# The Brothers Karamazov, In the Servants' Quarters

Братья Карамазовы · Fyodor Dostoevsky · Book III — The Sensualists

Source: https://1732studios.com/books/karamazov/b3-c1. Data: https://1732studios.com/books/karamazov/b3-c1.json.


Дом Федора Павловича Карамазова стоял далеко не в самом центре города, но и не совсем на окраине.  
The house of Fyodor Pavlovich Karamazov stood far from the very center of town, yet not quite at its outskirts either.
> A chain of genitives: «Дом Фёдора Павловича Карамазова» strings name, patronymic, and surname all in the genitive of possession — "the house of Fyodor Pavlovich Karamazov." The genitive endings («-а», «-а») show the whole triad belongs to one owner.
> Name + patronymic, the respectful form: «Фёдор Павлович» is first name plus patronymic — the neutral, respectful way to name an adult. «Павлович» (-ович) marks him as the son of a Pavel; throughout the novel Dostoevsky's choice between full name, name-and-patronymic, and bare diminutive is itself characterization.
> Emphatic «далеко не»: «Далеко не» («far from») is a fixed emphatic negation: not merely "not in the center" but "by no means in the center." Paired with «но и не совсем на окраине» it brackets the house between two negated extremes.

Был он довольно ветх, но наружность имел приятную: одноэтажный, с мезонином, окрашенный серенькою краской и с красною железною крышкой.  
It was rather decrepit, but its appearance was a pleasant one: a single story, with an attic loft, painted a greyish color and roofed in red iron.
> Short adjective «ветх» as predicate: «Ветх» is the bookish short form of «ветхий» (decrepit, ancient), used predicatively after «был». Short adjectives state a temporary or absolute condition and lend the 19th-century narration its elevated ring; note too the inversion «был он» (verb before subject) for narrative weight.
> Object split by inversion: The neutral order would be «имел приятную наружность»; Dostoevsky frames it «наружность имел приятную», fronting the topic («наружность») and trailing the new, weighted word («приятную») to the end. Cases keep it unambiguous, so position serves emphasis, not grammar.
> «Мезонин» — the half-storey loft: A «мезонин» is a small attic room or half-storey rising over the center of a one-storey house, a hallmark of modest Russian provincial architecture (and the title of Chekhov's «Дом с мезонином»). We render it "attic loft."
> Diminutive «серенький» + old instrumental «-ою»: «Серенькою краской» is instrumental of means — painted "with greyish paint." The suffix «-еньк-» softens «серый» to a homely "greyish," and «-ою» is the bookish 19th-century variant of the feminine instrumental ending «-ой».

Впрочем, мог еще простоять очень долго, был поместителен и уютен.  
Even so, it might still stand for a very long while; it was roomy and snug.
> Perfective infinitive «простоять»: «Простоять» is the perfective "to stand (for a stretch and then no longer)" — the prefix «про-» bounds the standing as a whole span of time. Under «мог» it reads as potential: the house "could yet stand for a very long while." The subject «он» (the house) is dropped, carried over from the previous sentence.
> Paired short adjectives: «Поместителен» (roomy, capacious) and «уютен» (snug) are both short forms, again predicating a settled quality of the house. The clustering of short adjectives is a stylistic marker of careful literary description.

Много было в нем разных чуланчиков, разных пряток и неожиданных лесенок.  
There were many odd little closets in it, all sorts of nooks and hiding places, and unexpected little staircases.
> «Много» + genitive plural: Quantity words like «много» govern the genitive plural, so «чуланчиков», «пряток», «лесенок» all stand in the genitive: "many of...". The sentence opens with «много», foregrounding the abundance before naming what there is much of.
> A cluster of diminutives: «Чуланчик» (little closet, from «чулан»), «прятки» (hiding places), and «лесенка» (little staircase, from «лестница») are all diminutives that make the rambling house feel intimate and slightly mysterious. The piling-up of «-чик/-к-» forms is a deliberate cozy texture.

Водились в нем крысы, но Федор Павлович на них не вполне сердился: «Всё же не так скучно по вечерам, когда остаешься один».  
Rats lived in it, but Fyodor Pavlovich was not altogether cross with them: "At least it isn't so dreary in the evenings, when you're left alone."
> Reflexive «водиться» — to be found: «Водились» (from «водиться», -ся) here means "there used to be / were to be found," said of creatures inhabiting a place. The imperfective past gives a standing, habitual fact, and the inversion «водились... крысы» (verb first) introduces the rats as new information.
> Reflexive «сердиться» + «на» for the object of anger: «Сердиться на кого-то» (to be angry at someone) is a -ся verb taking «на» + accusative for its target, here «на них» (at them). «Не вполне» ("not altogether") softly qualifies the negation.
> Generalizing 2nd-person «остаёшься»: «Остаёшься» is 2nd-person singular present of «оставаться» (-ся), but here it is the impersonal, generalizing "you" — "when one is left alone" — a colloquial touch in Fyodor Pavlovich's quoted speech rather than address to a specific person.

А он действительно имел обыкновение отпускать слуг на ночь во флигель и в доме сам запирался один на всю ночь.  
And in fact he did have the habit of sending the servants off to the lodge for the night and locking himself up alone in the house for the whole night through.
> «Иметь обыкновение» + imperfective infinitive: «Имел обыкновение отпускать» ("had the habit of sending off") pairs the set phrase «иметь обыкновение» with an imperfective infinitive, «отпускать» — imperfective because the action is repeated, customary, not a single event.
> Reflexive «запираться» — to lock oneself in: «Запирался» (from «запираться», -ся) is the middle/reflexive "to lock oneself in." Reinforced by «сам» (himself) and «один» (alone), it stresses Fyodor Pavlovich's deliberate nightly self-enclosure — a detail loaded with foreboding in this novel.
> «Флигель» — the outbuilding lodge: A «флигель» (from German Flügel, "wing") is a separate small building in the courtyard of an estate, used for servants, a kitchen, or guests. Here it is the «людской флигель», the servants' lodge — central to the geography of the murder to come.

Флигель этот стоял на дворе, был обширен и прочен; в нем же определил Федор Павлович быть и кухне, хотя кухня была и в доме: не любил он кухонного запаха, и кушанье приносили через двор зимой и летом.  
This lodge stood in the yard, spacious and solid; in it Fyodor Pavlovich had also decreed the kitchen should be, although there was a kitchen in the house too: he did not care for the smell of cooking, and the food was carried across the yard winter and summer alike.
> Short adjectives again: «Обширен» (spacious) and «прочен» (solid, sturdy) are short forms predicating the lodge's qualities — the same crisp, bookish device used to describe the house above.
> Dative «кухне» + particle «же»: An archaic construction: «определил... быть кухне» means "decreed that the kitchen should be" there, with «кухне» in the dative as the subject of «быть» (a 19th-century bookish pattern). The particle «же» here links emphatically back to the lodge — "in that very lodge."
> Genitive of negation: «запаха»: «Не любил... запаха» puts the object «запах» (smell) into the genitive under negation — a regular shift for negated, non-specific objects, especially with «не любить». Garnett-era word order «не любил он» fronts the verb for narrative rhythm.

Вообще дом был построен на большую семью: и господ, и слуг можно было бы поместить впятеро больше.  
On the whole the house had been built for a large family: it could have housed five times as many masters and servants both.
> Conditional «бы» + impersonal «можно»: «Можно было бы поместить» is an impersonal potential-conditional: «можно» ("it is possible") plus past «было» plus the irrealis particle «бы» — "one could have housed." There is no nominative subject; the construction is subjectless and hypothetical.
> Passive participle «построен»: «Был построен» is a periphrastic passive: the short past-passive participle «построен» (from perfective «построить») joined to «был» states a completed result — "had been built." «На большую семью» means "for a large family."
> «Господа» — masters, gentry: «Господа» (sg. «господин») are the masters / gentry of a household, set against «слуги», the servants — the basic social division of an estate. The «и... и...» construction means "both... and...". «Впятеро» means "fivefold."

