# The Brothers Karamazov, They Arrive at the Monastery

Братья Карамазовы · Fyodor Dostoevsky · Book II — An Unfortunate Gathering

Source: https://1732studios.com/books/karamazov/b2-c1. Data: https://1732studios.com/books/karamazov/b2-c1.json.


Выдался прекрасный, теплый и ясный день.  
It turned out to be a beautiful day, warm and clear.
> Perfective «выдаться» + subject-last word order: «Выдался» is the perfective past of «выдаться», a reflexive verb meaning (of weather, a day) "to turn out, to come off as." The sentence opens with the verb and saves the subject «день» for the end — a topic-comment inversion that lands the new information, the kind of day, in the stressed final position. The reflexive «-ся» here is the impersonal-middle type, not a true reflexive.
> Three long-form adjectives agreeing with «день»: All three adjectives carry the masculine nominative singular ending to agree with «день»: «прекрасный, тёплый, ясный». These are the long (attributive) forms, declined for gender, number, and case, as opposed to the bookish short predicate forms.

Был конец августа.  
It was the end of August.
> Genitive of «of»: «августа»: «Августа» is the genitive of «август», giving the "of" relation: "the end of August." The bare noun phrase «конец августа» needs no preposition — the genitive ending alone does the work English spreads across the word "of."

Свидание со старцем условлено было сейчас после поздней обедни, примерно к половине двенадцатого.  
The meeting with the elder had been arranged for directly after the late Mass, around half past eleven.
> starets (the elder): A «старец» is not merely an old man but an "elder": a spiritually experienced monk recognized as a guide of souls. We render it "elder" throughout. The word names a real Orthodox institution of guidance («старчество»), central to this novel through Father Zossima.
> Short passive participle + «было»: "had been arranged": «Условлено» is the short (predicative) neuter form of the past passive participle of «условить» (to agree, arrange); joined to «было» it forms a periphrastic passive in the past, "had been arranged." The neuter «-о» agrees with the neutral, deferred subject «свидание». This past-passive construction is a staple of formal narration.
> Telling time: «половина двенадцатого» = half past eleven: Russian counts the hour toward the one approaching: «половина двенадцатого» is literally "half of the twelfth (hour)," i.e. half past eleven. «Двенадцатого» is the genitive of the ordinal «двенадцатый», and the whole phrase sits in the dative after «к» ("toward, by").

Наши посетители монастыря к обедне, однако, не пожаловали, а приехали ровно к шапочному разбору.  
Our visitors, however, had not appeared for the Mass at all, but arrived just as it was all breaking up.
> «пожаловать» — to deign to come (ironic here): «Пожаловать» is an elevated, courtly verb for "to come, to arrive (graciously)," the same root as in «добро пожаловать» (welcome). Negated and applied to these unceremonious guests it is dryly ironic: they did not "deign" to come to the Mass.
> The contrastive «однако» and parenthetical «а»: «Однако» ("however") is dropped in mid-sentence as a parenthetical concession, set off by commas. The following «а» is the mild contrastive conjunction — "and/but" marking a shift — pivoting from what they failed to do to what they actually did.

Приехали они в двух экипажах; в первом экипаже, в щегольской коляске, запряженной парой дорогих лошадей, прибыл Петр Александрович Миусов со своим дальним родственником, очень молодым человеком, лет двадцати, Петром Фомичом Калгановым.  
They came in two carriages; in the first, a dapper barouche drawn by a pair of costly horses, arrived Pyotr Alexandrovich Miusov together with a distant relative of his, a very young man of about twenty, Pyotr Fomich Kalganov.
> Numeral «два» + genitive singular, then prepositional: «Два» governs the genitive singular, so the base phrase is «два экипажа»; but under «в» the whole quantified phrase shifts to the prepositional plural «в двух экипажах» (location). Russian numerals control the case of what they count, and that case is itself overridden by a governing preposition.
> «щегольская коляска» — a dapper barouche: A «коляска» is an open four-wheeled carriage (a barouche/calash); «щегольской» means "dandified, foppish, showily smart," from «щёголь» (a dandy). The phrase signals Miusov's vanity and money before he says a word — set against the Karamazovs' rattletrap a few lines on.
> Past passive participle + instrumental of means: «Запряжённой» is a past passive participle ("harnessed, drawn") agreeing in the feminine instrumental with «коляске». «Парой дорогих лошадей» is the instrumental of means — drawn BY a pair — with «лошадей» in the genitive plural after «пара». The chained participle is typical literary compression of a который-clause.

Этот молодой человек готовился поступить в университет; Миусов же, у которого он почему-то пока жил, соблазнял его с собою за границу, в Цюрих или в Иену, чтобы там поступить в университет и окончить курс.  
This young man was preparing to enter the university; Miusov, with whom for some reason he was meanwhile living, kept tempting him to go abroad with him, to Zurich or Jena, to enroll there and finish his studies.
> The emphatic particle «же»: Postpositive «же» here is contrastive-emphatic: it sets Miusov off against the young man just described ("Miusov, for his part…"). One of the small modal particles that English renders only with stress or word order, «же» is a constant texturing device in Dostoevsky's prose.
> Relative «который» in a prepositional phrase: «У которого» opens a relative clause: «который» agrees in gender/number with its antecedent Miusov but takes the case its own role demands — here genitive after «у» ("at whose place he was living"). The clause is fenced off by commas in the standard way.
> Imperfective «соблазнял» of repeated tempting + purpose «чтобы»: The imperfective past «соблазнял» ("kept tempting") views the action as repeated, ongoing pressure, not a single event. «Чтобы» then opens a purpose clause; after «чтобы» Russian normally uses the past form or, as here with a shared subject, the infinitive «поступить … и окончить».

Молодой человек еще не решился.  
The young man had not yet made up his mind.
> Reflexive «решиться» + «не» = had not yet decided: «Решился» is the perfective past of the reflexive «решиться» ("to make up one's mind, resolve"), a change-of-state middle use of «-ся». With «ещё не» it states that the resolution has not yet been reached — the perfective under negation denying that the completed act has happened.

Он был задумчив и как бы рассеян.  
He was pensive and as though absent-minded.
> Short-form predicate adjectives after «был»: «Задумчив» and «рассеян» are short (predicative) adjective forms, used only as predicates and carrying a slightly bookish, state-describing flavor very common in 19th-century prose. They take only gender/number endings (here masculine, zero) and cannot stand before a noun.
> «как бы» — "as though, sort of": «Как бы» is a hedging particle meaning "as it were, as though, kind of," softening the assertion: he was distracted, or seemed so. It recurs throughout the novel as a marker of the narrator's tentative, qualifying voice.

Лицо его было приятное, сложение крепкое, рост довольно высокий.  
His face was pleasant, his build sturdy, his height fairly tall.
> Parallel zero-copula clauses with «его» possessive: Three balanced clauses share one shape — noun + (зero) copula + adjective — with the past «было» stated once and felt across all three. The invariable genitive pronoun «его» ("his") never changes form, unlike the agreeing possessives «мой/твой». The rhythm sketches the young man in three quick strokes.

Во взгляде его случалась странная неподвижность: подобно всем очень рассеянным людям, он глядел на вас иногда в упор и подолгу, а между тем совсем вас не видел.  
There was a strange fixity in his gaze: like all very absent-minded people, he would sometimes stare straight at you and for a long while, yet meanwhile not see you at all.
> Imperfective «случалась» of recurrence, subject after verb: «Случалась» is imperfective past — a recurring, habitual happening ("there would occur"), not one event — agreeing as feminine with the postposed subject «неподвижность». Placing the subject after the verb keeps the new, characterizing detail in the weighted position.
> Dative after «подобно»: «Подобно» ("like, similar to") governs the dative, so the whole phrase «всем очень рассеянным людям» stands in the dative plural, every word agreeing. It is a slightly bookish alternative to «как».
> Contrastive «а» + «между тем» = "and yet, meanwhile": «А» is the soft contrastive conjunction; with «между тем» ("meanwhile") it pivots to the paradox — he stares straight at you yet does not see you. This «а» of gentle contrast is one of Russian's untranslatable hinges.

Был он молчалив и несколько неловок, но бывало, — впрочем не иначе как с кем-нибудь один на один, — что он вдруг станет ужасно разговорчив, порывист, смешлив, смеясь бог знает иногда чему.  
He was taciturn and a little awkward, but it would happen — never, though, except one-on-one with someone — that all at once he would grow terribly talkative, impulsive, prone to laughter, sometimes laughing God knows at what.
> Perfective present-future «станет» for a typical sudden turn: «Станет» is the perfective of «стать» conjugated like a present, yielding future/potential meaning — here a vivid "gnomic" future inside an imperfective frame «бывало» ("it would happen that…"), capturing a thing that characteristically suddenly occurs. The predicate adjectives «разговорчив, порывист, смешлив» are short forms.
> Imperfective gerund «смеясь» (laughing): «Смеясь» is the present (imperfective) деепричастие of «смеяться» — an indeclinable verb-adverb meaning "while laughing," describing the manner of his talk and sharing its subject. «Чему» is the dative governed by «смеяться над»? — here the bare dative of the thing laughed at: "laughing at God knows what."
> Non-specific «-нибудь»: with just anyone: «Кем-нибудь» is the instrumental of «кто-нибудь», the non-specific indefinite ("with someone, anyone at all"), as opposed to specific «кто-то». The «-нибудь» series marks an open, unspecified referent — appropriate to a habitual "whenever he was alone with anyone."

Но одушевление его столь же быстро и вдруг погасало, как быстро и вдруг нарождалось.  
But his animation died down just as quickly and suddenly as it had flared up.
> Paired imperfectives «погасало / нарождалось»: Both verbs are imperfective past in «-ся» middle voice — «погасало» (was dying down) and «нарождалось» (was being born, flaring up) — and the imperfective lets the clause compare two ongoing processes for their shared speed and suddenness. The correlative here is «столь же … как» ('just as … as'), where «как» introduces the second term of comparison.
> «одушевление» — animation, enlivenment: «Одушевление» is a bookish abstract noun in «-ение» meaning "animation, enthusiasm, the becoming-alive of the spirit," from «душа» (soul). Such «-ение/-ие» nouns give the prose its reflective, slightly elevated texture.

