
> «и» as 'also' plus emphatic «же»: Here «и» before «прокурор» means "also/too" rather than "and," and the particle «же» reinforces «тотчас» ("at once") — "the prosecutor, too, appeared the very moment." The little particle adds the insistent, conversational shrug the narrator gives with «Разумеется» ("Naturally").

Председатель был плотный, коренастый человек, ниже среднего роста, с геморроидальным лицом, лет пятидесяти, с темными с проседью волосами, коротко обстриженными, и в красной ленте — не помню уж какого ордена.  
The presiding judge was a thickset, stocky man, below average height, with a hemorrhoidal complexion, about fifty years old, with dark hair shot through with gray, cropped short, and wearing a red ribbon — of what order I no longer recall.
> Approximate age by inversion: «лет пятидесяти» inverts the usual numeral order — putting «лет» (genitive plural of «год») before the number signals approximation, "about fifty years (old)." The genitive throughout («среднего роста», «лет пятидесяти») is the genitive of description and of numerals.
> Past passive participle in the instrumental: «обстриженными» is the past passive participle of «обстричь» ("cropped"), agreeing with «волосами» in the instrumental — the case governed here by the «с» ("with") construction describing his appearance.
> «проседь» — gray streaked through: «проседь» is hair just beginning to gray, dark shot through with gray strands — "с темными с проседью волосами." The prefix «про-» here conveys the gray showing through the dark.

Прокурор же показался мне, да и не мне, а всем, очень уж как-то бледным, почти с зеленым лицом, почему-то как бы внезапно похудевшим в одну, может быть, ночь, потому что я всего только третьего дня видел его совсем еще в своем виде.  
The prosecutor, however, struck me — and not me alone, but everyone — as somehow very pale, almost with a greenish face, having for some reason grown thin, as it were, all of a sudden, perhaps in a single night, for only the day before yesterday I had seen him still looking quite himself.
> Contrastive «же» and dative experiencer: The particle «же» after «Прокурор» sets him in contrast to the presiding judge just described ("the prosecutor, for his part…"). «показался мне» puts the perceiver in the dative — «мне» is the one to whom he "seemed/struck," a dative-experiencer pattern.
> Past active participle in the instrumental predicate: «похудевшим» ("having grown thin") is the past active participle of «похудеть», in the instrumental as a predicate complement after «показался» ("seemed [to be]…"). The hedging «как бы» ("as it were") softens the observation.
> «третьего дня» — the day before yesterday: A fixed time expression in the genitive: «третьего дня» literally "of the third day," meaning "two days ago / the day before yesterday." Slightly archaic and bookish to a modern ear.

Председатель начал с вопроса судебному приставу: все ли явились присяжные заседатели?..  
The presiding judge began with a question to the bailiff: had all the jurors appeared?..
> Indirect yes/no question with «ли»: The enclitic «ли» after the fronted, focused word «все» ("all") turns the embedded clause into a "whether"-question: "[asking] whether all the jurors had appeared." «ли» is the formal, literary way to mark a yes/no question.

Вижу, однако, что так более продолжать не могу, уже потому даже, что многого не расслышал, в другое пропустил вникнуть, третье забыл упомнить, а главное, потому, что, как уже и сказал я выше, если всё припоминать, что было сказано и что произошло, то буквально недостанет у меня ни времени, ни места.  
I see, however, that I cannot go on like this any longer — if only because there was much I did not catch, much else I failed to grasp, and a third thing I forgot to set down; and chiefly because, as I have already said above, if I were to recall everything that was said and that happened, I should literally have neither the time nor the room for it.
> Negated modal 'cannot go on': «не могу» negates the modal «мочь» ("to be able"), with the infinitive «продолжать» ("to continue"). Note the bookish placement of «не могу» after «более продолжать» — "continue thus any longer I cannot."
> Genitive of negation with «много»: Under negation «не расслышал», the partitive object appears as genitive «многого» ("much [of it]"), echoed by «в другое… третье». The genitive of negation is especially natural with vague, non-specific quantities like this.
> «если… то» with a negated existential: The conditional «если… то» ("if… then") frames a hypothetical; its result «недостанет у меня ни времени, ни места» is an impersonal negated existential, so "neither time nor room" stands in the genitive «ни времени, ни места» after the negative «недостанет».
> «ни… ни…» negative concord: «ни… ни…» ("neither… nor…") is the intensifying negator that pairs with the verb's own negation («недостанет» = "there will not suffice"). Russian negative concord requires both the «ни»-coordination and a negated predicate together.

Знаю только, что присяжных заседателей, тою и другою стороной, то есть защитником и прокурором, отведено было не очень много.  
I know only that not very many of the jurors were challenged off by either side — that is, by the defense and the prosecution.
> Impersonal passive with the agent in the instrumental: «отведено было» is a short past passive participle plus «быть» ("were challenged/struck off"), used impersonally. The challenging parties — «тою и другою стороной… защитником и прокурором» — stand in the instrumental, the case of the agent of a passive.
> «отвести» — to challenge (a juror): «отвести присяжного» is the legal idiom for peremptorily challenging or striking a juror — each side could "challenge off" («отвести») a number of candidates. The narrator notes that few were so removed here.
> Archaic instrumental «тою / другою»: «тою» and «другою» are the older, fuller feminine instrumental endings (-ою) for modern «той / другой» — "by the one and the other side." The -ою forms are a literary, period-flavoured variant kept by 19th-century prose.