Но в момент нашего рассказа в доме жил лишь Федор Павлович с Иваном Федоровичем, а в людском флигеле всего только три человека прислуги: старик Григорий, старуха Марфа, его жена, и слуга Смердяков, еще молодой человек.  
But at the moment of our story only Fyodor Pavlovich and Ivan Fyodorovich were living in the house, while in the servants' lodge there were just three of the household staff in all: old Grigory, the old woman Marfa, his wife, and the servant Smerdyakov, still a young man.
> Instrumental of accompaniment after «с»: «Жил... с Иваном Фёдоровичем» uses «с» + instrumental for accompaniment ("with Ivan Fyodorovich"). Note the patronymic «Фёдорович» — Ivan is Fyodor's son — also declining into the instrumental «-ем».
> «Три» + genitive singular «человека»: The numeral «три» governs the genitive singular, hence «три человека» ("three persons"), with «прислуги» (the household staff) in the genitive of the whole. «Всего только» stacks two limiters — "just only three in all."
> The name «Смердяков»: The surname «Смердяков» is built on the verb «смердеть» (to stink) — literally "son of the stinking one," derived from his mother's nickname «Смердящая». Dostoevsky's naming brands the servant from the outset with the odor of degradation.

Приходится сказать несколько поподробнее об этих трех служебных лицах.  
We must say a few more words in detail about these three persons of the household.
> Impersonal «приходится» — one must: «Приходится» (from «приходиться», -ся) is an impersonal verb of obligation — "it falls to one / one must" — with no nominative subject. Here the narrator says he is obliged to add a few words; «поподробнее» is a doubly-prefixed comparative, "in a little more detail."
> «О» + prepositional, with the numeral declined: «Об этих трёх... лицах» shows the topic-marking «о(б)» governing the prepositional case throughout — demonstrative, numeral, and noun all inflect together («этих трёх лицах»). «Лицо» here means "person" rather than "face."

О старике Григории Васильевиче Кутузове мы, впрочем, уже говорили довольно.  
Of old Grigory Vasilievich Kutuzov we have, however, already spoken at some length.
> Full name triad in the prepositional: «О старике Григории Васильевиче Кутузове» declines the entire string — common noun, first name, patronymic, surname — into the prepositional after «о». «Григории» and «Васильевиче» show the soft and consonant-stem prepositional endings side by side.
> Imperfective «говорили» of a completed report: «Говорили» is imperfective past — the narrator has "already spoken (about him)" as a general activity covered earlier, not a single bounded act. The particle «впрочем» ("however, by the way") and «довольно» ("enough, at some length") soften the aside.

Это был человек твердый и неуклонный, упорно и прямолинейно идущий к своей точке, если только эта точка по каким-нибудь причинам (часто удивительно нелогическим) становилась пред ним как непреложная истина.  
He was a man firm and unwavering, who pressed stubbornly and in a straight line toward whatever he aimed at, provided only that this aim, for some reason or other (often astonishingly illogical), had come to stand before him as an unalterable truth.
> Present active participle «идущий»: «Идущий» is the present active participle of «идти» (going), agreeing with «человек» — "a man going (pressing) toward." It compresses a «который»-clause ("who pressed toward") into one bookish modifier, the kind of participial packing typical of literary narration.
> Reflexive possessive «своей»: «Своей» («свой») points the possession back to the clause's own subject — his own aim, the point he himself was driving at. Using «его» here would have meant someone else's point.
> «Если только» + imperfective «становилась»: «Если только» ("provided only that") opens a conditional clause; «становилась» is imperfective, presenting the becoming-fixed of the idea as a recurring pattern. «Пред» is the bookish/archaic form of «перед» (before).
> «Непреложный» — immutable: «Непреложный» is an elevated, bookish adjective meaning "unalterable, immutable, not to be revoked," most at home in religious and philosophical contexts. «Непреложная истина» = "an unalterable truth," coloring Grigory's rigid certitude with near-doctrinal weight.

Вообще говоря, он был честен и неподкупен.  
Generally speaking, he was honest and incorruptible.
> Short adjectives «честен», «неподкупен»: Both predicates are short adjectives: «честен» (honest) and «неподкупен» (incorruptible, lit. "unbribable"). The short form pronounces these as defining, absolute traits of his character.
> «Вообще говоря» — generally speaking: «Вообще говоря» is a fixed parenthetical idiom, "generally speaking, on the whole," built on a frozen gerund «говоря» (speaking). It frames the verdict on Grigory as a broad summary.

Жена его, Марфа Игнатьевна, несмотря на то что пред волей мужа беспрекословно всю жизнь склонялась, ужасно приставала к нему, например, тотчас после освобождения крестьян, уйти от Федора Павловича в Москву и там начать какую-нибудь торговлишку (у них водились кое-какие деньжонки); но Григорий решил тогда же и раз навсегда, что баба врет, «потому что всякая баба бесчестна», но что уходить им от прежнего господина не следует, каков бы он там сам ни был, «потому что это ихний таперича долг».  
His wife, Marfa Ignatievna, in spite of having bowed all her life without a murmur before her husband's will, badgered him dreadfully, for instance just after the emancipation of the serfs, to leave Fyodor Pavlovich and go to Moscow and start up some little business there (they had a bit of money set by); but Grigory decided then and there, once and for all, that the woman was talking nonsense, "because every woman is dishonest," and that it would not do for them to leave their former master, whatever sort of man he might be, "because that is now their duty."
> Concessive «несмотря на то что»: «Несмотря на то что» ("in spite of the fact that") is a compound subordinating conjunction opening a concessive clause. «Склонялась» (from «склоняться», -ся) is the imperfective "bowed / submitted," habitual across her whole life — the -ся giving the verb its "bend oneself before" sense.
> Belittling diminutives «торговлишка», «деньжонки»: Both carry the pejorative-diminutive suffix «-ишк-/-онк-»: «торговлишка» is "some piddling little trade," «деньжонки» "a bit of (paltry) money." The suffixes voice the smallness and unseriousness of Marfa's scheme as Grigory weighs it.
> «Баба» — peasant woman, here dismissive: «Баба» is a coarse, folk word for a (married, peasant) woman, here flatly contemptuous in Grigory's maxim «всякая баба бесчестна» ("every woman is dishonest"). It belongs to his blunt, proverb-speaking peasant register.
> Substandard «ихний» and «таперича»: Grigory's quoted speech uses non-standard peasant forms: «ихний» (a colloquial, looked-down-upon possessive for standard «их», "their") and «таперича» (a dialectal/archaic «теперь», "now"). Dostoevsky spells out his lower-class voice phonetically inside the quotation marks.

— Ты понимаешь ли, что есть долг? — обратился он к Марфе Игнатьевне.  
"Do you understand what duty is?" he said, turning to Marfa Ignatievna.
> Interrogative particle «ли»: «Понимаешь ли» uses the enclitic «ли» to form a pointed yes/no question — more weighty and rhetorical than mere intonation. «Что есть долг» keeps the bookish «есть» ("is") for emphasis: "what duty is."

— Про долг я понимаю, Григорий Васильевич, но какой нам тут долг, чтобы нам здесь оставаться, того ничего не пойму, — ответила твердо Марфа Игнатьевна.  
"As for duty, I understand that, Grigory Vasilievich, but what duty there is for us in staying here, that I can make no sense of at all," Marfa Ignatievna answered firmly.
> Genitive of negation + negative concord: «Ничего не пойму» combines the negative «ничего» with the negated verb «не пойму» — Russian's obligatory negative concord ("I'll make no sense of any of it"). «Того... ничего» fronts the topic in the genitive: of that, none of it can I grasp.
> Perfective future «пойму»: «Пойму» is the perfective (from «понять»), and a perfective conjugated like a present yields the future — "I won't / can't come to understand." It frames her incomprehension as a completed non-result rather than an ongoing process.