Был он одет всегда хорошо и даже изысканно: он уже имел некоторое независимое состояние и ожидал еще гораздо большего.  
He was always well, even fastidiously, dressed: he already had a certain independent fortune and expected a far greater one to come.
> Short passive participle «одет» + inverted «был он»: «Одет» is the short past passive participle of «одеть» ("dressed"), forming a stative passive with «был»: "he was dressed." The inversion «был он» (verb before pronoun) opens the sentence on the predicate, a characterizing rhythm Dostoevsky favors in these portrait sentences.
> Comparative «большего» in the genitive object: «Большего» is the genitive of «больший», the suppletive comparative of «большой» ("greater"), intensified by «гораздо» ("far, much"). It stands in the genitive as the object of «ожидал» (to expect/await, which governs the genitive of an abstract awaited thing).

С Алешей был приятелем.  
He was a friend of Alyosha's.
> Instrumental of company «с Алёшей» + predicate instrumental «приятелем»: Two instrumentals do different jobs: «с Алёшей» is the instrumental of accompaniment after «с» ("with Alyosha"), while «приятелем» is the predicate instrumental after the elided «был он» — the complement of "to be" in the past goes in the instrumental ("was a friend"). The dropped subject is recoverable from context.

В весьма ветхой, дребезжащей, но поместительной извозчичьей коляске, на паре старых сиво-розовых лошадей, сильно отстававших от коляски Миусова, подъехали и Федор Павлович с сынком своим Иваном Федоровичем.  
In an exceedingly rickety, rattling, but roomy hired carriage, drawn by a pair of old roan-pink horses that lagged far behind Miusov's barouche, Fyodor Pavlovich also drove up, with his little son Ivan Fyodorovich.
> Stacked modifiers, including the participle «дребезжащей»: A long prepositional phrase front-loads the sentence with three modifiers of «коляске», all agreeing in feminine prepositional: the adjectives «ветхой», «поместительной» and the present active participle «дребезжащей» ("rattling," from «дребезжать»). The participle behaves exactly like an adjective, condensing "which rattles" into one word.
> Past active participle «отстававших»: «Отстававших» is the past active participle of imperfective «отставать» ("to lag behind"), in the genitive plural to agree with «лошадей». Imperfective stem gives an ongoing past sense — horses that were continually lagging. «От коляски» is genitive after «от».
> Diminutive «сынок» + reflexive possessive «свой»: «Сынок» is the affectionate diminutive of «сын» ("little son, sonny") — here faintly ironic of the grown, cold Ivan. «Своим» is the reflexive possessive «свой», pointing the possession back to the clause's own subject Fyodor Pavlovich ("his own son").

Дмитрию Федоровичу еще накануне сообщен был и час и срок, но он запоздал.  
Dmitri Fyodorovich had been told the hour and the appointed time the day before, but he was late.
> Dative recipient + short passive participle: «Дмитрию Фёдоровичу» is the dative of the person told ("to Dmitri it had been communicated"), fronted for emphasis; «сообщён был» is a short past passive participle with «был» forming the periphrastic passive. Russian readily makes the recipient the topic while keeping it dative.
> Coordinating «и … и» = both… and: Repeated «и … и» means "both… and," coordinating «час» (the hour) and «срок» (the appointed time/term) as two communicated facts. The doubling adds emphatic completeness — he had been told everything, and still came late.

Посетители оставили экипажи у ограды, в гостинице, и вошли в монастырские ворота пешком.  
The visitors left their carriages by the wall, at the hostelry, and went in through the monastery gates on foot.
> Prefixed motion verb «войти» + accusative of destination: «Вошли» is the perfective of «войти» ("to go in, enter"), a prefixed motion verb where the prefix «в-» supplies direction and makes the verb an ordinary perfective. «В … ворота» takes the accusative for motion-toward (the gates as destination).

Кроме Федора Павловича, остальные трое, кажется, никогда не видали никакого монастыря, а Миусов так лет тридцать, может быть, и в церкви не был.  
Apart from Fyodor Pavlovich, the other three had apparently never seen any monastery at all, and Miusov for some thirty years, perhaps, had not so much as set foot in a church.
> Negative concord: «никогда … не … никакого»: Three negatives make one meaning: «никогда» (never), «не» on the verb, and «никакого монастыря» (not any monastery). Russian requires this negative concord — the verb keeps «не» even when ни-words are present — and the negated object «монастыря» stands in the genitive of negation.
> Approximation by inversion: «лет тридцать»: Putting the noun before the numeral — «лет тридцать» instead of «тридцать лет» — signals approximation: "some thirty years, about thirty years." «Лет» is the genitive plural used for counting years (the suppletive plural of «год»).

Он озирался с некоторым любопытством не лишенным некоторой напущенной на себя развязности.  
He looked about him with a certain curiosity, not without a certain casualness deliberately put on.
> Imperfective reflexive «озираться» (to look about): «Озирался» is the imperfective past of the «-ся» verb «озираться» ("to look around, gaze about"), the «-ся» giving a self-directed, middle sense. The imperfective renders the looking as an ongoing process, in keeping with the durative "was looking about."
> «развязность» + «напустить на себя» (put on): «Развязность» is a slightly pejorative noun for unbuttoned, over-familiar ease of manner — "breezy casualness, free-and-easiness." The idiom «напустить на себя» means to affect or assume a manner deliberately; here the participle «напущенной» marks Miusov's nonchalance as a studied pose.

Но для наблюдательного его ума кроме церковных и хозяйственных построек, весьма, впрочем, обыкновенных, во внутренности монастыря ничего не представлялось.  
But to his observant mind nothing presented itself within the monastery beyond the church and household buildings, which were, moreover, quite ordinary.
> Impersonal «-ся» + genitive «ничего»: «Представлялось» is the imperfective «-ся» middle ("presented itself, appeared"), used impersonally with the negated «ничего» (nothing) in the genitive — the genitive of negation for an absent subject. The whole frame is the Russian impersonal turn: nothing offered itself to his mind.
> Dative-of-interest sense via «для» + genitive: «Для наблюдательного его ума» ("to/for his observant mind") uses «для» + genitive to mark the perceiver. Note the split word order «наблюдательного его ума», with the possessive «его» tucked between adjective and noun — a bookish, slightly archaic placement.

Проходил последний народ из церкви, снимая шапки и крестясь.  
The last of the people were filing out of the church, taking off their caps and crossing themselves.
> Two imperfective gerunds: «снимая» and «крестясь»: Both are present деепричастия sharing the subject «народ»: «снимая» (taking off, from «снимать») and «крестясь» (crossing themselves, from reflexive «креститься», with the gerund «-сь» after a vowel). They paint the simultaneous attendant actions of the departing crowd.

Между простонародьем встречались и приезжие более высшего общества, две-три дамы, один очень старый генерал, все они стояли в гостинице.  
Among the common folk there were also visitors of a higher class — two or three ladies, one very old general — all of them lodging at the hostelry.
> «простонародье» — the common folk: «Простонародье» is a collective noun (literally "simple-folk") for the common people, the lower social orders. Here in the instrumental «между простонародьем» ("among the common folk") it is set against «приезжие более высшего общества" — the class divide the scene keeps drawing.
> Layered comparatives «более высшего»: «Высшего» is already the comparative/elevated form of «высокий» ("higher, upper"); preceding it with «более» ("more") doubles the comparison, a slightly loose colloquial intensification: "of a (more) higher class." «Общества» is genitive ("of … society").

Нищие обступили наших посетителей тотчас же, но им никто ничего не дал.  
The beggars surrounded our visitors at once, but no one gave them anything.
> Triple negation + dative «им»: Classic negative concord: «никто … ничего … не дал» — "nobody gave anything," three negatives, one meaning. «Им» is the dative of the recipients (the beggars), fronted as topic. «Ничего» is the genitive form of «ничто», standard for the negated object.

Только Петруша Калганов вынул из портмоне гривенник и, заторопившись и сконфузившись бог знает отчего, поскорее сунул одной бабе, быстро проговорив: «Разделить поровну»  
Only little Petrusha Kalganov took a ten-copeck piece from his purse and, hurrying and growing flustered God knows why, hastily thrust it at one of the women, saying quickly: "Divide it equally"
> A гривенник (ten-copeck coin): «Гривенник» is the colloquial name for a ten-copeck coin (one tenth of a rouble). Russian has many such single-word coin names («пятак» = five copecks, «полтинник» = fifty copecks). We expand it here to "a ten-copeck piece," since English has no one-word equivalent.
> Two perfective past gerunds in «-вшись»: «Заторопившись» and «сконфузившись» are perfective past деепричастия (in «-вшись», from reflexive verbs) expressing prior, completed actions attendant on the main verb: "having begun to hurry and grown flustered, he thrust…" The perfective gerund marks the action as completed just before the main one.
> Diminutive «Петруша»; «баба» for a peasant woman: «Петруша» is the tender diminutive of «Пётр» ("little Petrusha"), matching his shy, blushing impulse. «Баба» is a plain, slightly rough word for a peasant or married woman of the lower classes — not the polite «женщина» — fixing the recipient's social world.

Никто ему на это ничего из его сопутников не заметил, так что нечего было ему конфузиться, но, заметив это, он еще больше сконфузился.  
None of his companions made any remark about it, so there was nothing for him to be embarrassed by; but, noticing this, he grew all the more embarrassed.
> Dense negative concord with scattered constituents: «Никто … ничего … не заметил» again stacks negatives for one meaning ("no one remarked anything"). The constituents «ему», «на это», and the partitive «из его сопутников» are strewn through the clause — free word order let by the case endings — keeping «никто» in topic position.
> Impersonal «нечего» + dative subject + infinitive: «Нечего было ему конфузиться» is the impersonal negative construction: «нечего» ("there is nothing to") with the experiencer in the dative «ему» and an infinitive — "there was nothing for him to be embarrassed about." «Конфузиться» is the imperfective «-ся» verb "to be/feel embarrassed."
> Perfective gerund «заметив» (having noticed): «Заметив» is the perfective past деепричастие of «заметить» — "having noticed (this)" — a completed action just preceding the main verb «сконфузился». The neat irony turns on aspect: noticing (perfective) triggers the further embarrassment.