Состав же двенадцати присяжных запомнил: четыре наших чиновника, два купца и шесть крестьян и мещан нашего города.  
The makeup of the twelve jurors, though, I do remember: four of our officials, two merchants, and six peasants and townsmen of our town.
> Topicalising «же» and a dropped subject: «же» again marks a contrastive turn ("the composition, on the other hand, I do remember"), and the object «состав» is fronted ahead of the verb «запомнил», whose subject "I" is dropped because the ending carries it. Topic-comment ordering at work.
> Genitive singular after 2–4: After «четыре» and «два» the counted noun takes the genitive singular — «четыре… чиновника», «два купца» — while after «шесть» it shifts to genitive plural «крестьян и мещан». This is the numeral-case rule of Russian in miniature.

У нас в обществе, я помню, еще задолго до суда, с некоторым удивлением спрашивали, особенно дамы: «Неужели такое тонкое, сложное и психологическое дело будет отдано на роковое решение каким-то чиновникам и, наконец, мужикам, и что-де поймет тут какой-нибудь такой чиновник, тем более мужик?»  
In our society, I remember, even long before the trial, people would ask with a certain wonder, especially the ladies: "Can it really be that so subtle, so complicated and psychological a case is to be handed over for fateful decision to some officials and, in the end, to peasants — and what on earth will some such official, let alone a peasant, make of it?"
> «неужели» — incredulous question particle: «Неужели» opens a rhetorical, almost scandalised question — "Can it really be that…?" — colouring the ladies' disbelief. «будет отдано» is a compound future passive (future of «быть» + short participle «отдано»), "is to be handed over."
> «-то» vs «-нибудь» indefinites: «каким-то» marks specific-but-dismissive "some (particular) officials," while «какой-нибудь» is the fully non-specific "any such official at all" — the two indefinite series the ladies use to belittle the jurors. The contrast between «-то» (some definite one) and «-нибудь» (any one whatever) is a classic reading point.
> Reportative particle «-де»: The clitic «-де» (here «что-де») flags reported speech with a tinge of the speaker's distance or skepticism — "and what, [they say], will such an official make of it." It is an old colloquial marker that the narrator slips in to ventriloquise the ladies.
> «мужик» — peasant (with a class edge): «мужик» is the plain word for a peasant man, but in genteel mouths like these ladies' it carries condescension — the simple muzhik set against the "subtle, psychological" case. The shift from neutral «крестьянин» to «мужик» is itself characterisation.

В самом деле, все эти четыре чиновника, попавшие в состав присяжных, были люди мелкие, малочиновные, седые — один только из них был несколько помоложе, — в обществе нашем малоизвестные, прозябавшие на мелком жалованье, имевшие, должно быть, старых жен, которых никуда нельзя показать, и по куче детей, может быть даже босоногих, много-много что развлекавшие свой досуг где-нибудь картишками и уж, разумеется, никогда не прочитавшие ни одной книги.  
Indeed, all four of these officials who had ended up on the jury were petty people, of the lower ranks, gray-haired — only one of them was somewhat younger — little known in our society, eking out a living on meager salaries, having, no doubt, old wives whom they could not show anywhere and a heap of children, perhaps even barefoot ones, at most beguiling their leisure somewhere over a hand of cards, and, needless to say, never in their lives having read a single book.
> A chain of past active participles: The four officials are characterised by a long string of past active participles in the nominative plural — «попавшие» (who had ended up), «прозябавшие» (vegetating), «имевшие» (having), «развлекавшие» (amusing), «не прочитавшие» (never having read). This dense participial chaining is quintessential 19th-century literary syntax.
> Triple negation, single meaning: «никогда… не… ни одной» stacks three negatives — "never not a single" — yet means simply "never read a single book." Russian negative concord requires the «не» on the verb even alongside «никогда» and «ни одной».
> «прозябать» — to vegetate, eke out a dreary existence: «прозябать» means to drag out a stagnant, dim existence — literally close to "to vegetate." «прозябавшие на мелком жалованье» paints the officials languishing on their meager pay.
> Pejorative diminutive «картишки»: «картишки» is a dismissive diminutive of «карты» (cards) — "a little hand of cards," the petty card-play with which these dreary men «развлекали свой досуг». The -ишк- suffix here belittles the pastime as cheap and trivial.

Два же купца имели хоть и степенный вид, но были как-то странно молчаливы и неподвижны; один из них брил бороду и был одет по-немецки; другой, с седенькою бородкой, имел на шее, на красной ленте, какую-то медаль.  
The two merchants did have a sedate enough air, but were somehow strangely silent and motionless; one of them shaved his beard and was dressed in the German fashion; the other, with a little gray beard, wore on his neck, on a red ribbon, some sort of medal.
> Concessive «хоть и… но…»: «хоть и… но…» sets up a concession: "though they did have a sedate air, yet they were…" The pattern lets the narrator grant the merchants their dignity before undercutting it with their strange silence.
> Affectionate diminutives «седенькая бородка»: Both words carry softening diminutive suffixes: «седенькая» (from «седой», gray) with -еньк-, and «бородка» (from «борода») — "a dear little gray beard." The diminutives lend the second merchant a faintly fond, homely touch. Note the archaic instrumental ending «-ою».
> «по-немецки» — in the German (Western) fashion: The adverb «по-немецки» means dressed in Western European style rather than traditional Russian dress (kaftan, beard). For a merchant to shave and dress "German" signals modernity; keeping the beard and old dress signals traditional Old-Russian piety. The contrast is socially loaded.

Про мещан и крестьян и говорить нечего.  
Of the townsmen and peasants there is nothing to say.
> Negative pronoun «нечего» + infinitive: «нечего» is the negative "there is nothing to," governing an infinitive: «и говорить нечего» = "there's nothing even to say." These «не-» pronouns (нечего, некого, негде) form impersonal constructions where the logical subject, if present, would be dative.