— И не понимай, а оно так будет.  
"Then don't make sense of it, but so it shall be.
> Imperative «не понимай»: «Не понимай» is a negated imperative of «понимать» — "don't (bother to) understand." The imperfective imperative under negation tells someone not to engage in the activity at all, fitting Grigory's brusque dismissal.
> Contrastive «а» + neuter «оно»: «А» is the mild contrastive "and yet / but," pivoting from her not-understanding to his decree. The empty neuter «оно» ("it") is a dummy subject pointing forward to the whole situation: "but so it shall be."

Впредь молчи.  
From now on, hold your tongue."
> Imperative «молчи»: «Молчи» is the singular imperative of imperfective «молчать» (to be silent) — "hold your tongue, stay silent." «Впредь» ("henceforth, from now on") is a bookish adverb that gives the curt command finality.

Так и вышло: они не ушли, а Федор Павлович назначил им жалованье, небольшое, и жалованье выплачивал.  
And so it turned out: they did not leave, and Fyodor Pavlovich fixed them a wage, a small one, and paid the wage out.
> Perfective «назначил» vs imperfective «выплачивал»: The aspect pairing tells the story: «назначил» (perfective) fixes the wage in one completed act, while «выплачивал» (imperfective) shows the paying-out repeated over time. «Им» is the dative indirect object — he fixed a wage "for them."
> Perfective negation «не ушли»: «Не ушли» (perfective «уйти») negates a single completed departure — "they did not (end up) leaving." The opening «так и вышло» ("and so it turned out") is a fixed idiom confirming the outcome.

Григорий знал к тому же, что он на барина имеет влияние неоспоримое.  
Grigory knew, moreover, that he held an unquestionable sway over his master.
> Trailing adjective for weight: Neutral order would put «неоспоримое влияние» together; here «влияние» comes first and «неоспоримое» (unquestionable) is held to the end of the clause for emphasis — a typical literary inversion. «На барина» = "over his master."
> «Барин» — the master, the gentleman: «Барин» is the master of an estate, the gentleman whom serfs and servants serve. From a servant's mouth it is the standard title for the man of the house; here «на барина» (accusative animate) means his influence over Fyodor Pavlovich.

Он чувствовал это, и это было справедливо: хитрый и упрямый шут, Федор Павлович, очень твердого характера «в некоторых вещах жизни», как он сам выражался, бывал, к собственному удивлению своему, весьма даже слабоват характером в некоторых других «вещах жизни».  
He felt it, and it was true: that cunning, obstinate buffoon, Fyodor Pavlovich, a man of very firm character "in certain matters of life," as he himself put it, would prove, to his own surprise, decidedly weak of character in certain other "matters of life."
> «Шут» — the buffoon: «Шут» originally meant a court jester or fool; applied to Fyodor Pavlovich it brands him a self-made "buffoon" who clowns, provokes, and degrades himself for effect. "Buffoonery" («шутовство») is one of the novel's keywords for him.
> Instrumental of respect + diminutive «слабоват»: «Слабоват характером» uses the instrumental «характером» to say in what respect he is weak — "weak as to character." The suffix «-оват-» softens «слаб» to "rather/decidedly weakish," an ironic understatement.
> Reflexive «выражаться» — to express oneself: «Выражался» (from «выражаться», -ся) is the middle/reflexive "to express oneself, put it," framing «в некоторых вещах жизни» as Fyodor Pavlovich's own phrase. «Сам» underscores it is his self-description.

И он сам знал в каких, знал и боялся многого.  
And he himself knew in which ones, knew it and was afraid of much.
> «Бояться» + genitive «многого»: «Бояться» (a -ся verb existing only in reflexive form) governs the genitive of what is feared — «многого», "of much." The clipped paratactic «знал и боялся» ("knew it and was afraid") mirrors his anxious inwardness.
> Embedded interrogative «в каких»: «Знал в каких» leaves «вещах» elided — "knew in which (matters)." The interrogative «какой» here works as an embedded indirect question after «знал», in the prepositional plural to match the dropped noun.

В некоторых вещах жизни надо было держать ухо востро, и при этом тяжело было без верного человека, а Григорий был человек вернейший.  
In certain matters of life one had to keep one's ear keen, and in those it was hard to do without a trustworthy man, and Grigory was the most trustworthy of men.
> An idiom: keeping your ear sharp: Literally "to hold one's ear keen," «держать ухо востро» is a fixed idiom meaning to stay alert or be on one's guard — we render it "keep one's ear keen." «Востро» is an old short-form adverb from «острый» (sharp); the phrase survives only in this expression.
> Impersonal «надо было»: «Надо было держать» is an impersonal necessity construction — «надо» ("one must") plus past «было» plus infinitive, with no nominative subject. It generalizes: in certain matters "one had to" stay alert.
> Superlative suffix «-ейший»: «Вернейший» is the bookish synthetic superlative of «верный» (faithful) — "the most trustworthy." The «-ейший» suffix is an elevated alternative to «самый верный», capping the sentence emphatically.

Даже так случалось, что Федор Павлович много раз в продолжение своей карьеры мог быть бит, и больно бит, и всегда выручал Григорий, хотя каждый раз прочитывал ему после того наставление.  
It even happened more than once in the course of his career that Fyodor Pavlovich might have been beaten, and beaten badly, and each time Grigory came to his rescue, though afterward he would read him a lecture every time.
> Passive participle «бит» under «мог»: «Бит» is the short past-passive participle of «бить» (to beat); «мог быть бит» = "could have been beaten." The repetition «и больно бит» ("and beaten badly") intensifies it; «больно» here is the adverb "painfully, badly."
> Imperfective «прочитывал» for repeated lectures: «Прочитывал» is imperfective (note the suffix «-ыва-»), marking a habitual, repeated act — "he would read him a lecture every time." «Ему» is dative (to him), and «наставление» the moral lecture delivered.

Но одни побои не испугали бы Федора Павловича: бывали высшие случаи, и даже очень тонкие и сложные, когда Федор Павлович и сам бы не в состоянии, пожалуй, был определить ту необычайную потребность в верном и близком человеке, которую он моментально и непостижимо вдруг иногда начинал ощущать в себе.  
But mere blows would not have frightened Fyodor Pavlovich: there were higher occasions, and even very subtle and complicated ones, when Fyodor Pavlovich himself, perhaps, would not have been able to define that extraordinary craving for a trusty and intimate person which he would suddenly and unaccountably begin at times to feel within himself.
> Conditional «не испугали бы»: «Не испугали бы» is the irrealis: past-tense perfective «испугали» plus «бы» — "would not have frightened." «Одни побои» means "mere blows, blows alone" («одни» = "only"); the genitive-animate object «Фёдора Павловича» marks him as the one (not) frightened.
> Relative «которую» across a long clause: «Которую» agrees with its antecedent «потребность» in gender and number (feminine singular) but takes the accusative its own clause demands as object of «ощущать». Dostoevsky stretches the relative clause far from its head — a hallmark of his winding syntax.
> Reflexive pronoun «в себе»: «В себе» (in oneself) is the reflexive pronoun «себя», pointing back to the subject Fyodor Pavlovich — the craving he felt "within himself." «Себя» has no nominative and serves any person; here it localizes the inner sensation.

Это были почти болезненные случаи: развратнейший и в сладострастии своем часто жестокий, как злое насекомое, Федор Павлович вдруг ощущал в себе иной раз, пьяными минутами, духовный страх и нравственное сотрясение, почти, так сказать, даже физически отзывавшееся в душе его.  
These were almost morbid occasions: that most debauched man, often cruel in his sensuality, like some vicious insect, Fyodor Pavlovich would suddenly feel within himself, now and then in his drunken moments, a spiritual dread and a moral shudder that seemed almost, so to speak, to echo physically in his soul.
> Superlative «развратнейший»: «Развратнейший» is the synthetic superlative of «развратный» (depraved, debauched) — "most debauched." Opening the clause with this bare superlative, set off before the name, throws maximal stress onto Fyodor Pavlovich's corruption.
> Instrumental absent — «как» + nominative simile: «Как злое насекомое» ("like a vicious insect") is a simile in the nominative after «как». Dostoevsky's insect imagery for sensuality recurs across the novel (Dmitri later quotes the "insect" of lust), making this a thematic thread, not a stray comparison.
> Past active participle «отзывавшееся»: «Отзывавшееся» is the past active participle of reflexive «отзываться» (to echo, resound), agreeing with neuter «сотрясение» — "a shudder that echoed." The hedging «почти, так сказать, даже» ("almost, so to speak, even") is pure Dostoevskian narratorial stammer.