Было, однако, странно; их по-настоящему должны бы были ждать и, может быть, с некоторым даже почетом один недавно еще тысячу рублей пожертвовал, а другой был богатейшим помещиком и образованнейшим, так сказать, человеком, от которого все они тут отчасти зависели по поводу ловель рыбы в реке, вследствие оборота, какой мог принять процесс.  
It was strange, however; by rights they ought to have been awaited, and perhaps even with some ceremony: one of them had not long ago donated a thousand roubles, while another was a most wealthy landowner and, so to speak, a most cultivated man, on whom they all here partly depended in the matter of fishing rights in the river, depending on the turn the lawsuit might take.
> Conditional «бы» softening obligation: «Должны бы были ждать» layers the particle «бы» onto «должны были» ("ought to have been") to make a softened, irrealis obligation: "by rights they ought to have awaited them." The «бы» turns plain duty into a counterfactual reproach — they should have, but did not.
> Bookish superlative suffix «-ейший»: «Богатейшим» and «образованнейшим» are synthetic superlatives in «-ейший» ("a most wealthy… a most cultivated"), a bookish formation against the everyday periphrastic «самый богатый». Both stand in the instrumental as predicate complements of «был».
> Relative «который» governed by «от» + «зависеть от»: The verb «зависеть» takes «от» + genitive ("to depend on"), so the relative «который» appears as «от которого» in the genitive, agreeing in masculine singular with its antecedent (the landowner). It opens a long subordinate clause, comma-fenced as usual.

И вот, однако ж, никто из официальных лиц их не встречает.  
And yet, for all that, none of the official persons came out to meet them.
> «однако ж» — adversative «however» plus «ж»: «Однако ж» is «однако» ("however, yet") reinforced by the clipped particle «ж» (a form of «же»), heightening the indignant contrast: "and yet, for all that." The clitic «ж/же» repeatedly carries the narrator's editorializing pressure in this passage.
> Switch to the imperfective present «встречает»: Mid-narration the verb shifts to the imperfective present tense «встречает» ("comes out to meet"), a vivid present that pulls the reader into the scene's ongoing slight. With «никто … не» it again forms negative concord.

Миусов рассеянно смотрел на могильные камни около церкви и хотел было заметить, что могилки эти, должно быть, обошлись дорогонько хоронившим за право хоронить в таком «святом» месте, но промолчал: простая либеральная ирония перерождалась в нем почти что уж в гнев.  
Miusov gazed absent-mindedly at the gravestones around the church and was about to remark that these little graves must have cost a pretty penny to those who buried their dead for the right to do so in such a "holy" spot, but he held his tongue: his simple liberal irony was turning in him into something almost like anger.
> The particle «было» of an interrupted intention: «Хотел было заметить» uses the special unstressed «было» — frozen from the past of «быть» — to mark an action begun or just intended and then checked or undone: "he was about to remark… but held his tongue." It is a distinctively Russian device for the act that almost happened.
> Dative «хоронившим» (the past active participle as a noun): «Хоронившим» is the past active participle of «хоронить» ("to bury") used substantivally and standing in the dative plural — "to those who buried (their dead)." «Обойтись» + dative + a sum/adverb means "to cost someone"; the affectionate diminutive adverb «дорогонько» softens "dear, pricey" into a wry "a pretty penny."
> «перерождаться в» — to be reborn into / turn into: «Перерождалась» (imperfective «-ся») literally means "was being re-born," "was transforming" — «пере-» (over/again) + «рождаться» (to be born). The metaphor of rebirth, applied to Miusov's fashionable "liberal irony" curdling into «гнев» (anger/wrath), carries a faint theological edge in this monastery setting.

— Черт, у кого здесь, однако, спросить, в этой бестолковщине… Это нужно бы решить, потому что время уходит, — промолвил он вдруг, как бы говоря про себя.  
"The devil — whom does one ask here, anyway, in this muddle… This really needs settling, because time is getting on," he muttered suddenly, as though speaking to himself.
> «у кого спросить» — interrogative + infinitive of deliberation: «У кого спросить» pairs the interrogative «кто» (here genitive «кого» after «у») with a bare infinitive to express deliberation: "whom is one to ask?" The infinitive-question, often with an implied dative subject, is the Russian way of voicing "what/whom should I…".
> Impersonal «нужно» + «бы» softening: «Нужно бы решить» is an impersonal necessity construction («нужно» + infinitive) softened by «бы» — "this really ought to be settled." Such subjectless «нужно/надо» + infinitive frames are everywhere in Russian; the «бы» adds a tentative, fretting tone.
> «бестолковщина» — muddle, senseless confusion: «Бестолковщина» is an expressive, faintly contemptuous noun (suffix «-щина», which lumps a phenomenon into a disparaging mass) from «бестолковый» ("muddle-headed, senseless"). It conveys Miusov's irritated sense of disorganized chaos: "this muddle, this senseless mess."
> Gerund «говоря» + reflexive «про себя»: «Говоря» is the imperfective gerund of «говорить» ("speaking"), under the hedge «как бы» ("as though"). «Про себя» ("to oneself") uses the reflexive pronoun «себя», which points back to the subject and has no nominative.

Вдруг подошел к ним один пожилой лысоватый господин в широком летнем пальто и с сладкими глазками.  
Suddenly an elderly, balding gentleman in a loose summer overcoat, with sugary little eyes, came up to them.
> Prefixed motion «подойти» + dative after «к»: «Подошёл» is the perfective of «подойти» ("to come up to, approach"), the prefix «под-» giving "up to." It governs «к» + dative «к ним» ("to them") — the standard frame for approaching a person.
> Suffix «-оват» (somewhat) and diminutive «глазки»: «Лысоватый» uses «-оват-», the suffix of mitigated degree ("somewhat balding, baldish"). «Глазками» is the diminutive of «глаза» ("little eyes"), and «сладкие» (sweet/sugary) makes them cloying — Dostoevsky's expressive morphology sketches Maximov as fawning before he speaks.

Приподняв шляпу, медово присюсюкивая, отрекомендовался он всем вообще тульским помещиком Максимовым.  
Lifting his hat and lisping sweetly, he introduced himself to all of them in general as Maximov, a landowner from Tula.
> Perfective gerund «приподняв» (having raised): «Приподняв» is the perfective past деепричастие of «приподнять» ("to raise a little") — a completed action just before the main verb: "having lifted his hat… he introduced himself." The chain of an opening gerund into the main clause is a hallmark of the literary narrative sentence.
> «присюсюкивая» — lisping/mincing sweetly: «Присюсюкивая» is the imperfective gerund of «присюсюкивать», an onomatopoeic, faintly mocking verb for a soft, lisping, mincing way of speaking; «медово» ("honeyedly") doubles down on the cloying manner. The word itself, full of hissing sibilants, performs the sound it names.
> Predicate instrumental after «отрекомендоваться»: After the reflexive «отрекомендоваться» ("to introduce oneself as"), the role assumed goes in the instrumental: «тульским помещиком Максимовым» — "as Maximov, a landowner from Tula." This is the instrumental of the predicate, framing an assumed identity, with all three words agreeing in the instrumental.

Он мигом вошел в заботу наших путников.  
He entered at once into our travelers' difficulty.
> «войти в заботу» — to enter into someone's concern: «Вошёл в заботу наших путников» is an idiomatic "entered into our travelers' difficulty/concern" — i.e. busied himself helpfully with their problem. «Путники» (wayfarers, travelers) is a slightly elevated, almost storybook word, gently coloring the narrator's amused tone.

— Старец Зосима живет в скиту, в скиту наглухо, шагов четыреста от монастыря, через лесок, через лесок…  
"The elder Zossima lives in the hermitage, shut away in the hermitage, some four hundred paces from the monastery, through the little wood, through the little wood…"
> Approximation by inversion: «шагов четыреста»: Noun-before-numeral «шагов четыреста» (rather than «четыреста шагов») again marks approximation — "some four hundred paces." «Шагов» is the genitive plural governed by the large numeral.
> Diminutive «лесок» (little wood): «Лесок» is the diminutive of «лес» ("a little wood, copse"), and Maximov's giddy repetition «через лесок, через лесок» catches his breathless, ingratiating manner. The diminutive makes the path sound small and homely.

— Это и я знаю-с, что через лесок, — ответил ему Федор Павлович, — да дорогу-то мы не совсем помним, давно не бывали.  
"That much I know myself, sir, that it's through the little wood," Fyodor Pavlovich answered him, "but we don't quite remember the way — it's been a long time since we were here."
> The deferential particle -с: The little «-с» tacked onto «знаю» ("I know, sir") is the slovoers, a clitic contracted from «сударь» ("sir"). Added to words it signals deference, politeness, or sometimes ironic obsequiousness. It has no English equivalent — we suggest it here with "sir"; in Dostoevsky it richly colors a speaker's social tone.
> The emphatic topic clitic «-то»: Hyphenated «-то» on «дорогу» is the topic-emphasis clitic, distinct from the indefinite «-то» of «кто-то»: it foregrounds "the way" as the known thing now in question — "but the way, that we don't quite remember." It is colloquial and very characteristic of Fyodor Pavlovich's chatty register.
> Iterative «бывать» in the imperfective: «Бывали» is the past of «бывать», the iterative/habitual counterpart of «быть» ("to be repeatedly, to frequent"). With «давно … не» it means "we haven't been (here) in a long time" — the imperfective fitting the open, repeated non-visiting.

— А вот в эти врата, и прямо леском… леском.  
"In through these gates here, and straight on through the little wood… the little wood.
> «врата» — the Church-Slavonic doublet of «ворота»: «Врата» is the elevated, Church-Slavonic non-pleophonic doublet of plain «ворота» ("gates"); compare «град/город», «глас/голос». Here, of a monastery's gates, the solemn form quietly sacralizes the threshold the visitors are crossing.
> Instrumental of route: «леском»: «Леском» (the diminutive «лесок» in the instrumental) expresses the path taken — the "instrumental of route": "go straight through/by the little wood." Russian uses a bare instrumental for the way one travels (cf. «идти лесом, полем»).

Пойдемте.  
Come along.
> First-person plural imperative «пойдёмте»: «Пойдёмте» is the hortative "let's go": the perfective future first-person plural «пойдём» plus the polite/plural «-те». Russian forms "let us…" either this way or with «давай(те)» + future/infinitive.