Наши скотопригоньевские мещане почти те же крестьяне, даже пашут.  
Our Skotoprigonyevsk townsmen are almost the same as peasants; they even plow.
> Zero copula in the present: "Our townsmen are almost the same peasants" needs no verb "to be" — Russian uses no present-tense copula, so «мещане почти те же крестьяне» links subject and predicate directly. «даже пашут» ("they even plow") then adds the clinching present-tense detail.

Двое из них были тоже в немецком платье и оттого-то, может быть, грязнее и непригляднее на вид, чем остальные четверо.  
Two of them were likewise in German dress, and on that account, perhaps, dirtier and less prepossessing in appearance than the other four.
> Comparatives in «-ее» with «чем»: «грязнее» and «непригляднее» are predicative comparatives in «-ее» ("dirtier," "less prepossessing"), completed by «чем остальные четверо» ("than the other four"). The invariable «-ее» comparative is the standard predicative form.
> «неприглядный» — unsightly, unprepossessing: «неприглядный» means unattractive, unsightly, unprepossessing — literally "not nice to look at." Its comparative «непригляднее» here ranks two of the peasants as even less presentable than their fellows.

Так что действительно могла зайти мысль, как зашла и мне, например, только что я их рассмотрел: «Что могут такие постичь в таком деле?»  
So that one might really be visited by the thought — as it visited me, for instance, the moment I had looked them over: "What can such men grasp in a case like this?"
> Dative experiencer of an arriving thought: The thought "could come" («могла зайти мысль») and "came" («зашла»); the one to whom it came stands in the dative — «мне» ("to me"). Russian frames a thought striking someone as the thought coming to them, an impersonal-leaning, dative-experiencer pattern.
> Fronted object «Что» and bookish «постичь»: The interrogative object «Что» is fronted for emphasis ("What can such men grasp?"), with the subject «такие» ("such [men]") and verb «могут постичь» following. «постичь» ("to comprehend, fathom") is an elevated, bookish verb fitting the lofty doubt being voiced.

Тем не менее лица их производили какое-то странно внушительное и почти грозящее впечатление, были строги и нахмурены.  
Nonetheless their faces produced a somehow strangely imposing and almost menacing impression; they were stern and frowning.
> Short-form predicate adjectives/participles: «строги» (short form of «строгий», "stern") and «нахмурены» (short past passive participle of «нахмурить», "frowning") are predicative short forms after «были», naming a present state of their faces. The short form is the bookish, properly predicative choice here.
> Present active participle as modifier: «грозящее» is the present active participle of «грозить» ("threatening, menacing"), used adjectivally with «впечатление». It agrees in neuter singular and stacks with «внушительное» to make the jurors' faces seem alive with menace.

Наконец председатель объявил к слушанию дело об убийстве отставного титулярного советника Федора Павловича Карамазова — не помню вполне, как он тогда выразился.  
At last the presiding judge declared open for hearing the case of the murder of the retired titular councillor Fyodor Pavlovich Karamazov — I do not quite remember how he put it then.
> Genitive chains and case after «о/об»: A stack of genitives links the nouns — «дело об убийстве… советника… Карамазова» ("the case of the murder of the councillor Karamazov") — while «об убийстве» itself sits in the prepositional after «об» ("concerning"). The genitive-of chain is how Russian builds such legal phrases.

Судебному приставу велено было ввести подсудимого, и вот появился Митя.  
The bailiff was ordered to bring in the defendant, and now Mitya appeared.
> Impersonal passive with a dative recipient: «велено было» is an impersonal short passive participle ("it was ordered"), and the one ordered stands in the dative — «судебному приставу» ("to the bailiff"). The construction has no nominative subject at all; the order is simply "given to" the bailiff.
> «Митя» — the intimate form of Dmitri: «Митя» is the affectionate diminutive of «Дмитрий», the name the warm narrator uses throughout — against the cold official «подсудимый» (defendant) and the formal «Дмитрий Карамазов» Mitya gives himself. The choice of name is itself a stance toward him.

Всё затихло в зале, муху можно было услышать.  
Everything in the hall fell silent; you could have heard a fly.
> Perfective «затихнуть» with inceptive «за-»: «затихло» is the perfective past of «затихнуть» — the prefix «за-» gives an inceptive, "fell quiet / hushed" sense, a single completed event. Against the imperfective background, this perfective snaps the hall into sudden silence.
> Impersonal «можно было» of possibility: «можно было услышать» is an impersonal modal — «можно» ("it was possible") + infinitive — with no nominative subject; "one could have heard a fly." The thing heard, «муху», is the accusative object of «услышать».

Не знаю как на других, но вид Мити произвел на меня самое неприятное впечатление.  
I do not know how it was for others, but the sight of Mitya made a most unpleasant impression on me.
> Idiom «произвести впечатление на кого»: «произвести впечатление на + accusative» is the set phrase "to make an impression on (someone)" — here «на меня», accusative after «на». «произвёл» is the perfective past, registering the impression as a single, decisive event.

Главное, он явился ужасным франтом, в новом с иголочки сюртуке.  
Above all, he turned up a dreadful dandy, in a brand-new, fresh-off-the-tailor frock coat.
> Instrumental predicate after «явиться»: «явился… франтом» — "he appeared [as] a dreadful dandy" — puts the predicate noun «франтом» in the instrumental, the case predicate nouns take after «явиться», «быть», «стать». It frames "dandy" as the role he showed up in.
> «франт» and «с иголочки»: «франт» is a dandy, a man overdressed and vain about his clothes. «с иголочки» (lit. "straight from the needle") is the idiom for brand-new, freshly tailored — "a frock coat fresh off the tailor's needle." Together they sketch Mitya's disastrously showy turnout.