«Душа у меня точно в горле трепещется в эти разы», — говаривал он иногда.  
"At such times my soul fairly quivers in my throat," he used to say sometimes.
> Reflexive «трепетаться» — quivers: «Трепещется» is a reflexive/intensive form of «трепетать» (to quiver, tremble), here a vivid colloquial "fairly quivers." The -ся deepens the sense of an involuntary inner shudder. «В эти разы» ("at such times") is a colloquial plural of «раз».
> Iterative «говаривал»: «Говаривал» is a special iterative-imperfective (suffix «-ива-» with a habitual past flavor) meaning "he used to say (now and then)," stronger in repetition than plain «говорил». Such «-ивал» forms are an archaic, folksy way of marking recurrent past habit.

Вот в эти-то мгновения он и любил, чтобы подле, поблизости, пожалуй хоть и не в той комнате, а во флигеле, был такой человек, преданный, твердый, совсем не такой, как он, не развратный, который хотя бы всё это совершающееся беспутство и видел и знал все тайны, но всё же из преданности допускал бы это всё, не противился, главное — не укорял и ничем бы не грозил, ни в сем веке, ни в будущем; а в случае нужды так бы и защитил его, — от кого?  
It was at just such moments that he liked to have nearby, close at hand — even, perhaps, not in the same room but in the lodge — such a man, devoted, steadfast, not at all like himself, not debauched, who, though he saw and knew all this depravity going on and knew all the secrets, would yet out of his devotion put up with it all, not resist, and above all would not reproach him or threaten him with anything, neither in this world nor in the next; and who, in case of need, would even defend him — from whom?
> Emphatic clitic «-то» and «и»: The clitic «-то» on «эти-то» («в эти-то мгновения») emphasizes a known, pointed topic — "it was at just such moments." The «и» before «любил» reinforces it: precisely then he liked. Both are stress-bearing particles English renders only by intonation.
> «Чтобы» + the willed irrealis: «Чтобы... был... человек» opens a purpose/desideratum clause: «чтобы» fuses «что» with the irrealis «бы», so its verb stands in the past form («был», later «допускал бы», «не противился»). It names not a fact but a wished-for state — the kind of man Fyodor Pavlovich craved.
> Present active participle «совершающееся»: «Совершающееся» is the present active participle of reflexive «совершаться» (to be going on, take place), agreeing with neuter «беспутство» (debauchery) — "all this depravity going on." The -ся participle gives the dissipation a self-unfolding, ongoing life.
> Archaic «сей» and the «ни... ни...» of the two worlds: «В сем веке» uses the bookish/Church-Slavonic demonstrative «сей» ("this") — "in this world/age." Paired with «ни... ни...» (neither... nor) it echoes the liturgical formula of "this world and the world to come," lending the passage a sacral undertone.

От кого-то неизвестного, но страшного и опасного.  
From someone unknown, but terrible and dangerous.
> Indefinite «кого-то» — someone specific but unknown: The clitic «-то» on «кого-то» marks a specific but unidentified referent — "from someone (definite yet) unknown." It differs from «кто-нибудь» ("anyone at all"): Fyodor Pavlovich senses a real, particular threat he simply cannot name.

Дело было именно в том, чтобы был непременно другой человек, старинный и дружественный, чтобы в больную минуту позвать его, только с тем чтобы всмотреться в его лицо, пожалуй переброситься словцом, совсем даже посторонним каким-нибудь, и коли он ничего, не сердится, то как-то и легче сердцу, а коли сердится, ну, тогда грустней.  
The whole point was that there should without fail be another person, old and friendly, whom in a sickly moment he could call to him, only so as to look into his face, perhaps exchange a word — about something quite irrelevant, even — and if the man took no offense and was not angry, then somehow his heart felt the lighter for it, and if he was angry, well, then it was the sadder.
> Doubled «чтобы» purpose clauses: Two «чтобы» clauses stack: the first with the irrealis «был» ("that there should be... a person"), the second with a bare infinitive «позвать» ("so as to call him") — «чтобы» + infinitive expressing aim when the subject is the same. The construction lays out exactly what he needed.
> Folk conditional «коли» + dative «сердцу»: «Коли» is a colloquial/archaic «если» ("if"), giving the reflection a folk-speech flavor. «Легче сердцу» is a dative-experiencer impersonal — "the heart felt the lighter," lit. "(it was) easier to the heart," with no nominative subject. «Он ничего» colloquially means "he's all right, takes no offense."
> «Перекинуться/переброситься словцом» — to exchange a word: «Переброситься словцом» is an idiom, "to exchange a (brief, casual) word," the -ся giving it reciprocal sense. «Словцо» is the diminutive of «слово» — a light, throwaway little word, matching «совсем посторонним каким-нибудь» ("about something quite irrelevant").

Случалось (но, впрочем, чрезвычайно редко), что Федор Павлович шел даже ночью во флигель будить Григория, чтобы тот на минутку пришел к нему.  
It would happen (though, however, exceedingly rarely) that Fyodor Pavlovich would go even at night to the lodge to wake Grigory, so that he might come to him for a moment.
> Impersonal «случалось» + imperfective «шёл»: «Случалось» (it would happen) is an impersonal, subjectless verb introducing a «что»-clause. Inside it «шёл» is imperfective past of the unidirectional motion verb «идти», here iterative — "he would go (on such occasions)." «Чрезвычайно редко» = "exceedingly rarely."
> Correlative «тот» + «чтобы пришёл»: «Тот» ("the latter, that one") tracks Grigory as topic across the clause, and «чтобы... пришёл» is a purpose clause with the past-form irrealis (perfective «прийти») — "so that he might come." «К нему» uses «к» + dative for motion toward a person.

Тот приходил, и Федор Павлович заговаривал о совершеннейших пустяках и скоро отпускал, иногда даже с насмешечкой и шуточкой, а сам, плюнув, ложился спать и спал уже сном праведника.  
He would come, and Fyodor Pavlovich would begin talking of the most utter trifles and soon let him go, sometimes even with a little jeer and a little joke, while he himself, spitting, would lie down to sleep and sleep then the sleep of the righteous.
> Imperfective chain for a recurring scene: «Приходил», «заговаривал», «отпускал» are all imperfective past — the whole little scene is presented as something that habitually unfolded, not a one-off. «Заговаривал» (inceptive prefix «за-») means "would begin talking."
> Perfective gerund «плюнув»: «Плюнув» is a perfective past gerund (деепричастие) of «плюнуть» — "having spat" — naming a prior, completed act attendant on «ложился спать» (lay down to sleep). It shares the subject (Fyodor Pavlovich) and compresses two actions into one flowing clause.
> Diminutives «насмешечка», «шуточка»: «Насмешечка» (a little jeer) and «шуточка» (a little joke) carry the diminutive «-очк-/-ечк-», here ironically belittling — the small, needling mockery with which he dismisses Grigory. «Спал сном праведника» = the set phrase "slept the sleep of the righteous."

Нечто в этом роде случилось с Федором Павловичем и по приезде Алеши.  
Something of this sort happened to Fyodor Pavlovich upon Alyosha's arrival as well.
> «По» + prepositional = "upon": «По приезде» uses «по» with the prepositional in its temporal sense "upon, after" — "upon Alyosha's arrival." «Приезде» takes the older locative-style «-е»; «Алёши» is genitive of the doer. «Алёша» is the affectionate diminutive of Alexei.