Не угодно ли… мне самому… я сам… Вот сюда, сюда…  
Would you allow me… myself… I myself… This way, this way…"
> Polite formula «не угодно ли» with «ли»: «Не угодно ли (вам)…» is a courtly, deferential offer — "would you be so good as to…, might it please you to…" — built on the impersonal «угодно» (pleasing) + the dative addressee + the interrogative particle «ли». Maximov's mincing politeness shows in this archaic-polite turn.
> The intensifier «сам» (myself): «Сам» is the intensifier "oneself, in person": «мне самому» is the dative ("to me myself") agreeing with the elided dative of the polite offer, and «я сам» the nominative ("I myself"). His broken, repeated «сам» conveys flustered eagerness to escort them personally.

Они вышли из врат и направились лесом.  
They went out through the gates and set off through the wood.
> Prefixed motion + genitive «из», then instrumental of route: «Вышли» (perfective «выйти», prefix «вы-» = out) governs «из» + genitive «из врат» ("out of the gates"). «Направились» is the reflexive perfective "set off," and «лесом» is again the bare instrumental of route — "through the wood."

Помещик Максимов, человек лет шестидесяти, не то что шел, а, лучше сказать, почти бежал сбоку, рассматривая их всех с судорожным, невозможным почти любопытством.  
The landowner Maximov, a man of about sixty, did not so much walk as — better put — almost run alongside, scrutinizing them all with a twitching, almost impossible curiosity.
> Correlative «не то что… а» (not so much… as): «Не то что шёл, а … почти бежал» is the correlative "not so much walked as almost ran," with the contrastive «а» pivoting between the rejected and the truer description. Both verbs are imperfective past, viewing the gait as an ongoing process.
> Imperfective gerund «рассматривая» (scrutinizing): «Рассматривая» is the present gerund of «рассматривать» ("to scrutinize, examine"), describing the manner accompanying his near-running and sharing its subject. «Их всех» is the accusative direct object ("them all").
> Approximate age in the genitive: «лет шестидесяти»: "A man of about sixty" is rendered with the noun-before-numeral approximation «лет шестидесяти», the whole phrase in the genitive describing «человек» (a man «of» some sixty years). «Лет» is the counting-genitive plural of «год».

В глазах его было что-то лупоглазое.  
There was something goggle-eyed in his eyes.
> Indefinite «что-то» + neuter adjective: «Что-то лупоглазое» is the specific-but-unidentified indefinite «что-то» ("something") with a neuter adjective agreeing with it — "something goggle-eyed." «Лупоглазый» (pop-eyed, bug-eyed) is an expressive colloquial compound from «лупить глаза» (to goggle).

— Видите ли, мы к этому старцу по своему делу, — заметил строго Миусов, — мы, так сказать, получили аудиенцию «у сего лица», а потому хоть и благодарны вам за дорогу, но вас уж не попросим входить вместе.  
"You see, we are going to this elder on business of our own," Miusov observed sternly, "we have, so to speak, been granted an audience 'with the said personage,' and so, although we are grateful to you for showing us the way, we will not ask you to go in with us."
> «видите ли» — "you see" with particle «ли»: «Видите ли» is a softening conversational opener ("you see, you understand"), built on the polite imperative/present «видите» plus the particle «ли». It frames Miusov's pointedly cool dismissal with surface courtesy.
> Concessive «хоть… но» (although… yet): «Хоть (и) благодарны вам… но вас уж не попросим» pairs concessive «хоть(и)» ("although") with adversative «но» ("yet"): a balanced although-but structure. «Благодарны» is a short predicate adjective; «попросим» the perfective future "we will (not) ask."

— Я был, был, я уже был… Un chevalier parfait! — и помещик пустил на воздух щелчок пальцем  
"I've been, I've been, I've already been… Un chevalier parfait!" — and the landowner snapped his fingers in the air
> Imperfective «быть» of bare experience: Maximov's stammering «был, был, я уже был» uses imperfective «быть» in the past for plain "I have been (there)," the imperfective stating the bare fact of an experience having occurred at least once — the natural aspect for "I've been."

— Кто это chevalier? — спросил Миусов.  
"Who is this chevalier?" Miusov asked.
> Interrogative «кто» + presentative «это»: «Кто это…?» ("who is this…?") combines the interrogative «кто» (which always takes masculine agreement and has no gender) with the invariable presentative «это» — the standard frame for "who/what is this?" Note the zero copula: no "is" is spoken.

— Старец, великолепный старец, старец.  
"The elder, the magnificent elder, the elder.
> «великолепный» — magnificent, splendid: «Великолепный» ("magnificent, splendid," literally "great-glorious") is gushing praise; Maximov's threefold repetition «старец… старец… старец» mimics his breathless, fawning enthusiasm. The word's grandeur sits oddly applied to an ascetic monk.

Честь и слава монастырю Зосима.  
The honor and glory of the monastery — Zossima.
> Dative of beneficiary: «монастырю»: «Честь и слава монастырю» — "honor and glory to the monastery" — uses the dative «монастырю» for the one to whom honor accrues, in a verbless exclamatory blessing. The construction is faintly liturgical, echoing church acclamations.

Это такой старец…  
Such an elder he is…"
> Exclamatory «такой» (such a…): «Такой» here is the exclamatory intensifier "such a (one), so very much a…", left trailing off — "such an elder he is…". It agrees like an adjective and leans on intonation to do the rest, a hallmark of excited spoken Russian.

Но беспорядочную речь его перебил догнавший путников монашек, в клобуке, невысокого росту, очень бледный и испитой.  
But his disjointed speech was cut short by a little monk who had caught up with the travelers — in a cowl, of no great height, very pale and gaunt.
> Past active participle «догнавший» before its noun: «Догнавший путников» is the perfective past active participle of «догнать» ("to catch up with"), with its own accusative object «путников», placed attributively before «монашек» — "a little monk who had caught up with the travelers." The participial phrase compresses a который-clause, typical literary economy.
> Diminutive «монашек»; the «клобук» (cowl): «Монашек» is the diminutive of «монах» ("a little monk"), faintly affectionate and stressing his smallness, reinforced by «невысокого росту, бледный и испитой." The «клобук» is the tall cylindrical Orthodox monastic head-covering with a veil — a precise marker of his order and rank.
> Genitive of description «невысокого росту»: «Невысокого росту» ("of no great height") is a genitive of description, with «росту» showing the old partitive/genitive «-у» ending of «рост» beside the modern «роста» — a slightly archaic flavor. The whole phrase characterizes the monk like an apposition.

Федор Павлович и Миусов остановились.  
Fyodor Pavlovich and Miusov stopped.
> Perfective change-of-state «остановиться»: «Остановились» is the perfective past of the reflexive «остановиться» ("to stop, come to a halt"), the «-ся» marking an intransitive change of state. The perfective records the single completed event of their halting.

Монах с чрезвычайно вежливым, почти поясным поклоном произнес:  
With an exceedingly polite, almost waist-deep bow, the monk pronounced:
> «произнести» — to utter, pronounce: «Произнёс» (perfective «произнести») is a more formal, weighted verb than plain «сказал» — "pronounced, uttered" — fitting the monk's ceremonious delivery of the abbot's invitation.

— Отец игумен, после посещения вашего в ските покорнейше просит вас всех, господа, у него откушать.  
"The Father Superior most humbly begs you all, gentlemen, after your visit to the hermitage, to dine with him.
> Superlative adverb «покорнейше» (most humbly): «Покорнейше» is the bookish superlative adverb in «-ейше» from «покорный» ("humble, submissive") — "most humbly begs." Such «-ейше» adverbs belong to elevated, ceremonious speech, exactly suiting a monastic invitation.
> «откушать» — to dine (deferential archaism): «Откушать» is a courteous, old-fashioned verb for "to eat, to dine" (the prefixed perfective of «кушать»), used in polite invitations — "to partake of a meal." It carries an obliging, ceremonious tone now archaic, perfectly in register for the monk's errand.

У него в час, не позже.  
At his place at one o'clock, no later.
> Time «в час» (accusative) + comparative «позже»: «В час» — "at one o'clock" — uses «в» + accusative for clock time. «Позже» is the predicative comparative of «поздно/поздний» ("later"); «не позже» means "no later." The comparative here is the invariable adverbial form.

И вас также, — обратился он к Максимову.  
And you also," he said, turning to Maximov.
> Reflexive «обратиться к» + dative: «Обратился» (perfective «обратиться», "to turn to, address") is a «-ся» verb governing «к» + dative — «к Максимову» ("turning to Maximov"). The same frame recurs at the chapter's close; it is the standard way Russian marks a shift of addressee in dialogue tags.

— Это я непременно исполню! — вскричал Федор Павлович, ужасно обрадовавшись приглашению, — непременно.  
"That I shall certainly do!" cried Fyodor Pavlovich, terribly delighted by the invitation, "certainly.
> Perfective future «исполню» fronting «это»: «Исполню» is the perfective simple future of «исполнить» ("I will carry out, do [it completely]") — the perfective present-form yielding completed future meaning. Fronting the object «это» gives the emphatic "That I shall certainly do!", placing the topic first and the new commitment last.
> Perfective gerund «обрадовавшись» + dative object: «Обрадовавшись» is the perfective past gerund of reflexive «обрадоваться» ("to be delighted, rejoice at"), describing Fyodor Pavlovich's state as he cries out. The verb governs the dative «приглашению» ("delighted at the invitation"). «Ужасно» ("terribly") is his characteristic hyperbole.

И знаете, мы все дали слово вести себя здесь порядочно… А вы, Петр Александрович, пожалуете?  
And you know, we have all given our word to behave ourselves properly here… And you, Pyotr Alexandrovich, will you come?"
> Idiom «дать слово» + reflexive «себя»: «Дали слово» ("gave (our) word, promised") is followed by the infinitive «вести себя» ("to behave, conduct oneself"), where «себя» is the reflexive object pronoun pointing back to the subject. The promise to behave "properly" is dramatic irony — the scene exists to be wrecked.
> Polite «пожаловать» as future, with «вы»: «Пожалуете?» is the perfective future of «пожаловать» used courteously — "will you (be so good as to) come?" — addressed with the polite «вы» (here in the full name+patronymic «Пётр Александрович»). The same elevated verb that opened the chapter ironically («не пожаловали») recurs, now sincerely polite.