Я узнал потом, что он нарочно заказал к этому дню себе сюртук в Москве, прежнему портному, у которого сохранилась его мерка.  
I learned afterward that he had deliberately ordered a frock coat made for himself for that day, in Moscow, from his former tailor, who still had his measurements on file.
> Relative «у которого» of possession: The relative «который» takes the form its own clause demands: here genitive after «у» in the possessive «у которого… сохранилась мерка» ("with whom his measurements had been kept"). «сохранилась» is a «-ся» middle — the measurements "survived/were kept on file" intransitively.
> «мерка» — tailor's measurements: «мерка» here is the set of measurements a tailor takes and keeps for a client — the "pattern" on file. That his former Moscow tailor still had Mitya's «мерка» lets him order a coat without a fitting, sharpening the absurd vanity of the gesture.

Был он в новешеньких черных лайковых перчатках и в щегольском белье.  
He was in brand-new black kid gloves and dapper linen.
> Intensive diminutive «новешенький»: «новёшенький» is an expressive form of «новый» — the «-ёшеньк-» suffix intensifies rather than shrinks, "brand-spanking-new." It loads the gloves with the same overdone freshness as Mitya's whole dandy's outfit.
> «лайковые перчатки» — kid gloves: «лайка» is fine, soft kidskin leather; «лайковые перчатки» are kid gloves, a marker of fashionable gentility. The detail underlines Mitya dressing for the dock as if for a society occasion.

Он прошел своими длинными аршинными шагами, прямо до неподвижности смотря пред собою, и сел на свое место с самым бестрепетным видом.  
He walked in with his long, yard-wide strides, staring straight ahead to the point of immobility, and sat down in his place with the most undaunted air.
> Imperfective gerund «смотря»: «смотря» is the imperfective present gerund («деепричастие») of «смотреть» — "(while) gazing" — an adverbial of attendant circumstance running alongside the main verbs «прошёл… и сел». It must share Mitya as subject, and it is a signature of literary narration.
> «аршинными» — strides of an arshin: «аршин» is an old Russian unit of length, about 71 cm (28 inches). «аршинными шагами» — "with arshin-long strides" — measures Mitya's exaggerated, theatrical gait by the archaic yardstick, a period-flavoured way of saying "yard-wide steps."
> Reflexive «себя» after a preposition: «пред собою» ("before himself") uses the instrumental «собою» of the reflexive pronoun «себя», which always refers back to the clause's subject (Mitya) and never appears in the nominative. «пред» is the bookish form of «перед».

Тут же сейчас же явился и защитник, знаменитый Фетюкович, и как бы какой-то подавленный гул пронесся в зале.  
At that very instant the counsel for the defense appeared as well — the celebrated Fetyukovich — and a kind of suppressed murmur ran through the hall.
> Hedging «как бы» and perfective «пронёсся»: «как бы» ("as it were, a kind of") softens the narrator's claim, while «пронёсся» — perfective past of «пронестись», with «-ся» — captures the murmur sweeping through the hall as one swift completed event. «подавленный» is a past passive participle, "suppressed."

Это был длинный, сухой человек, с длинными, тонкими ногами, с чрезвычайно длинными, бледными, тонкими пальцами, с обритым лицом, со скромно причесанными, довольно короткими волосами, с тонкими, изредка кривившимися не то насмешкой, не.то улыбкой губами.  
He was a tall, lean man, with long, thin legs, with exceedingly long, pale, thin fingers, a clean-shaven face, modestly combed and rather short hair, and thin lips that now and then curled into something between a sneer and a smile.
> Stacked «с» + instrumental description: The portrait is built from a chain of «с» ("with") phrases, each governing the instrumental — «с… ногами… с… пальцами… с обритым лицом…». «с» (with) takes the instrumental, the case here used to itemise the man's features.
> Past active participle in the instrumental: «кривившимися» is the past active participle of «кривиться» (with «-ся»), agreeing with «губами» in the instrumental — "lips that now and then curled." A whole который-clause ("lips which kept curling") is folded into one participle.
> «не то… не то…» — 'either… or…' uncertain: «не то… не то…» expresses the narrator's inability to decide between two options — "something between a sneer and a smile." The nouns «насмешкой, улыбкой» stand in the instrumental as the manner of the curling.

На вид ему было лет сорок.  
He looked to be about forty.
> Dative of age in an impersonal frame: Russian states age impersonally with the dative: «ему было лет сорок» = literally "to him there was about forty years." The person whose age it is stands in the dative «ему», with no nominative subject — and «лет сорок» (inverted) marks the approximation.

Лицо его было бы и приятным, если бы не глаза его, сами по себе небольшие и невыразительные, но до редкости близко один от другого поставленные, так что их разделяла всего только одна тонкая косточка его продолговатого тонкого носа.  
His face would have been pleasant, were it not for his eyes, which in themselves were small and inexpressive, but set rarely close to each other, so that they were divided only by the single thin little bone of his long, narrow nose.
> Conditional with «бы… если бы не…»: This is the irrealis: «было бы… приятным» (past form + «бы» = "would have been pleasant") with the counterfactual condition «если бы не глаза» ("were it not for his eyes"). The predicate «приятным» sits in the instrumental after «было».
> Object-first word order: The object «их» ("them," the eyes) is fronted before the verb «разделяла» and its subject «косточка» — "them there divided only a single thin little bone." Cases keep roles clear, so the topic (the eyes) can lead and the new detail (the nose-bone) land last.
> Diminutive «косточка»: «косточка» is the diminutive of «кость» (bone) — "a little bone," here the thin ridge of nasal bone between Fetyukovich's too-close eyes. The diminutive sharpens the fastidious, almost squeamish precision of the portrait.