Алеша «пронзил его сердце» тем, что «жил, всё видел и ничего не осудил».  
Alyosha "pierced his heart" by the fact that he "lived among them, saw everything, and condemned nothing."
> Instrumental «тем, что» — "by the fact that": «Тем, что...» is the instrumental of «то» (means/cause) plus a «что»-clause — "by the fact that, by means of...". So Alyosha "pierced his heart" by his way of living. «Ничего не осудил» is negative concord: "condemned nothing."

Мало того, принес с собою небывалую вещь: совершенное отсутствие презрения к нему, старику, напротив — всегдашнюю ласковость и совершенно натуральную прямодушную привязанность к нему, столь мало ее заслужившему.  
What is more, he brought with him an unprecedented thing: a complete absence of contempt for him, the old man — on the contrary, an unfailing tenderness and a wholly natural, plain-hearted attachment to him, who so little deserved it.
> Past active participle «заслужившему» in the dative: «Заслужившему» is the past active participle of perfective «заслужить» (to deserve), here in the dative to agree with «ему» (the old man) — "to him, who had so little deserved it." «Столь» is the bookish «так / so.» A dense participial modifier folded onto a pronoun.
> «Небывалый» — unheard-of: «Небывалый» (from «не» + «бывать», "never having been") means "unprecedented, unheard-of." «Принёс... небывалую вещь» = "he brought an unprecedented thing," preparing the surprise of Alyosha's wholly unfamiliar tenderness.

Всё это было для старого потаскуна и бессемейника совершенным сюрпризом, совсем для него, любившего доселе одну лишь «скверну», неожиданным.  
All this came as a perfect surprise to the old reprobate and family-less man, something quite unexpected for one who until then had loved nothing but "filth."
> «Потаскун» and «бессемейник»: «Потаскун» is a coarse word for a lecher/reprobate (from «таскаться», to gad about), and «бессемейник» a "family-less man" («без» + «семья»). The two nouns together pin Fyodor Pavlovich as both debauched and rootless — exactly what makes Alyosha's affection so jarring.
> Past active participle «любившего»: «Любившего» (past active participle of «любить»), in the genitive to agree with «него», compresses "who had loved" into a modifier — "for one who until then had loved nothing but 'filth.'" «Доселе» is an archaic "until now"; «скверна» is a Church-Slavonic-flavored word for moral filth/defilement.

По уходе Алеши он признался себе, что понял кое-что, чего доселе не хотел понимать.  
After Alyosha had gone, he confessed to himself that he had understood something he had not until then been willing to understand.
> «По» + prepositional «уходе»: Like «по приезде» earlier, «по уходе» is the temporal «по» + prepositional — "after Alyosha had gone, upon his departure." The construction frames the timing of his self-confession.
> Genitive of negation: «чего не хотел понимать»: «Чего... не хотел понимать» puts the relative object into the genitive under negation — "something which he had not wished to understand." «Признался себе» uses reflexive «себе» (to himself); «кое-что» is the indefinite "a certain something."

Я уже упоминал в начале моего рассказа, как Григорий ненавидел Аделаиду Ивановну, первую супругу Федора Павловича и мать первого сына его, Дмитрия Федоровича, и как, наоборот, защищал вторую его супругу кликушу, Софью Ивановну, против самого своего господина и против всех, кому бы пришло на ум молвить о ней худое или легкомысленное слово.  
I have already mentioned at the beginning of my story how Grigory hated Adelaida Ivanovna, Fyodor Pavlovich's first wife and the mother of his first son, Dmitri Fyodorovich, and how, on the contrary, he defended his second wife, the shrieker, Sofya Ivanovna, against his own master and against everyone to whom it might occur to utter an unkind or frivolous word about her.
> Generalizing relative + irrealis «бы»: «Кому бы пришло на ум» ("to anyone to whom it might occur") combines the relative «кто» (dative «кому») with «бы» for a generalized, hypothetical agent. «Пришло на ум» is the idiom "to come to mind," with the experiencer in the dative.
> Archaic «молвить» and «худое»: «Молвить» is a bookish/archaic verb "to utter, speak," and «худое» an old word for "bad, ill" (a word) rather than its modern sense "thin." Together they raise the register of Grigory's fierce protectiveness toward Sofya Ivanovna.

В нем симпатия к этой несчастной обратилась во что-то священное, так что и двадцать лет спустя он бы не перенес, от кого бы то ни шло, даже худого намека о ней и тотчас бы возразил обидчику.  
In him sympathy for this unfortunate woman turned into something sacred, so that even twenty years later he could not bear, from anyone whatsoever, so much as an unkind hint about her, and would at once round on the offender.
> Conditional «не перенёс бы» + genitive of negation: «Не перенёс бы» is the irrealis (past perfective «перенёс» + «бы»): "he could not have borne." Under the negation the object slips into the genitive — «худого намёка» ("so much as an unkind hint"), a textbook genitive of negation.
> Concessive idiom «кто бы то ни...»: «От кого бы то ни шло» is a fixed concessive formula — "from whomsoever it might come," i.e. "from anyone whatsoever." Built on «кто» + «бы... ни», it is the same pattern as «что бы ни», «как бы ни»: a relative pronoun plus «бы ни» yielding "no matter who/what."
> Reflexive «обратиться» — to turn into: «Обратилась» (from «обратиться», -ся) here means "turned into, was transformed into," governing «во что-то» ("into something") with «в» + accusative. The -ся gives the middle/change-of-state sense: his sympathy itself underwent the change.

По наружности своей Григорий был человек холодный и важный, не болтливый, выпускающий слова веские, нелегкомысленные.  
In his outward appearance Grigory was a man cold and self-important, not given to chatter, dispensing weighty words, not frivolous ones.
> Present active participle «выпускающий»: «Выпускающий» (present active participle of «выпускать», to let out) describes Grigory as one "dispensing" his words. The trailing adjectives «веские, нелегкомысленные» (weighty, not frivolous) follow their noun «слова» for emphasis, a literary inversion.
> Long-form adjectives as character labels: Here the adjectives are long forms in the nominative («холодный», «важный», «болтливый») modifying «человек» — stable, defining traits of who Grigory is, as opposed to the short forms used earlier for the house's passing qualities.

Точно так же невозможно было бы разъяснить в нем с первого взгляда: любил он свою безответную, покорную жену или нет, а между тем он ее действительно любил, и та, конечно, это понимала.  
In the same way it would have been impossible to make out at first glance whether or not he loved his meek, submissive wife, and yet he did love her in fact, and she, of course, understood it.
> Impersonal conditional + embedded yes/no question: «Невозможно было бы разъяснить» is an impersonal irrealis ("it would have been impossible to make out"), and the embedded clause «любил он... жену или нет» is an indirect yes/no question — "whether or not he loved his wife," expressed by «...или нет».
> Reflexive possessive «свою»: «Свою... жену» ("his own wife") refers the possession back to the clause's subject, Grigory. «Безответный» (lit. "answerless") here means "meek, uncomplaining," paired with «покорный» (submissive) to paint Marfa's outward humility.

Эта Марфа Игнатьевна была женщина не только не глупая, но, может быть, и умнее своего супруга, по меньшей мере рассудительнее его в делах житейских, а между тем она ему подчинялась безропотно и безответно, с самого начала супружества, и бесспорно уважала его за духовный верх.  
This Marfa Ignatievna was a woman not only not stupid but perhaps even cleverer than her husband, at least more level-headed than he in worldly affairs, and yet she submitted to him without complaint and without protest from the very start of their marriage, and unquestionably respected him for his spiritual superiority.
> Comparatives «умнее», «рассудительнее»: «Умнее» (cleverer) and «рассудительнее» (more level-headed) are predicative comparatives in «-ее». The framing «не только не глупая, но...» ("not only not stupid, but...") is a characteristic double-negative buildup that elevates her over her husband.
> Reflexive «подчиняться» + dative «ему»: «Подчиняться» (-ся, to submit/obey) governs the dative of whom one obeys — «ему», "to him." The -ся marks the middle sense of placing oneself under another's will. «Безропотно» ("without a murmur") echoes «безответно».
> «Духовный верх» — spiritual superiority: «Верх» literally is "top, upper hand"; «духовный верх» means his "spiritual superiority / the upper hand in spiritual matters." «За» + accusative here gives the grounds: she respected him for it.