— Да еще же бы нет?  
"Why ever should I not?
> A pile-up of particles: «да… же… бы»: Miusov's retort heaps up modal particles for an emphatic rhetorical "why ever should I not?": «да» (here an emphatic opener, not "yes"), «же» (insistent emphasis), and «бы» (the irrealis tinge). Such particle clusters are the very texture of Dostoevsky's spoken Russian, where attitude lives in tiny untranslatable words.

Да я зачем же сюда и приехал. как не видеть все их здешние обычаи.  
What did I come here for, after all, if not to see all their customs of the place.
> «зачем же… и» — rhetorical "what for, after all": «Зачем же … и приехал» is a rhetorical question — "what on earth did I even come here for?" — with «же» adding indignant emphasis and «и» ("even, at all") intensifying. «Приехал» is the perfective past of arrival. The question implies its own answer.
> «как не…» + infinitive = "how could I not…": «Как не видеть» is the rhetorical "how (could one) not see" — the infinitive with «как не» asserting the obvious purpose. «Все их здешние обычаи» is the accusative plural object ("all their local customs").

Я одним только затрудняюсь, именно тем, что я теперь с вами, Федор Павлович…  
There is only one thing I find awkward, namely that I am at present in your company, Fyodor Pavlovich…"
> Reflexive «затрудняться» + instrumental «одним»: «Затрудняюсь» (reflexive «-ся», "I am troubled/find difficult") governs the instrumental of the thing that troubles: «одним только» ("by one thing only"), picked up by «именно тем, что…» ("namely by the fact that…"). The instrumental of cause/respect is typical of this verb.
> Correlative «тем, что» introducing the cause: «Тем, что…» is the instrumental of the correlative «то» plus the conjunction «что», pointing forward to the trouble: "namely [by] the fact that I am at present in your company." Such «то, что» correlatives let Russian nominalize a whole clause and slot it into a case.

— Да, Дмитрия Федоровича еще не существует.  
"Yes — Dmitri Fyodorovich does not yet exist."
> Genitive of negated existence «Дмитрия Фёдоровича»: With negated «не существует» the logical subject goes obligatorily into the genitive: «Дмитрия Фёдоровича … не существует» — "Dmitri Fyodorovich does not (yet) exist." This is the genitive of negation governing an absent subject, here Fyodor Pavlovich's cruel joke that the late Dmitri might as well not be born.

— Да и отлично бы было, если б он манкировал, мне приятно, что ли, вся эта ваша мазня, да еще с вами на придачу?  
"And it would be just as well if he failed to turn up — do you suppose I find it pleasant, all this mess of yours, and you on top of it into the bargain?
> Conditional «бы… если б» (would be… if he failed to come): Both halves carry the irrealis particle: «отлично бы было» ("it would be excellent") and «если б он манкировал» ("if he failed to turn up"), with «если б» the clipped «если бы» and a past-form verb. This is the standard counterfactual conditional — past-tense verb plus «бы» in each clause.
> Gallicism «манкировать»; slangy «мазня»: «Манкировать» (from French manquer) is a gentry Gallicism for "to fail to appear, to neglect, to play truant" — fashionable borrowed slang. «Мазня» (literally "a daub, smear," from «мазать») is contemptuous for a messy botched affair: Miusov sneers at "all this mess of yours."
> The dubitative tag «что ли»: «Что ли» is a colloquial particle tag of doubt or rhetorical incredulity ("do you suppose…?, or what?"), built on the interrogative «что» + «ли». Here «мне приятно, что ли…?» throws scorn on the idea that he could be enjoying himself.

Так к обеду будем, поблагодарите отца игумена, — обратился он к монашку.  
So we'll come to dinner — thank the Father Superior," he said, turning to the little monk.
> Compound future «будем» (we will be there): «Будем» here is the conjugated future of «быть» standing alone ("we will be (there) for dinner"), the same form that builds the imperfective compound future. «К обеду» is «к» + dative for "by/for dinner."
> Polite imperative «поблагодарите» + animate accusative: «Поблагодарите» is the perfective imperative ("thank, give thanks to") with the polite/plural «-те». Its object «отца игумена» shows the animate accusative borrowing the genitive form («отца», not «отец») — how Russian keeps animate object distinct.

— Нет, уж я вас обязан руководить к самому старцу, — ответил монах.  
"No, it is my duty to conduct you to the elder himself," the monk replied.
> The particle «уж» and short predicate «обязан»: «Уж» here is an insistent, slightly resigned particle ('I really am bound to…'), softening the refusal. «Обязан» is a short-form adjective/participle used predicatively with an infinitive — 'am obliged to' — the bookish short form that can only stand as a predicate.
> «старец» — the elder: Not merely an 'old man' but a «старец», the spiritual elder of Orthodox monasticism — a monk of recognized holiness to whom others submit their souls in obedience. The whole scene turns on the gravity of being conducted to him.

— А я, коль так, к отцу игумену, я тем временем прямо к отцу игумену, — защебетал помещик Максимов.  
"And I, if that's how it is, will go to the Father Superior — in the meantime I'll go straight to the Father Superior," twittered the landowner Maximov.
> «коль» — archaic 'if': «Коль» (от «коли») is a folksy, archaic conditional conjunction equal to «если» ('if'). It marks Maximov's speech as a touch old-fashioned and provincial, fitting the fussy little landowner.
> «защебетал» — twittered: Literally 'began to twitter/chirp' (of birds), the prefix «за-» marking the onset of the action. Applied to a man it is vividly belittling — Maximov chatters like a small bird — and Dostoevsky chooses it to make the landowner faintly ridiculous.

— Отец игумен в настоящий час занят, но как вам будет угодно… — нерешительно произнес монах.  
"The Father Superior is occupied at the present hour, but as you please…" the monk pronounced irresolutely.
> «как вам будет угодно» — impersonal politeness: A frozen polite formula, 'as you please / as it will be agreeable to you.' It is a dative-experiencer construction: «вам» (to you) is dative, «угодно» an invariable predicate, with no nominative subject — the deferential idiom Russian builds impersonally.
> «нерешительно» — irresolutely: An adverb from «нерешительный» ('indecisive'), itself negation «не-» + «решительный» ('resolute'). The monk speaks haltingly, caught between the rule and the guests' will.

— Преназойливый старичишка, — заметил вслух Миусов, когда помещик Максимов побежал обратно к монастырю.  
"A most importunate little old man," Miusov remarked aloud, when the landowner Maximov had run back toward the monastery.
> «пре-» intensifier + the contemptuous «-ишк-»: Two expressive morphemes pile on at once. The prefix «пре-» intensifies («назойливый» importunate → 'most importunate'), while «старичишка» fits «старик» with the pejorative suffix «-ишк-», a contemptuous 'wretched little old man.' Miusov's disdain is built into the morphology.
> Perfective past «побежал» — a single completed dart: «Побежал» is perfective ('set off running, ran back'), the prefix «по-» marking the inception of a single, bounded action. Against the imperfective background it moves the narrative one step: Maximov scuttles off and the moment is over.

— На фон Зона похож, — проговорил вдруг Федор Павлович.  
"He looks like von Sohn," Fyodor Pavlovich said suddenly.
> Short adjective «похож» + «на» + accusative: 'Resembles' is built on the short predicative adjective «похож» ('similar'), which governs «на» + accusative («на фон Зона»). Fronting the phrase before «похож» throws the emphasis onto von Sohn — Russian's free word order signaling the new, comic point.

— Вы только это и знаете… С чего он похож на фон Зона?  
"That's all you ever know… How does he look like von Sohn?
> The «только… и» frame — 'that's all you…': The pairing «только… и» before the verb means 'that's the only thing you do' — here, dismissively, 'that's all you ever know.' «Это» is the fronted accusative object, and the construction concentrates scorn on the narrowness of Fyodor's repertoire.
> «с чего» — 'on what grounds / how come': «С чего» is «с» + genitive of «что» ('from what'), an idiomatic colloquial 'why / how come / on what basis?' It is sharper and more exasperated than a plain «почему», pressing Fyodor to justify the absurd comparison.

Вы сами-то видели фон Зона?  
Have you yourself even seen von Sohn?"
> Emphatic «сами» + topicalizing clitic «-то»: «Сами» ('yourself') intensifies the pronoun «вы», and the clitic «-то» pins it as the known topic — roughly 'you, for your part, have you actually seen…'. The «-то» here is the emphatic topic-marker, not the indefinite suffix on interrogatives.

— Его карточку видел.  
"I've seen his photograph.
> Dropped subject, fronted object: The pronoun «я» is dropped — the masculine past «видел» already shows it — and the object «его карточку» (accusative) is fronted as the answer's focus: 'his photo I've seen.' Compact, colloquial topic-comment ordering.
> «карточка» — a photograph: Diminutive of «карта», but in 19th-century usage «карточка» is the everyday word for a photographic portrait (the carte de visite). 'His photograph,' not 'his little card.'

Хоть не чертами лица, так чем-то неизъяснимым.  
If not in the features of the face, then in something inexpressible.
> Concessive «хоть… так» + instrumental of respect: «Хоть… так» sets up a concession: 'if not by X, then by Y.' Both «чертами» (features) and «чем-то» (something) stand in the instrumental, the case of the means or respect in which the resemblance holds — 'alike in something.'
> «неизъяснимый» — inexpressible: A bookish, elevated adjective: «не-» + «изъяснимый» (from «изъяснить», to explain/expound). 'Inexpressible, beyond explaining' — mock-solemn diction lending Fyodor's silly comparison a falsely lofty air.

Чистейший второй экземпляр фон Зона.  
A purest second copy of von Sohn.
> Superlative «-ейш-»: «чистейший»: «Чистейший» is the bookish synthetic superlative of «чистый» ('pure'), formed with «-ейш-»: 'purest, most absolute.' This suffixal superlative is more emphatic and literary than the periphrastic «самый чистый».
> «экземпляр» — specimen/copy: A loanword (Latin exemplar) meaning a 'copy' or 'specimen,' as of a book or biological type. Calling a person a «второй экземпляр» — a 'second copy' of von Sohn — is dehumanizing and comic, treating the man as a duplicate print.