Словом, физиономия эта имела в себе что-то резко птичье, что поражало.  
In a word, this physiognomy had in it something sharply birdlike, which struck one.
> Correlative «что-то… что»: «что-то… что» pairs an indefinite "something" with a relative "which": "something sharply birdlike, which struck one." The relative «что» (rather than «которое») picks up the whole indefinite «что-то» as its antecedent — a bookish correlative.
> «физиономия» — physiognomy, cast of face: «физиономия» means the face as a revealing physiognomy — its overall "look" or cast, with a slightly ironic, appraising tone. Calling Fetyukovich's face a «физиономия» fits the era's interest in reading character from features.

Он был во фраке и в белом галстуке.  
He was in a dress coat and a white cravat.

Помню первый опрос Мити председателем, то есть об имени, звании и проч.  
I remember the presiding judge's first questioning of Mitya — that is, about his name, rank, and so forth.
> Agent in the instrumental within a noun phrase: In the verbal noun phrase «опрос Мити председателем» ("the questioning of Mitya by the presiding judge"), the patient «Мити» is genitive and the agent «председателем» is instrumental — the same agent-marking the instrumental does in a full passive, here packed into a noun.
> «звание» — rank, estate, standing: «звание» here is one's official rank or social standing — the formal datum ("name, rank, and so forth") the judge asks at the opening of any trial. For Mitya, a nobleman by birth, this is a loaded question about who and what he is.

Митя ответил резко, но как-то неожиданно громко, так что председатель встряхнул даже головой и почти с удивлением посмотрел на него.  
Mitya answered sharply, but somehow unexpectedly loudly, so that the presiding judge even gave a start, jerking his head, and looked at him almost with surprise.
> Perfective jolt with emphatic «даже»: «встряхнул» is a perfective single jerk of the head, with «даже» ("even") emphasising how startling Mitya's loudness was. The result clause «так что…» ("so that…") draws the consequence, a subordinating link of result.

Затем был прочитан список лиц, вызванных к судебному следствию, то есть свидетелей и экспертов.  
Then the list was read of the persons summoned to the judicial inquiry — that is, the witnesses and the experts.
> Passive plus an embedded past passive participle: «был прочитан» is a periphrastic passive ("the list was read out"), and within it «вызванных» is a past passive participle in the genitive plural — "of the persons summoned." Two layers of passive participle in one clause, typical of bureaucratic-legal narration.

Список был длинный; четверо из свидетелей не явились: Миусов, бывший в настоящее время уже в Париже, но показание которого имелось еще в предварительном следствии, госпожа Хохлакова и помещик Максимов по болезни и Смердяков за внезапною смертью, причем было представлено свидетельство от полиции.  
The list was a long one; four of the witnesses had not appeared: Miusov, by this time already in Paris, but whose deposition had been taken back in the preliminary inquiry; Madame Khokhlakova and the landowner Maximov, on account of illness; and Smerdyakov, on account of his sudden death, for which a certificate from the police had been submitted.
> Past active participle of «быть» — «бывший»: «бывший» is the past active participle of «быть» ("being / who was"), here "Miusov, by this time already in Paris." It introduces a participial relative clause naming his whereabouts without a finite verb — compact literary syntax.
> Cause expressed by «за» + instr. and «по» + dat.: Both phrases give a reason but with different prepositions: «за внезапною смертью» ("on account of [his] sudden death," «за» + instrumental, archaic «-ою» ending) and «по болезни» ("on account of illness," «по» + dative). Each preposition fixes its own case.

Известие о Смердякове вызвало сильное шевеление и шепот в зале.  
The news about Smerdyakov set off a strong stir and whispering in the hall.
> «о» + prepositional for 'news about': «Известие о Смердякове» ("news about Smerdyakov") uses «о» governing the prepositional case «Смердякове» — the case of the topic one speaks or hears about. «вызвало» is the perfective "provoked/set off."

Конечно, в публике многие еще вовсе не знали об этом внезапном эпизоде самоубийства.  
Of course, many in the public had as yet had no idea at all of this sudden episode of suicide.
> Emphatic «вовсе не» — 'not at all': «вовсе не» strengthens the negation of «знали» to "did not know at all / had no idea whatever." Russian piles up such intensifiers («еще вовсе не») before a negated verb, all resolving to a single emphatic 'not'.

Но что особенно поразило, это — внезапная выходка Мити: только что донесли о Смердякове, как вдруг он со своего места воскликнул на всю залу:  
But what especially struck everyone was Mitya's sudden outburst: the moment Smerdyakov was reported on, he suddenly cried out from his place for the whole hall to hear:
> «только что… как вдруг…» — 'no sooner… than…': The pair «только что… как (вдруг)…» means "the moment X happened, suddenly Y" — the report of Smerdyakov and Mitya's cry collide instantly. «донесли» is an impersonal perfective ("they reported"), subject unstated.
> «выходка» — a sally, an outburst: «выходка» is an unexpected, often unseemly outburst or stunt — a sudden act that breaks decorum. Used twice here for Mitya's eruptions, it casts them as impulsive escapades that damage him in the eyes of the court.