Замечательно, что оба они всю жизнь свою чрезвычайно мало говорили друг с другом, разве о самых необходимых и текущих вещах.  
It is remarkable that the two of them, all their lives, spoke exceedingly little with one another, save about the most necessary, everyday matters.
> Impersonal «замечательно, что»: «Замечательно, что...» is an impersonal evaluative — "it is remarkable that" — a neuter predicate with no nominative subject, opening a «что»-clause. «Говорили» is imperfective, marking the habitual scarcity of their talk over a lifetime.
> Reciprocal «друг с другом»: «Друг с другом» is the reciprocal expression "with one another." Only the second «друг» declines (here instrumental after «с»); the first stays frozen. «Разве о...» means "save / except about."

Важный и величественный Григорий обдумывал все свои дела и заботы всегда один, так что Марфа Игнатьевна раз навсегда давно уже поняла, что в советах ее он совсем не нуждается.  
The grave and stately Grigory thought over all his affairs and cares always alone, so that Marfa Ignatievna had long since grasped, once and for all, that he had no need at all of her advice.
> Imperfective habit «обдумывал»: «Обдумывал» (imperfective of «обдумать») presents Grigory's brooding as a lifelong habit — "always thought (everything) over alone." «Один» here is the adverbial "alone, by himself."
> «Нуждаться в» + prepositional, genitive of negation context: «Нуждаться в чём-то» (to need) governs «в» + prepositional, here «в советах её» ("in her advice"). Negated by «совсем не», it states he had "no need at all" of her counsel. «Раз навсегда» = "once and for all."

Она чувствовала, что муж ценит ее молчание и признает за это в ней ум.  
She felt that her husband valued her silence and credited her with intelligence on account of it.
> «Признавать за кем ум» — to credit with: «Признаёт... в ней ум» means "acknowledges intelligence in her / credits her with intelligence," with «в ней» (in her) and «за это» ("on account of this," «за» + accusative for cause). The present-tense verbs «чувствовала... ценит» blend her perception with his standing attitude.

Бить он ее никогда не бивал, разве всего только один раз, да и то слегка.  
He had never beaten her, except just one single time, and that but lightly.
> Tautological infinitive + iterative «бивал»: Russian folk-emphatic syntax fronts the infinitive «бить» before the finite «бивал» — "as for beating, he never (used to) beat her," stressing the verb. «Бивал» is the iterative-habitual «-ива-» form of «бить», and «никогда... не» is negative concord.

В первый год брака Аделаиды Ивановны с Федором Павловичем, раз в деревне, деревенские девки и бабы, тогда еще крепостные, собраны были на барский двор попеть и поплясать.  
In the first year of Adelaida Ivanovna's marriage to Fyodor Pavlovich, once in the country, the village girls and women, then still serfs, were gathered into the master's yard to sing and dance.
> Passive «собраны были» + «по-» perfectives: «Собраны были» is a periphrastic passive (short participle «собраны» + «были») — "were gathered." The infinitives «попеть» and «поплясать» take the prefix «по-», which gives a perfective "to do a bit of singing / dancing" — a delimited spell of the activity.
> «Девки» and «бабы» — unmarried girls and married women: In village usage «девки» are the unmarried young women and «бабы» the married ones; both are folk, plain-spoken terms. The pairing names the whole female cohort of the village brought in to entertain the gentry.

Начали «Во лузях», и вдруг Марфа Игнатьевна, тогда еще женщина молодая, выскочила вперед пред хором и прошлась «русскую» особенным манером, не по-деревенскому, как бабы, а как танцевала она, когда была дворовою девушкой у богатых Миусовых на домашнем помещичьем их театре, где обучал актеров танцевать выписанный из Москвы танцмейстер.  
They struck up "In the Meadows," and suddenly Marfa Ignatievna, then still a young woman, sprang out in front of the chorus and danced "the Russian" in a particular manner, not in the village way, as the women did, but as she had danced when she was a house-serf girl with the wealthy Miusovs, on their private estate theater, where a dancing-master brought over from Moscow taught the actors to dance.
> Perfective verbs move the action: «Выскочила» (sprang out) and «прошлась» (danced/took a turn, reflexive «пройтись») are perfectives that advance the narrative as single, vivid events against the imperfective background — the sudden burst of Marfa's dance.

Григорий видел, как прошлась его жена, и дома у себя в избе, через час, поучил ее, потаскав маленько за волосы.  
Grigory saw how his wife had danced, and at home in their cottage, an hour later, he taught her a lesson by dragging her a little by the hair.
> Perfective gerund «потаскав»: «Потаскав» is a perfective past gerund (деепричастие) of «потаскать» — "having dragged (a little)." It attends the main verb «поучил» (taught a lesson), telling how he did it. «Маленько» is a folksy diminutive adverb "a little," softening — chillingly — the violence.
> «Изба» — the peasant cottage: An «изба» is the traditional Russian peasant log house. That Grigory and Marfa live «у себя в избе» rather than the manor marks their station as servants/former serfs even within the Karamazov household.

Но тем и кончились раз навсегда побои и не повторялись более ни разу во всю жизнь, да и Марфа Игнатьевна закаялась с тех пор танцевать.  
But with that the beatings ended once and for all and were never repeated even once in their whole life, and Marfa Ignatievna swore off dancing from that time on.
> Reflexive «повторяться» + negative concord: «Повторялись» (from «повторяться», -ся) is the middle/intransitive "to recur, be repeated." Negated, it joins «ни разу» ("not once") in negative concord — "were never repeated even once." «Тем и кончились» = "with that they ended."
> «Закаяться» — to swear off: «Закаяться (что-то делать)» is a colloquial "to swear off, foreswear (doing something)," the -ся giving the reflexive vow-upon-oneself sense. "Marfa swore off dancing from that time on" — a single beating cured her of it for life.

Детей им бог не дал, был один ребеночек, да и тот умер.  
God gave them no children; there was one little child, but it too died.
> Genitive of negation + dative «им»: «Детей... не дал» puts the object «дети» into the genitive plural under negation — "gave no children." «Им» is the dative of the persons affected (to them). The folk-pious phrasing «бог не дал» frames childlessness as God's withholding.
> Diminutive «ребёночек» + «да и тот»: «Ребёночек» is the tender diminutive of «ребёнок» (little child), its warmth deepening the pathos. «Да и тот умер» — "and even that one died," with «да и» ("and even/yet") and the demonstrative «тот» pointing back to the single child.

Григорий же видимо любил детей, даже не скрывал этого, то есть не стыдился выказывать.  
Grigory, however, plainly loved children, and did not even conceal it — that is, he was not ashamed to show it.
> Reflexive «стыдиться» + genitive/infinitive: «Стыдиться» (-ся, to be ashamed) here takes an infinitive complement, «выказывать» (to show, display) — "was not ashamed to show it." The -ся marks the inward, self-directed emotion. «Видимо» means "evidently, plainly."