Я это всегда по одной только физиономии узнаю.  
I always recognize the type from the face alone."
> «по» + dative of basis; imperfective habit: «По» governs the dative «физиономии» in the sense 'by, going by' — recognizing 'by the face alone.' The imperfective present «узнаю» states a habitual ability ('I always recognize'), reinforced by «всегда».
> «физиономия» — physiognomy/mug: A loanword for 'face,' but with the period flavor of physiognomy — the pseudo-science of reading character from facial features. Fyodor's boast that he 'recognizes the type from the face alone' parodies that fashionable notion.

— А пожалуй; вы в этом знаток.  
"Well, perhaps; you're a connoisseur in such matters.
> Concessive «а пожалуй»: «Пожалуй» is a particle of grudging assent ('perhaps, I dare say, very well'), and the leading «а» is the soft contrastive conjunction that shifts the topic — together a reluctant 'well, perhaps.' Miusov half-concedes the joke before turning to his warning.
> Zero copula in the present: 'You are a connoisseur in this' has no verb 'to be' — Russian drops the present copula, leaving subject «вы» and predicate noun «знаток» both in the nominative. The link is purely juxtaposition.

Только вот что, Федор Павлович, вы сами сейчас изволили упомянуть, что мы дали слово вести себя прилично, помните.  
Only here is the thing, Fyodor Pavlovich — you yourself just now were so good as to mention that we had given our word to behave decently, remember.
> «изволить» + infinitive — mock-deferential past: «Изволили» is the polite/archaic «изволить» ('to deign, be so good as to') plus the infinitive «упомянуть»; the plural «-и» is the formal 'you.' The phrasing is heavily ironic-courtly — Miusov needling Fyodor with exaggerated deference.
> Reflexive pronoun «себя» with «вести»: «Вести себя» — literally 'to lead oneself' — is the fixed idiom 'to behave.' «Себя» is the reflexive object pronoun (no nominative form), pointing back to the subject; here it underlies the 'word' they gave to conduct themselves decently.
> Perfective «дали слово» — a single pledge: «Дали» is perfective ('gave', completed), and «дать слово» is the set phrase 'to give one's word, to promise.' The completed aspect frames the promise as a fixed prior fact Miusov is now holding Fyodor to.

Говорю вам, удержитесь.  
I'm telling you, restrain yourself.
> Imperative of the reflexive «удержаться»: «Удержитесь» is the polite/plural imperative of the perfective reflexive «удержаться» ('to restrain oneself, hold back'). The «-сь» (post-vowel form of «-ся») turns the verb on its own subject, and the perfective demands a decisive, once-and-for-all restraint.

А начнете шута из себя строить, так я не намерен, чтобы меня с вами на одну доску здесь поставили… Видите, какой человек, — обратился он к монаху, — я вот с ним боюсь входить к порядочным людям.  
If you start playing the buffoon, then I have no intention of being put on the same footing with you here… You see what sort of man this is," he said, turning to the monk, "I'm actually afraid to go in among decent people with him."
> Perfective future as condition + idiom «строить из себя»: «Начнёте» is a perfective future (conjugated form, future meaning) used conditionally — 'if you (will) start.' «Строить из себя шута» is the idiom 'to play the fool of oneself,' with «из себя» literally 'out of oneself' (genitive of the reflexive «себя»).
> «чтобы» + past form for a willed/feared outcome: After «не намерен» ('I do not intend'), «чтобы» introduces the result clause with a past-form verb «поставили» — the irrealis pattern for a willed or refused outcome. The plural «поставили» is also impersonal ('that they put me…' = 'that I be put…').
> «поставить на одну доску» — to put on the same footing: Literally 'to set on one board/plank,' the idiom means to rank two people as equals — here, with distaste, to be lumped together with Fyodor. The image is of two things laid side by side on the same surface.
> «бояться» + infinitive; verb of motion «входить»: «Боюсь» is from the «-ся»-only verb «бояться» ('to fear'). «Входить» is the imperfective prefixed motion verb 'to enter, go in' (пара «входить/войти»), here a general 'I'm afraid to go in among decent people.'

На бледных, бескровных губах монашка показалась тонкая, молчальная улыбочка, не без хитрости в своем роде, но он ничего не ответил, и слишком ясно было, что промолчал из чувства собственного достоинства.  
On the little monk's pale, bloodless lips there appeared a faint, silent little smile, not without a cunning of its own, but he answered nothing, and it was all too plain that he had held his tongue out of a sense of his own dignity.
> Reflexive «показалась» + fronted locative: «Показалась» is the reflexive/middle 'appeared, showed itself' (the «-ся» making it intransitive). The sentence opens with the prepositional locative «на… губах», delaying the grammatical subject «улыбочка» to the end — the new image arriving last, as Russian word order likes.
> «улыбочка» and «монашка» — pointed diminutives: «Улыбочка» is a diminutive of «улыбка» ('smile') — a 'little smile,' faint and knowing — while «монашка» (gen. «монашка»/«монашек») softens «монах» to 'the little monk.' Both shrink their referents, lending the moment an intimate, slightly ironic close-up.
> «из» + genitive of cause; reflexive possessive «собственного»: «Из» + genitive «чувства» names the motive — 'out of a feeling of.' «Собственного достоинства» ('his own dignity') uses «собственный», a reinforcing 'own' akin to «свой», stressing that the dignity is the monk's own and self-possessed.

Миусов еще больше наморщился.  
Miusov frowned all the more.
> Comparative «больше» + perfective reflexive «наморщился»: «Больше» ('more') is the suppletive comparative of «много/большой», and «ещё больше» means 'all the more.' «Наморщился» is the perfective reflexive 'frowned, knit his brow,' the «-ся» turning the wrinkling on the subject's own face.

«О, черт их всех дери, веками лишь выработанная наружность, а в сущности шарлатанство и вздор!» — пронеслось у него в голове.  
"Oh, the devil take the whole lot of them — a mere outer manner worked up over centuries, and at bottom charlatanism and nonsense!" flashed through his head.
> Optative imperative «дери» — 'the devil take them': A curse in the form of a wish: «дери» is the imperative of «драть» ('to tear/flay'), with «чёрт» as notional subject — 'may the devil flay them all.' «Их всех» is the animate accusative object. The imperative used as an exclamatory optative is a feature of vehement speech.
> Past passive participle «выработанная»: «Выработанная» is a past passive participle (perfective «выработать», 'to work out') agreeing with «наружность» — 'an outward manner worked up.' The instrumental «веками» ('over centuries') gives the means/time; «лишь» ('merely') deflates it to a mere veneer.
> Reflexive «пронеслось» — flashed through his head: «Пронеслось» is the perfective reflexive 'rushed/flashed past' (neuter, agreeing with the quoted thought). The idiom «у него в голове» ('in his head') frames the interior thought — Russian reports inner speech with this 'flashed through the mind' formula.

— Вот и скит, дошли! — крикнул Федор Павлович, — ограда и врата запертые.  
"Here's the hermitage, we've arrived!" cried Fyodor Pavlovich, "the wall and gates shut."
> Prefixed motion verb «дойти» — 'arrived (on foot)': «Дошли» is the perfective past of «дойти» ('to reach, get to on foot'), prefix «до-» marking arrival at the goal. It belongs to the prefixed-motion system, where «до-» specifically means reaching a destination — 'we've made it here.'
> Past passive participle «запертые» + archaic «врата»: «Запертые» is a past passive participle ('locked, shut') in attributive long form. «Врата» is the Church-Slavonic/elevated word for 'gates' (vs. everyday «ворота»), fitting the sacred threshold of the hermitage.

И он пустился класть большие кресты пред святыми, написанными над вратами и сбоку врат.  
And he set about making large signs of the cross before the saints painted above the gates and on either side of them.
> «пуститься» + infinitive — 'set about, fell to': «Пустился» (perfective reflexive of «пуститься») + the imperfective infinitive «класть» means 'set about / launched into' an activity — here, energetically crossing himself. The construction marks the impulsive start of an ongoing action.
> Archaic «пред» + past passive participle «написанными»: «Пред» is the bookish/archaic form of «перед» ('before'), governing the instrumental «святыми». «Написанными» is a past passive participle ('painted/depicted') agreeing in instrumental — 'before the saints painted above the gates.'

— В чужой монастырь со своим уставом не ходят, — заметил он.  
"One does not go into another's monastery with one's own rule," he remarked.
> Impersonal generic «не ходят» + «свой»: The 3rd-plural «ходят» with no subject is the generic impersonal 'one does not go' — Russian's way of stating a rule about people-in-general. «Со своим уставом» uses the reflexive possessive «свой» ('one's own'), pointing to whoever the implied subject is.

— Всех здесь в скиту двадцать пять святых спасаются, друг на друга смотрят и капусту едят.  
"Twenty-five saints are saving their souls here in the hermitage — they look at one another and eat cabbage.
> Genitive plural after a numeral; reflexive «спасаются»: After «двадцать пять» the counted noun takes the genitive plural «святых» (compound numbers ending in 5+ govern the genitive plural). «Спасаются» is the reflexive imperfective 'are saving themselves / their souls,' the religious sense of «спасаться».

И ни одной-то женщины в эти врата не войдет, вот что особенно замечательно.  
And not a single woman will pass through these gates — that's what is especially remarkable.
> Genitive of negation + «ни… не» concord: Under the negation «не войдёт», the absent subject goes genitive: «ни одной женщины» ('not a single woman'). «Ни» intensifies and obligatorily co-occurs with «не» — Russian negative concord. The clitic «-то» on «одной» adds insistent emphasis.
> Perfective future «войдёт» — gnomic 'will (ever) pass': «Войдёт» is the perfective future of the motion verb «войти» ('to enter'), here used in a near-timeless, rule-stating sense: not a single woman will ever pass through. The perfective future readily expresses such generalized impossibility.

И это ведь действительно так.  
And this really is so.
> The appeal-particle «ведь»: «Ведь» appeals to shared knowledge — 'this really is so, after all / you know.' Untranslatable with a single English word, it nudges the listener to grant a point already known; here Fyodor half-seriously concedes the truth of the rule.