— Собаке собачья смерть!  
"A dog's death for a dog!"
> Dative «собаке» without a verb: The proverb has no verb: the dative «собаке» ("to/for a dog") names the one to whom the «собачья смерть» ("dog's death") is fitting — a bare dative-of-the-affected construction frozen into a saying. «собачья» is the possessive adjective from «собака».

Помню, как бросился к нему его защитник и как председатель обратился к нему с угрозой принять строгие меры, если еще раз повторится подобная этой выходка.  
I remember how his counsel rushed to him, and how the presiding judge turned to him with a threat to take stern measures should any such outburst be repeated even once more.
> Conditional «если» with reflexive «повторится»: «если… повторится» is an open conditional ("if such an outburst is repeated"); «повторится» carries «-ся» in its intransitive sense — the outburst "repeats itself" with no agent. It is a perfective future inside the threat.
> Dative of comparison after «подобный»: «подобный» ("similar to") governs the dative: «подобная этой выходка» = "an outburst like this one" — «этой» is dative. The adjective «подобная» itself agrees with «выходка» in nominative feminine.

Митя отрывисто и кивая головой, но как будто совсем не раскаиваясь, несколько раз повторил вполголоса защитнику:  
Mitya, abruptly and nodding his head, but as though not in the least repentant, repeated several times to his counsel under his breath:
> Two imperfective gerunds, one negated: «кивая» and «раскаиваясь» are imperfective present gerunds («деепричастия») describing how Mitya repeats his words — "nodding… as though not in the least repenting." «не раскаиваясь» shows a gerund taking the negative «не», and «раскаиваться» is a «-ся»-only verb.
> «вполголоса» — under one's breath: The adverb «вполголоса» (lit. "at half-voice") means in an undertone, in a low voice. Mitya mutters his apology «вполголоса» to his counsel — half-chastened, half-defiant.

— Не буду, не буду! Сорвалось! Больше не буду!  
"I won't, I won't! It slipped out! I won't do it again!"
> "I won't" with the future of быть: «Не буду» literally means "I will not be (doing it)" — «буду» is the first-person future of «быть» (to be), normally used to build the imperfective future. Here the main verb is simply dropped because it is obvious from context ("I won't [do it]"). «Сорвалось» ("it broke loose / slipped out") is an impersonal past, conveying that the outburst escaped him against his will.
> Impersonal «сорвалось» — 'it slipped out': «Сорвалось» is the neuter perfective past of «сорваться» (with «-ся»), used impersonally with no subject — "it broke loose / it slipped out." The «-ся» makes the words seem to escape Mitya of their own accord, absolving him of intent.

И уж, конечно, этот коротенький эпизод послужил не в его пользу во мнении присяжных и публики.  
And, of course, this brief little episode did not serve him well in the opinion of the jurors and the public.
> Diminutive «коротенький»: «коротенький» is the diminutive of «короткий» (short), with the affectionate-belittling «-еньк-» — "this brief little episode." The diminutive lends the narrator's verdict a wry, almost pitying tone toward Mitya's self-damage.
> Idiom «послужить в пользу» negated: «послужить в пользу» ("to serve in [someone's] favour") is here negated — «не в его пользу», "not in his favour." «в… пользу» takes «в» + accusative, the idiom of working for or against someone's interest.

Объявлялся характер и рекомендовал себя сам.  
A character was declaring itself and recommending its own self.
> Imperfective «-ся» middle and reflexive «себя сам»: «Объявлялся» ("was declaring itself") is an imperfective «-ся» middle: the character announced itself, intransitively. Then «рекомендовал себя сам» uses the full reflexive object «себя» plus intensifier «сам» — "recommended its very own self" — a pointed contrast to the verbal «-ся».

Под этим-то впечатлением был прочитан секретарем суда обвинительный акт  
It was under this impression that the bill of indictment was read out by the clerk of the court.
> Passive with the reader in the instrumental: «был прочитан… секретарём» — periphrastic passive ("was read out") with the agent «секретарём» ("by the clerk") in the instrumental. The subject «обвинительный акт» comes last, the new information the inverted passive builds toward.

Он был довольно краток, но обстоятелен.  
It was rather brief, but circumstantial.
> Short-form predicate adjectives: «краток» and «обстоятелен» are short forms of «краткий» ("brief") and «обстоятельный» ("detailed, circumstantial"), used predicatively after «был». The bookish short form is the natural choice for stating these qualities of the document.

Излагались лишь главнейшие причины, почему привлечен такой-то, почему его должно было предать суду, и так далее.  
Only the chief reasons were set forth — why this man had been charged, why he had had to be committed for trial, and so on.
> Imperfective «-ся» passive: «Излагались» ("were set forth") is an imperfective passive in «-ся» — the reasons "were being laid out," with no named agent. Imperfective passives in Russian are regularly built this way rather than with a participle.
> Superlative «-ейш-» and modal «должно было»: «главнейшие» is the bookish superlative of «главный» in «-ейш-» ("the very chief"). «должно было предать» is an impersonal modal of obligation in the past — "he had to be committed [to trial]," with «суду» in the dative governed by «предать».
> «такой-то» — 'so-and-so': «такой-то» is the placeholder "such-and-such / so-and-so," standing in for a name the narrator declines to repeat — "why this man (so-and-so) had been charged." It mimics the impersonal formula-language of the indictment itself.

Тем не менее он произвел на меня сильное впечатление.  
Nonetheless it produced a strong impression on me.
> Concessive «тем не менее»: «Тем не менее» ("nonetheless, none the less") is a fixed concessive adverbial linking back against the previous clause — the indictment was dry, yet it moved him. «произвёл… впечатление на меня» repeats the perfective idiom of making an impression.