Дмитрия Федоровича он к себе принял на руки, когда сбежала Аделаида Ивановна, трехлетним мальчиком и провозился с ним почти год, сам гребешком вычесывал, сам даже обмывал его в корыте.  
He took Dmitri Fyodorovich into his own hands when Adelaida Ivanovna ran off, the boy being three years old, and fussed over him for nearly a year, combed his hair himself with a little comb, even washed him himself in the wooden tub.
> Instrumental «трёхлетним мальчиком» — "as a boy of three": «Трёхлетним мальчиком» is the instrumental used to state age/condition at the time — "when he was a three-year-old boy." «Сбежала» (perfective «сбежать», to run off) marks Adelaida Ivanovna's flight as a single completed event.
> «Провозиться», «гребешок», «корыто»: «Провозился (с ним)» means "fussed/busied himself over him" (perfective «провозиться», -ся, with the «про-» of spending a stretch of time). «Гребешок» is a diminutive comb and «корыто» a wooden trough/tub — homely, tender domestic detail of Grigory tending baby Dmitri.

Потом хлопотал он и с Иваном Федоровичем, и с Алешей, за что и получил пощечину; но об этом обо всем я уже повествовал.  
Later he busied himself with Ivan Fyodorovich too, and with Alyosha, for which he got a slap in the face; but of all this I have already given an account.
> Relative «за что» + emphatic «и»: «За что» ("for which") is a relative built on «что» governed by «за» + accusative (the grounds), referring back to his trouble over the boys. The «и» before «получил» is emphatic — "for which he actually got a slap." A «пощёчина» is specifically a slap in the face.
> «Повествовать» — to narrate (elevated): «Повествовать» is a bookish, slightly solemn verb for "to narrate, give an account," loftier than plain «рассказывать». Its use marks the self-conscious narratorial voice — "of all this I have already given an account."

Собственный же ребеночек порадовал его лишь одною надеждой, когда Марфа Игнатьевна еще была беременна.  
His own little child gladdened him with hope alone, while Marfa Ignatievna was still pregnant.
> Instrumental of means «надеждой»: «Порадовал... надеждой» uses the instrumental — gladdened him "by/with hope alone." «Одною» is again the archaic instrumental «-ою» for «одной» (only/a single). «Собственный ребёночек» = "his very own little child."
> Short adjective «беременна»: «Беременна» is the short form of «беременная» (pregnant), used predicatively after «была» — "while Marfa was still pregnant." Short adjectives are the norm for such temporary physical states.

Когда же родился, то поразил его сердце скорбью и ужасом.  
But when it was born, it struck his heart with grief and horror.
> Perfectives «родился ... поразил» with «когда... то»: «Родился» (was born, reflexive «родиться») and «поразил» (struck) are perfectives advancing the narrative event by event. The correlative «когда... то» ("when..., then") and the particle «же» pivot sharply from the hope of the previous sentence to the blow of birth.

Дело в том, что родился этот мальчик шестипалым.  
The thing was that this boy was born with six fingers.
> Instrumental «шестипалым» — born "six-fingered": «Родился... шестипалым» again uses the predicate instrumental to state the condition at birth — "was born six-fingered." «Шестипалый» («шесть» + «палец», finger) is the compound "six-fingered." «Дело в том, что» is the set frame "the thing is that."

Увидя это, Григорий был до того убит, что не только молчал вплоть до самого дня крещения, но и нарочно уходил молчать в сад.  
On seeing this, Grigory was so crushed that he not only kept silent right up until the very day of the christening, but would even go off on purpose to be silent in the garden.
> Gerund «увидя» + passive participle «убит»: «Увидя» is a (slightly archaic) perfective gerund of «увидеть», "on seeing / having seen," sharing Grigory's subject. «Был... убит» uses the short passive participle «убит» (lit. "killed") figuratively — "was so crushed," a striking metaphor of devastation.
> «Не только... но и...» with imperfectives: The correlative «не только... но и...» ("not only... but also...") joins two imperfectives, «молчал» and «уходил», stressing the prolonged, repeated silence right up to the christening. «Нарочно» ("on purpose") makes the withdrawal deliberate.

Была весна, он все три дня копал гряды в огороде в саду.  
It was spring; all three days he spent digging beds in the kitchen-garden out in the garden.
> Imperfective «копал» for a sustained activity: «Копал» is imperfective past — the durative "was digging / spent... digging" across all three days, the standing activity behind his grief. «Все три дня» governs the accusative duration; «гряды» are the raised garden beds he dug.

На третий день приходилось крестить младенца; Григорий к этому времени уже нечто сообразил.  
On the third day the infant had to be christened; by that time Grigory had worked something out.
> Impersonal «приходилось» + imperfective infinitive: «Приходилось крестить» is the impersonal verb of necessity ("it fell / had to be that") with no nominative subject — "the infant had to be christened." «Крестить» is imperfective here, naming the act in prospect.
> Perfective «сообразил» — had worked out: «Сообразил» (perfective of «соображать», to figure out) marks a completed mental result by the third day — "had worked something out." «Нечто» is the bookish indefinite "something." The perfective seals Grigory's arrival at a resolution.

Войдя в избу, где собрался причт и пришли гости и, наконец, сам Федор Павлович, явившийся лично в качестве восприемника, он вдруг заявил, что ребенка «не надо бы крестить вовсе», — заявил не громко, в словах не распространялся, еле выцеживал по словечку, а только тупо и пристально смотрел при этом на священника.  
Coming into the cottage, where the clergy had assembled and the guests had arrived and, finally, Fyodor Pavlovich himself, appearing in person in the role of godfather, he suddenly announced that the child "ought not to be christened at all" — announced it not loudly, did not enlarge upon it in words, barely squeezing it out word by word, and only stared dully and fixedly all the while at the priest.
> Perfective gerund «войдя»: «Войдя» is the perfective past gerund (деепричастие) of «войти», 'having entered / on entering'. It pins the whole long sentence to a single prior action shared with the main subject «он», a hallmark of Dostoevsky's layered narration.
> Past active participle «явившийся»: «Явившийся» is the past active participle of «явиться» ('who had appeared'), compressing a который-clause into one modifier of «Федор Павлович». Such participial chains are the connective tissue of 19th-century literary prose.
> Softening «бы» on «не надо»: «Надо бы» couples the impersonal necessity word «надо» with the irrealis particle «бы», softening a flat 'must not' into a hedged 'one really oughtn't'. The «бы» casts the whole judgement as conditional and tentative.
> «Выцеживать по словечку»: «Выцеживать» literally means to strain or filter liquid drop by drop; figuratively, to force words out grudgingly. The diminutive «словечко» ('a little word') makes the image vivid: Grigory squeezes out his speech one reluctant droplet at a time.
> «Изба» — the peasant cottage: An «изба» is a traditional Russian peasant log house. That the servants Grigory and Marfa live in one, rather than the manor house, quietly marks their station in Fyodor Pavlovich's household.

— Почему так? — с веселым удивлением осведомился священник.  
"Why so?" the priest inquired with cheerful surprise.
> Instrumental of manner «с… удивлением»: «С веселым удивлением» uses «с» plus the instrumental to express the manner of the asking ('with cheerful surprise'). The instrumental after «с» is Russian's standard way of attaching an accompanying emotion or attitude to a verb.
> «Осведомиться» — to inquire: «Осведомиться» is a bookish, faintly formal verb for 'to inquire', more elevated than «спросить». Its measured politeness here gently contrasts with the bizarre claim it answers.

— Потому это… дракон… — пробормотал Григорий.  
"Because it's… a dragon…" muttered Grigory.
> «Пробормотать» — to mutter out: The prefix «про-» on «бормотать» (to mumble) gives a single, completed mutter — he gets the words out, once. Dostoevsky favours this perfective for the brief, grudging utterances of taciturn characters like Grigory.

— Как дракон, какой дракон?  
"How a dragon, what dragon?"
> «Как» vs «какой»: The priest's double question pairs the adverb «как» ('how, in what way [a dragon]?') with the agreeing interrogative adjective «какой» ('what kind of dragon?'). «Какой» declines like an adjective to match its noun, unlike the invariable «как».

Григорий промолчал некоторое время.  
Grigory was silent for a while.
> Perfective «промолчал»: «Промолчал» (from «промолчать») is perfective: with «про-» plus a time-span object, it frames the silence as a bounded, completed stretch, 'kept silent for a while', not silence as an ongoing state.
> Accusative of duration «некоторое время»: The bare accusative «некоторое время» ('for a while') expresses duration with no preposition. Russian marks 'for how long' simply by putting the time-phrase in the accusative.