Только как же я слышал, что старец дам принимает? — обратился он вдруг к монашку.  
Only how is it I heard that the elder receives ladies?" he said, suddenly turning to the little monk.
> Emphatic «же»; «что»-clause; animate accusative «дам»: «Же» after «как» adds insistent surprise — 'how is it, then, that I heard…'. «Что» opens the reported-fact clause, in which «дам» is the animate accusative plural object of «принимает» ('receives ladies') — animates take genitive-shaped accusatives.
> «обратиться» + «к» + dative: «Обратился к» ('turned to / addressed') governs «к» + dative «монашку» (the diminutive 'little monk'). The directional preposition «к» always takes the dative — the person turned toward.

— Из простонародья женский пол и теперь тут, вон там, лежат у галерейки, ждут.  
"The womenfolk of the common people are here even now — over there, look, lying by the little gallery, waiting.
> «простонародье» and «женский пол»: «Простонародье» is the 'common people, the lower folk' (просто- 'plain' + народ 'people'), with a faintly condescending official ring. «Женский пол» literally 'the female sex,' here a slightly coarse collective for 'womenfolk.' The monk is classing the peasant women by station.
> «галерейка» — diminutive of gallery: A double diminutive: «галерея» → «галерейка», a 'little gallery' (covered porch/walkway). The cozy diminutive suits the humble peasant women lying and waiting beside it. «У» + genitive marks the location 'by, beside.'

А для высших дамских лиц пристроены здесь же на галерее, но вне ограды, две комнатки, вот эти самые окна, и старец выходит к ним внутренним ходом, когда здоров, то есть все же за ограду.  
But for ladies of higher rank, two little rooms have been built right here on the gallery, though outside the wall — those very windows there — and the elder comes out to them by an inner passage when he is well; that is, still beyond the wall.
> Short passive participle «пристроены» — a stated result: «Пристроены» is the short-form past passive participle of «пристроить» ('to build on, annex'), agreeing with «две комнатки» — 'two little rooms have been built on.' The short passive states a completed result, the standard Russian way of saying something 'has been built.'
> Instrumental of route «внутренним ходом»: «Внутренним ходом» ('by an inner passage') is the instrumental of means/route — the way by which the elder comes out. «Выходит к ним» pairs the prefixed motion verb «выходить» with «к» + dative ('comes out to them').

Вот и теперь одна барыня, помещица харьковская, госпожа Хохлакова, дожидается со своею расслабленною дочерью.  
Just now, too, one lady is waiting, a landowner from Kharkov, Madame Khokhlakova, with her crippled daughter.
> «барыня» and «помещица»: «Барыня» is the courtesy title for a lady of the gentry/mistress of an estate; «помещица» is the feminine of «помещик», a landowner. 'A landowner from Kharkov' places Madame Khokhlakova socially — a provincial gentry lady. «Харьковская» (feminine adjective) marks her by the city of Kharkov.
> Archaic instrumental endings «-ою/-ою»: «Со своею расслабленною дочерью» shows the older literary instrumental feminine «-ою» (modern «-ой») on «своею» and «расслабленною». These fuller endings are a 19th-century bookish flavor. «Расслабленная» is a past passive participle, 'enfeebled/paralyzed' — the crippled daughter.

Вероятно, обещал к ним выйти, хотя в последние времена столь расслабел, что и к народу едва появляется.  
Most likely he has promised to come out to them, although of late he has grown so feeble that he scarcely appears even to the common people."
> Bookish «столь… что» result clause: «Столь» is the elevated equivalent of «так/настолько» ('so'), setting up a «что» result clause: 'so feeble that…'. «Расслабел» is perfective ('grew feeble'); «появляется» imperfective present ('scarcely appears'), describing his present habitual state.
> «в последние времена» — of late: Idiomatic 'lately, of late, in recent times.' Note the plural «времена» (irregular plural of «время»), distinct from the singular «время» ('time'). The phrase carries a faint solemn ring, almost 'in these latter days.'

— Значит, всё же лазеечка к барыням-то из скита проведена.  
"So a little loophole to the ladies has been driven out of the hermitage after all.
> Short passive «проведена» + emphatic «-то»: «Проведена» is a short-form past passive participle ('has been driven/laid through'), feminine to agree with «лазеечка». The clitic «-то» on «барыням» topicalizes them sarcastically — 'a little loophole to the ladies, of all things.'
> «лазеечка» — a little loophole: Diminutive of «лазейка» (from «лазить», to crawl/clamber): a 'bolt-hole, loophole, way to sneak through.' The diminutive sharpens Fyodor's insinuation that the monks have quietly contrived a back door for the ladies despite the rule.

Не подумайте, отец святой, что я что-нибудь, я только так.  
Don't think anything of it, holy father — I mean nothing by it, I'm just talking.
> Negative imperative + indefinite «что-нибудь»: «Не подумайте» is the polite negative imperative ('don't think'). «Что-нибудь» is the non-specific indefinite ('anything at all'), built with «-нибудь»; Fyodor trails off — 'that I mean anything' — leaving the insinuation unfinished.
> «я только так» — 'I'm just talking': «Так» here is the dismissive colloquial 'just so, for no reason, idly.' «Я только так» = 'I'm just saying / I mean nothing by it' — the mock-innocent backpedal after a barbed remark.

Знаете, на Афоне, это вы слышали ль, не только посещения женщин не полагается, но и совсем не полагается женщин и никаких даже существ женского рода, курочек, индюшечек, телушечек…  
You know, on Athos — you've heard this, have you? — not only are women's visits forbidden, but no women are allowed at all, nor any creatures of the female sex whatever: no little hens, no little turkey-hens, no little heifers…"
> The interrogative particle «ль» (=«ли»): «Ль» is the reduced enclitic «ли», forming a yes/no question after the focused word «слышали» — 'have you heard this?' The shortened «ль» is a colloquial/metrical variant, woven into Fyodor's rambling speech.
> Impersonal «не полагается» — 'is not permitted': «Полагается» is the impersonal reflexive 'is proper / is allowed,' negated to 'is not permitted.' There is no nominative subject — what is forbidden («посещения», «существ») hangs off the impersonal verb, in the genitive of negation for the absent things.
> Strings of comic diminutives: «Курочек» (little hens), «индюшечек» (little turkey-hens), «телушечек» (little heifers) — diminutives of «курица», «индюшка», «тёлка», all in the genitive plural after the negation. The cozy '-ечк-' suffixes make the absurd list of banned female animals sound absurdly tender, heightening Fyodor's ridicule.

— Федор Павлович, я ворочусь и вас брошу здесь одного, и вас без меня отсюда выведут за руки, это я вам предрекаю.  
"Fyodor Pavlovich, I shall turn back and leave you here alone, and without me you'll be led out of here by the arms — that I prophesy to you."
> Perfective futures «ворочусь… брошу»: «Ворочусь» (reflexive, 'I'll turn back') and «брошу» ('I'll abandon') are both perfective futures — conjugated perfective verbs with future meaning — naming two decisive completed acts. «Ворочусь» is a colloquial variant of «возвращусь».
> Impersonal 3rd-plural «выведут» + «за» + accusative: «Выведут» is a subjectless 3rd-person-plural ('they'll lead you out' = 'you'll be led out') — Russian's common agentless impersonal. «За руки» ('by the arms') uses «за» + accusative in its 'grasping by' sense.
> «предрекать» — to prophesy: A solemn, bookish verb 'to foretell, prophesy' (пред- 'fore-' + рекать, an archaic root for 'speak,' cf. Church-Slavonic «рече»). Miusov's mock-grand 'that I prophesy to you' borrows the elevated register to threaten Fyodor with eviction.

— А чем я вам мешаю, Петр Александрович.  
"And how am I troubling you, Pyotr Alexandrovich.
> «мешать» + dative; instrumental «чем»: «Мешать» ('to hinder, get in the way of') governs the dative — «вам» ('to you'). «Чем» is the instrumental of «что» ('by what / how') — 'how am I troubling you?' The dative object is the person inconvenienced.

Посмотрите-ка, — вскричал он вдруг, шагнув за ограду скита, — посмотрите, в какой они долине роз проживают!  
Just look," he cried suddenly, stepping inside the hermitage wall, "look what a vale of roses they live in!"
> Imperative softened by «-ка»: «Посмотрите» is the polite/plural imperative ('look'), and the clitic «-ка» softens and familiarizes it — 'go on, have a look.' «-ка» lends a coaxing, casual tone to commands and is a staple of lively spoken Russian.
> Perfective gerund «шагнув»: «Шагнув» is a perfective past gerund («деепричастие») from «шагнуть» ('to take a step'): 'having stepped, on stepping inside the wall.' It names a prior action sharing the main subject (he stepped, then cried out) — a hallmark of literary narration.
> Exclamatory «какой» + genitive «роз»: «В какой… долине» is the exclamatory 'what a vale!', «какой» agreeing with «долине» in prepositional case (after «в»). «Роз» is the genitive plural of «роза» ('of roses'), the zero-ending genitive plural typical of «-а» nouns.

Действительно, хоть роз теперь и не было, но было множество редких и прекрасных осенних цветов везде, где только можно было их насадить.  
Indeed, though there were no roses now, there was a multitude of rare and beautiful autumn flowers everywhere it had been possible to plant them.
> Concessive «хоть… и» + genitive of negation: «Хоть… и» ('though, even though') concedes a point. With «не было» the absent subject «роз» stands in the genitive — the genitive of negation in a negated existential ('there were no roses'). «Было» is fixed neuter singular in such negatives.
> Impersonal «можно было» + infinitive: «Можно было… насадить» is an impersonal possibility construction ('it was possible to plant'), with no nominative subject and a perfective infinitive. «Их» (accusative, 'them') is the object of the infinitive — wherever it was possible to plant them.

Лелеяла их, видимо, опытная рука.  
An experienced hand had evidently tended them.
> Verb-first order; fronted object «их»: The sentence opens with the imperfective verb «лелеяла» ('tended, cherished') and the object «их», holding back the subject «опытная рука» ('an experienced hand') to the very end — the new, telling detail in final, emphatic position. Free word order at work.
> «лелеять» — to cherish, tend lovingly: A tender, slightly poetic verb 'to cherish, nurse, fondle' — more than mere 'tend.' Of the flowers it implies loving, attentive care; the 'experienced hand' did not just maintain them but doted on them.