Секретарь прочел четко, звучно, отчетливо.  
The clerk read it out clearly, sonorously, distinctly.
> Perfective «прочёл» with a triad of adverbs: «прочёл» is the perfective past of «прочесть/прочитать» — the clerk read the whole thing through, a completed act. The asyndetic triad «четко, звучно, отчетливо» (clearly, sonorously, distinctly) gives the reading its measured, ringing quality.

Вся эта трагедия как бы вновь появилась пред всеми выпукло, концентрично, освещенная роковым, неумолимым светом.  
This whole tragedy seemed to rise up anew before everyone, in bold relief, concentrated, lit by a fateful, inexorable light.
> Past passive participle in the instrumental: «освещённая» is a past passive participle ("lit, illuminated") agreeing with «трагедия», and its means «роковым, неумолимым светом» ("by a fateful, inexorable light") stands in the instrumental — the case of the means by which the tragedy is lit.
> «выпукло» — in bold relief: «выпукло» means "in relief, three-dimensionally, vividly" (from «выпуклый», convex/protruding); «концентрично» — "concentrated, drawn to a center." The pair makes the indictment seem to project the whole tragedy into sharp, gathered relief before the courtroom.

Помню, как сейчас же по прочтении председатель громко и внушительно спросил Митю:  
I remember how, immediately after the reading, the presiding judge asked Mitya loudly and imposingly:
> «по» + prepositional of 'right after': «по прочтении» uses «по» with the prepositional «прочтении» (a verbal noun) in its temporal sense "upon / right after the reading." This «по + prepositional = after» is a bookish, formal construction, reinforced here by «сейчас же» ("immediately").

— Подсудимый, признаете ли вы себя виновным?  
"Defendant, do you acknowledge yourself guilty?"
> Formal yes/no question with «ли» and reflexive «себя»: «признаёте ли вы…» fronts the focused verb and follows it with «ли», the formal yes/no marker — "do you acknowledge…?" The object is the reflexive «себя» ("yourself"), with the predicate «виновным» in the instrumental: "acknowledge yourself [to be] guilty."
> «подсудимый» — the defendant: «подсудимый» (lit. "the one under judgment") is the formal courtroom word for the accused on trial — the cold official designation the bench gives Mitya, set against the narrator's warm «Митя». It is grammatically a substantivised adjective.

Митя вдруг встал с места:  
Mitya suddenly rose from his place:
> Perfective «встал» with «вдруг»: «встал» is the perfective past of «встать» ("rose, stood up"), a single decisive movement, intensified by «вдруг» ("suddenly"). «с места» ("from his place") uses «с» + genitive of motion away from.

— Признаю себя виновным в пьянстве и разврате, — воскликнул он каким-то опять-таки неожиданным, почти исступленным голосом, — в лени и в дебоширстве.  
"I acknowledge myself guilty of drunkenness and dissipation," he cried out in some sort of, again, unexpected, almost frenzied voice, "of idleness and debauchery.
> «виновным в» + prepositional: «виновным в пьянстве и разврате» — "guilty of drunkenness and debauchery" — takes «в» plus the prepositional case for the thing one is guilty of. The predicate «виновным» is instrumental (the role assigned to «себя»), while the offences sit in the prepositional.
> «разврат» and «дебоширство»: «разврат» is debauchery, moral dissipation; «дебоширство» is rowdy, brawling carousing — drunken disorder. Mitya itemises his vices in escalating, self-lacerating terms, owning the lesser sins to throw the denial of murder into relief.

Хотел стать навеки честным человеком именно в ту секунду, когда подсекла судьба!  
I meant to become an honest man forever, at the very second when fate cut me down!
> Instrumental predicate after «стать»: «стать честным человеком» — "to become an honest man" — puts the predicate noun phrase in the instrumental after «стать», the case for what one turns into. The subject "I" is dropped, carried by «хотел».
> Temporal «когда»-clause with perfective «подсекла»: «когда подсекла судьба» ("when fate cut [me] down") is a temporal subordinate clause; «подсекла» is the perfective past of «подсечь» — a single, sudden severing blow — with the subject «судьба» placed after the verb for dramatic weight.

Но в смерти старика, врага моего и отца, — не виновен!  
But of the death of the old man, my enemy and my father — I am not guilty!
> Short adjective «виновен» negated: «не виновен» uses the short predicative form of «виновный» — the legally exact "[I am] not guilty," with «в смерти» ("of the death," «в» + prepositional) naming the charge. The short form is the proper predicative verdict-word.
> Appositive genitives: «старика, врага моего и отца» are three genitives in apposition — "of the old man, my enemy and my father" — all governed by «в смерти». The genitive of the dead man's identity stacks the terrible double bond (enemy and father) into one phrase.

Но в ограблении его — нет, нет, не виновен, да и не могу быть виновным: Дмитрий Карамазов подлец, но не вор!  
But of robbing him — no, no, I am not guilty, and I cannot be guilty: Dmitri Karamazov is a scoundrel, but not a thief!"
> Connective «да и» plus negated modal: «да и» here means "and indeed / and what's more," adding emphatic weight ("and I cannot even be guilty"). «не могу быть виновным» negates the modal «мочь» + infinitive, with the predicate «виновным» in the instrumental after «быть».
> Zero copula and the full name as self-naming: "Dmitri Karamazov is a scoundrel, but not a thief" needs no «есть» — the zero present copula links subject and nominative predicates «подлец… вор» directly. Mitya speaking of himself by his full formal name «Дмитрий Карамазов», in the third person, is a theatrical self-distancing.
> «подлец» — scoundrel: «подлец» is a strong, scornful word — a base, contemptible scoundrel, a man capable of mean and dishonourable acts. Mitya hurls it at himself to concede his moral squalor while fiercely refusing the specific charge of theft.

Прокричав это, он сел на место, видимо весь дрожа.  
Having shouted this out, he sat down in his place, visibly trembling all over.
> Perfective past gerund «прокричав»: «Прокричав» is the perfective past gerund («деепричастие») of «прокричать» — "having shouted this out" — naming the completed action that precedes «он сел» ("he sat down"). It shares Mitya as subject and sequences the two acts in one breath.
> Imperfective gerund «дрожа» of ongoing state: «дрожа» is the imperfective present gerund of «дрожать» ("trembling"), giving the simultaneous, ongoing condition as he sits — "visibly trembling all over." Set against the perfective «прокричав/сел», it shows the two gerund aspects in immediate contrast.

Председатель снова обратился к нему с кратким, но назидательным увещанием отвечать лишь на вопросы, а не вдаваться в посторонние и исступленные восклицания.  
The presiding judge turned to him once more with a brief but admonishing reminder to answer only the questions put to him, and not to lapse into irrelevant and frenzied outbursts.
> «увещание» — an admonition: «увещание» is a bookish, slightly solemn word for an exhortation or admonishment — a moral urging rather than a mere order. It belongs to the elevated courtroom-and-church register of this scene; the same root returns in «увещание священника» in s126.
> Instrumental after «с»: The preposition «с» here governs the instrumental case («с... увещанием»), expressing the manner in which the judge addressed him — "with an admonition." The adjectives «кратким» and «назидательным» agree in the instrumental, making the case visible even before the noun's own ending.
> Negated imperfective infinitive: «отвечать... а не вдаваться» pairs two imperfective infinitives governed by the admonition: to keep answering, and not to keep lapsing into outbursts. The imperfective frames the conduct as an ongoing manner of behaving, and «а» marks the contrastive hinge — "answer, but not lapse."
> «исступлённый» — frenzied: «исступлённый» means frenzied, raving, beside oneself — a favourite Dostoevskian word for a soul in extremity. Here, applied to Mitya's «восклицания» (outbursts), it carries the charge of a man who has lost self-possession in the dock.

Затем велел приступить к судебному следствию.  
He then ordered that the examination of the evidence begin.
> «велел» + infinitive: he ordered: «велеть» (here perfective past «велел») governs a bare infinitive to express a command issued to others — "he ordered [them] to proceed." The subject is dropped, recoverable from the preceding sentence; the chain «велел приступить» shows a finite verb steering a dependent infinitive.

Ввели всех свидетелей для присяги.  
All the witnesses were brought in to be sworn.
> Subjectless «они»-passive: «Ввели» is a third-person-plural past with no stated subject — an indefinite-personal construction ("they brought in" = "were brought in"). Russian uses this bare plural verb where English reaches for a passive; the deed matters, the agent does not.
> Animate accusative = genitive: «свидетелей» is the accusative of the animate plural «свидетели», which borrows the genitive ending — hence «всех свидетелей», not «все свидетели». The determiner «всех» agrees in the same animate-accusative form.

Тут я увидел их всех разом.  
It was then that I caught sight of them all at once.
> «разом» — all at one stroke: «разом» is an adverb meaning "all at once, in a single moment." Paired with «их всех» (them, all of them — animate accusative), it compresses the narrator's sudden, total view of the assembled cast into one beat.
> «увидел» — perfective of sudden perception: «увидел» is the perfective of «видеть», naming the single, punctual event of catching sight — not the ongoing state «видел» (was seeing). The narrator's «я» surfaces here, a rare first-person intrusion that marks him as an eyewitness reporter of the trial.

Впрочем, братья подсудимого были допущены к свидетельству без присяги.  
The defendant's brothers, however, were permitted to give their testimony without taking the oath.
> «впрочем» — however, then again: «впрочем» is a discourse hinge meaning "however / be that as it may / then again" — it qualifies or partly retracts what came before. It is one of the narrator's signature connectives, constantly nuancing his report.
> Periphrastic passive «были допущены»: «были допущены» is a true passive: past tense of «быть» plus the short-form past passive participle of «допустить» (to permit) — "were permitted." The short participle agrees in plural with «братья», and the construction states a result, contrasting with the agentless «ввели» of s123.

После увещания священника и председателя свидетелей увели и рассадили, по возможности, порознь.  
After the exhortation by the priest and the presiding judge, the witnesses were led away and seated, so far as was possible, apart from one another.
> Paired perfectives, subjectless: Two perfective past verbs in another indefinite-personal chain — "[they] led away and seated." Each names a completed step that moves the narrative forward; the prefix «рас-» in «рассадили» adds the sense of distributing them apart, picked up by «порознь».
> «порознь» — separately, apart: «порознь» is a somewhat bookish adverb meaning "separately, each apart from the others." The hedge «по возможности» ("as far as possible") tucked before it gives the courtroom a faintly bureaucratic, makeshift air.

Затем стали вызывать их по одному.  
They then began to call them in one by one.
> «стали» + imperfective: began to call: «стать» (perfective «стали») plus an imperfective infinitive («вызывать») is the standard way to say "began to do" — the inception of a repeated, ongoing process. The imperfective «вызывать» fits the iterative sense reinforced by «по одному», one after another.
> «по одному» — one by one: The distributive «по» here means "one at a time," governing «одному» to spread the calling out over each witness in turn. «их» is the animate accusative object of «вызывать».
---

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.