Цветники устроены были в оградах церквей и между могил.  
Flower beds had been laid out within the church enclosures and between the graves.
> Short passive «устроены» with split «были»: «Устроены были» is a short-form past passive participle ('had been laid out') plus the past of «быть». The inverted order «устроены были» (participle before auxiliary) is a literary rhythm; the construction states a completed result for «цветники» ('flower beds').

Домик, в котором находилась келья старца, деревянный, одноэтажный, с галереей пред входом, был тоже обсажен цветами.  
The little house in which the elder's cell was located — wooden, one-storied, with a gallery before the entrance — was likewise surrounded with flowers.
> Relative «в котором» — case from its own clause: «Который» agrees with its antecedent «домик» in gender/number but takes the case its own clause demands: «в котором» (prepositional, after «в») = 'in which.' «Находилась» is the reflexive 'was located/situated.'
> Short passive «обсажен» + instrumental of means: «Обсажен» is the short-form past passive participle of «обсадить» ('to plant around'), with «был» — 'was planted around / surrounded.' «Цветами» is the instrumental ('with flowers'), the means by which the house was surrounded.

— А было ль это при предыдущем старце, Варсонофии?  
"And was it like this under the previous elder, Varsonofy?
> Past «было» + «ль»; «при» + prepositional: «Было ль» again uses the question-particle «ль» (=«ли»). «При предыдущем старце» means 'in the time of / under the previous elder,' with «при» governing the prepositional case in its temporal 'during the reign/time of' sense.

Тот изящности-то, говорят, не любил, вскакивал и бил палкой даже дамский пол, — заметил Федор Павлович, подымаясь на крылечко.  
That one, they say, had no love of elegance — he'd leap up and beat even the female sex with his stick," remarked Fyodor Pavlovich, mounting the little porch.
> Genitive of negation «изящности» + topic «-то»: Under negation «не любил», the object «изящность» ('elegance') shifts to genitive «изящности» — the genitive of negation, frequent with abstract objects. The clitic «-то» topicalizes it: 'elegance, that he didn't care for.'
> Imperfective past «вскакивал… бил» — habit: Both verbs are imperfective past, here iterative-habitual: 'he would leap up and beat.' «Палкой» ('with a stick') is the instrumental of the means. The imperfective paints a repeated, characteristic behavior rather than one event.
> Imperfective gerund «подымаясь»: «Подымаясь» is an imperfective present gerund («деепричастие») from «подыматься» (colloquial for «подниматься», 'to climb up'), 'while mounting.' It marks an action simultaneous with the main verb — Fyodor remarks this as he climbs the little porch.

— Старец Варсонофий действительно казался иногда как бы юродивым, но много рассказывают и глупостей.  
"The elder Varsonofy did indeed sometimes seem to be a sort of holy fool, but a great deal of nonsense is told of him too.
> Instrumental predicate after «казаться»; hedge «как бы»: «Казаться» ('to seem') takes its predicate in the instrumental — «юродивым» ('a holy fool'). «Как бы» ('as it were, a sort of') hedges the claim. The instrumental frames the seeming-role as something assumed, not fixed identity.
> Impersonal «рассказывают» + partitive genitive «глупостей»: «Рассказывают» is subjectless 3rd-plural ('they tell' = 'is told'). «Много глупостей» uses the genitive plural «глупостей» after the quantifier «много» ('a lot of nonsense') — the partitive genitive that quantity words demand.
> yurodivy (holy fool): A «юродивый» is a "holy fool" or "fool for Christ": someone whose strange, even outrageous behavior is taken as a sign of hidden sanctity. We render it here as "holy fool," but the word carries a whole Russian religious type. It explains why Varsonofy's odd antics were tolerated rather than condemned.

Палкой же никогда и никого не бивал, — ответил монашек.  
As for beating anyone with a stick, that he never did," the little monk answered.
> Negative concord + emphatic «же»; iterative «бивал»: Triple negation in one meaning: «никогда» (never) + «никого» (no one, animate genitive/accusative) + «не бивал» — Russian negative concord. «Же» insists ('as for the stick…'). «Бивал» is an iterative/frequentative past of «бить» — 'never used to beat anyone.'

— Теперь, господа, минутку повремените, я о вас повещу.  
"Now, gentlemen, wait a moment — I'll announce you."
> Imperative «повремените» + perfective future «повещу»: «Повремените» is the polite imperative of perfective «повременить» ('to wait a bit'), the prefix «по-» giving a brief, bounded 'wait a moment.' «Повещу» is the perfective future of «повестить» (archaic 'to announce, give notice') — 'I'll announce you.'
> «минутку» — just a minute: Accusative diminutive of «минута», idiomatic for 'just a moment, a little minute.' The diminutive softens the request to wait — polite and warm, as the monk ushers the guests.

— Федор Павлович, в последний раз условие, слышите.  
"Fyodor Pavlovich, for the last time, the agreement — do you hear.
> Verbless command + imperative «слышите»: A clipped, verbless reminder — «в последний раз условие» ('for the last time, the agreement') — its urgency carried by intonation alone. «Слышите» ('do you hear') is the polite imperative used as an insistent tag, pressing the warning home.

Ведите себя хорошо, не то я вам отплачу, — успел еще раз пробормотать Миусов.  
Behave yourself well, or I'll pay you back," Miusov managed to mutter once more.
> Imperative + threat «не то» + perfective future: «Ведите себя» is the imperative of the reflexive idiom 'behave.' «Не то» ('or else') introduces the threat, with the perfective future «отплачу» ('I'll pay you back') — a single completed retaliation. «Вам» is the dative of the person paid back.
> «успеть» + infinitive — 'managed to': «Успел» (perfective 'managed, had time to') + infinitive «пробормотать» ('to mutter out') means 'managed to mutter once more.' The prefix «про-» on «бормотать» gives a brief, complete bout of muttering before the moment passes.

— Совсем неизвестно, с чего вы в таком великом волнении, — насмешливо заметил Федор Павлович, — али грешков боитесь?  
"I can't at all make out why you're in such great agitation," Fyodor Pavlovich remarked mockingly, "or is it your little sins you're afraid of?
> Verbless 'be in a state' + «с чего»: No copula: «вы в таком великом волнении» = 'you are in such great agitation,' a present-tense zero-copula 'be in (a state)' with «в» + prepositional. «С чего» ('on what grounds, how come') again presses for a reason.
> Folksy «али»; «бояться» + genitive object: «Али» is a colloquial/archaic 'or' (= «или»), giving a homespun mocking tone. «Бояться» governs the genitive of its object, here «грешков» — and «грешков» is itself a diminutive ('little sins') of «грех» in the genitive plural.
> «грешки» — little sins: Diminutive plural of «грех» ('sin'): «грешки» are petty, almost endearing 'little sins, peccadilloes.' The diminutive trivializes them mockingly — Fyodor teases that Miusov is fretting over mere trifling sins.

Ведь он, говорят, по глазам узнает, кто с чем приходит.  
For they say he reads from your eyes what you've come with.
> «ведь» + parenthetical «говорят» + «по» + dative: «Ведь» appeals to common report ('after all, you know'), and «говорят» ('they say') is an inserted impersonal hearsay. «По глазам» ('by the eyes,' dative after «по») gives the means of his discernment — he reads people by their eyes.
> Embedded question «кто с чем»: An indirect question: «кто с чем приходит» — 'who comes with what,' i.e. with what intent in his soul. «Кто» (nominative) and «с чем» («с» + instrumental of «что») pair two interrogatives; «приходит» is the imperfective motion verb 'comes.'

Да и как высоко цените вы их мнение, вы, такой парижанин и передовой господин, удивили вы меня даже, вот что!  
And how highly you value their opinion — you, such a Parisian and progressive gentleman — you've actually surprised me, that's what!"
> Exclamatory «как высоко» + fronted adverb: «Как высоко» ('how highly') opens an exclamation, the adverb fronted for rhetorical weight; «цените» is the imperfective present 'you value.' «Их мнение» is the accusative object ('their opinion'). The inversion «цените вы» lends a mock-astonished tone.

Но Миусов не успел ответить на этот сарказм, их попросили войти.  
But Miusov had no time to reply to this sarcasm; they were asked to come in.
> «не успеть» + infinitive — 'had no time to': «Не успел ответить» — 'did not manage / had no time to reply.' The perfective «успеть» measures whether an action could be completed in time; negated, it means the chance slipped away before he could answer.
> Impersonal «попросили» + animate accusative «их»: Subjectless 3rd-plural «попросили» ('they asked' = 'they were asked'), a standard agentless impersonal. «Их» is the animate accusative ('them'), and «войти» the perfective motion infinitive 'to come in.'

Вошел он несколько раздраженный…  
He went in somewhat irritated…
> Verb-first order + short passive participle as predicate: The perfective «вошёл» ('went in') stands first, with the subject «он» after it for narrative momentum. «Раздражённый» is a past passive participle used adjectivally as a secondary predicate — 'he went in, somewhat irritated' (a state accompanying the action).

«Ну, теперь заране себя знаю, раздражен, заспорю начну горячиться — и себя и идею унижу», — мелькнуло у него в голове.  
"Well, now I know about myself beforehand: I'm irritated, I'll start arguing, I'll get heated — and I'll demean both myself and my ideas," flashed through his head.
> Reflexive «себя» + short adjective «раздражён»: «Себя знаю» — 'I know myself,' with the reflexive object pronoun «себя» pointing back to the subject. «Раздражён» is a short-form adjective/participle as predicate ('[I am] irritated'), the bookish short form stating a present state. «Заране» is an archaic/colloquial 'beforehand' (= «заранее»).
> Perfective futures of self-prediction: «Заспорю» ('I'll start arguing,' inceptive «за-») and «унижу» ('I'll demean') are perfective futures foretelling completed acts; «начну горячиться» pairs perfective «начну» with the imperfective infinitive «горячиться» ('to get heated') — the onset of an ongoing process. Miusov narrates his own coming loss of composure.
> Animate vs inanimate accusative objects: Two accusative objects of «унижу»: «себя» (the reflexive, animate-patterned) and «идею» ('the idea,' inanimate, accusative = «идею»). Russian aligns animate accusatives with the genitive but keeps inanimate accusatives like the nominative — both objects here of 'I'll demean.'
---

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.