— Смешение природы произошло… — пробормотал он, хоть и весьма неясно, но очень твердо, и видимо не желая больше распространяться.  
"A confusion of nature came about…" he muttered, very vaguely, to be sure, but very firmly, and plainly with no wish to enlarge upon it further.
> «Смешение природы» — a confusion of nature: «Смешение» (a mixing, confusion) plus «природы» (genitive, 'of nature') is Grigory's solemn, semi-theological phrase for the deformity: the orders of nature have been improperly blended. The bookish abstraction sits oddly grand in his halting peasant mouth.
> Negated present gerund «не желая»: «Не желая» is the imperfective present gerund of «желать», 'not wishing', describing his attitude simultaneously with the main verb «пробормотал». The reflexive «распространяться» here means 'to expand / enlarge upon' a topic.

Посмеялись и, разумеется, бедненького ребеночка окрестили.  
They laughed and, of course, christened the poor little child.
> Subjectless 'they' plurals: Both verbs are 3rd-person plural with no stated subject, the standard Russian impersonal 'they' (the assembled company). The endings alone carry the agent, so no pronoun is needed.
> Double diminutive of pity: Both «бедненького» (from «бедный») and «ребеночка» (from «ребёнок») carry the affectionate-pitying suffix «-еньк-/-очк-». Stacked, they steep the doomed infant in tenderness, the narrator weeping a little over 'the poor wee child'.

Григорий молился у купели усердно, но мнения своего о новорожденном не изменил.  
Grigory prayed zealously at the font, but did not change his opinion of the newborn.
> Genitive of negation + «свой»: Under negation the object «мнение» shifts to the genitive «мнения», a classic genitive of negation. The reflexive possessive «своего» binds the opinion to the clause's own subject, Grigory: 'his own opinion'.

Впрочем, ничему не помешал, только все две недели, как жил болезненный мальчик, почти не глядел на него, даже замечать не хотел и большею частью уходил из избы.  
He did not, however, hinder anything; only, the whole two weeks the sickly boy lived, he scarcely looked at him, did not even want to take notice of him, and for the most part went off out of the cottage.
> «Впрочем» — 'however, then again': «Впрочем» is a discourse marker that qualifies or partly retracts what came before, 'however / be that as it may'. Dostoevsky's narrator uses it constantly to swerve, concede, and second-guess mid-thought.
> Negative concord with «ничему»: «Ничему… не помешал» pairs the negative pronoun «ничему» (dative, governed by «помешать') with the obligatory «не» on the verb, double negation that is grammatically required in Russian: 'hindered nothing'.
> Imperfective past of habit: The three imperfective past verbs «глядел», «хотел», «уходил» paint a repeated, habitual background over the whole fortnight, not single events. Aspect here renders Grigory's settled avoidance of the child.

Но когда мальчик через две недели помер от молочницы, то сам его уложил в гробик, с глубокою тоской смотрел на него и, когда засыпали неглубокую маленькую его могилку, стал на колени и поклонился могилке в землю.  
But when the boy, after two weeks, died of thrush, he himself laid him in the little coffin, gazed upon him with deep anguish, and, when they had filled in the small shallow grave, knelt down and bowed to the grave, to the ground.
> Genitive of cause after «от»: «От молочницы» uses «от» plus the genitive to name the cause of death, 'from thrush'. «От» governing the genitive is the regular way Russian marks the source or cause of a state.
> «Помереть» — the plain word for dying: «Помер» (from «помереть») is the colloquial, folk register of «умереть», 'to die'. It belongs to the servants' speech world and is gentler and earthier than the neutral «умер».
> Diminutives «гробик», «могилку»: «Гробик» (little coffin) and «могилку» (little grave) take affectionate diminutive suffixes that, applied to objects of death, ache with tenderness for the tiny body. Russian routinely diminutivizes around children and grief.

С тех пор многие годы он ни разу о своем ребенке не упомянул, да и Марфа Игнатьевна ни разу при нем про ребенка своего не вспоминала, а когда с кем случалось говорить о своем «деточке», то говорила шепотом, хотя бы тут и не было Григория Васильевича.  
From that time on, for many years he never once mentioned his child, nor did Marfa Ignatievna ever once speak of her child before him, and when she happened to talk with anyone about her "little one," she spoke in a whisper, even though Grigory Vasilievich might not have been there at all.
> «Ни разу… не» — 'not once': «Ни разу» ('not a single time') intensifies the negation and, by the rule of negative concord, still requires «не» on the verb. The pattern hammers home the totality of his years-long silence.
> «Деточка» — 'little one': «Деточка», a tender diminutive of «дитя/дети», is Marfa's hushed, loving word for the lost child. Set in guillemets, it preserves her own intimate phrasing inside the narration.
> Concessive «хотя бы… и»: «Хотя бы… и» builds a concessive 'even if / even though', here governing the negated existential «не было Григория Васильевича», whose absent subject stands in the genitive. The «бы» tints it hypothetical: even supposing he weren't there.

По замечанию Марфы Игнатьевны, он, с самой той могилки, стал по преимуществу заниматься «божественным», читал Четии-Минеи, больше молча и один, каждый раз надевая большие свои серебряные круглые очки.  
By Marfa Ignatievna's account, from the time of that very grave he took chiefly to occupying himself with "the things of God," reading the Lives of the Saints, mostly in silence and alone, putting on each time his big, round, silver spectacles.
> «Заниматься» + instrumental: «Заниматься» ('to occupy oneself with') governs the instrumental, here the substantivized adjective «божественным» ('the divine / things of God'). The reflexive «-ся» verb plus instrumental object is the fixed pattern for being engaged in an activity.
> Iterative gerund «надевая»: «Надевая» is an imperfective present gerund expressing a habitual accompanying action, 'putting on each time', synchronized with his repeated reading. The imperfective stem suits the recurring, customary gesture.

Редко читывал вслух, разве великим постом.  
He rarely read aloud, except during the Great Lent.
> Iterative «читывал»: «Читывал» is an archaic iterative imperfective of «читать», formed with «-ыва-», denoting an action done repeatedly over time in the past, 'used to read [now and then]'. This frequentative form is bookish and old-fashioned, exactly the texture Dostoevsky wants.

Любил книгу Иова, добыл откуда-то список слов и проповедей «богоносного отца нашего Исаака Сирина», читал его упорно и многолетно, почти ровно ничего не понимал в нем, но за это-то, может быть, наиболее ценил и любил эту книгу.  
He loved the Book of Job, got hold from somewhere of a collection of the sayings and homilies of "our God-bearing father Isaac the Syrian," and read it doggedly over many years, understanding almost precisely nothing in it, but for that very reason, perhaps, prized and loved that book most of all.
> Genitive negative «ничего»: «Ничего» is the genitive of «ничто», demanded both as the object of a negated verb and by negative concord with «не понимал». Russian fuses the two: 'understood nothing in it'.
> Emphatic clitic «-то»: The hyphenated «-то» on «за это-то» underscores the very reason just given, 'for that very reason'. This emphatic «-то», distinct from the indefinite one, spotlights a known item as the crux, here the paradox that he loved the book because he could not understand it.
> «Многолетно» — over many years: «Многолетно» ('over many years') is a rare, bookish adverb built on «много» + «лето» (year, in the old sense). It lends an antiquated, almost liturgical weight to the description of Grigory's stubborn lifelong reading.

В самое последнее время стал прислушиваться и вникать в хлыстовщину, на что по соседству оказался случай, видимо был потрясен, но переходить в новую веру не заблагорассудил.  
Of late he had begun to lend an ear to, and to look into, the Flagellant sect, an occasion for which had arisen in the neighborhood; he was plainly shaken, but did not see fit to go over to the new faith.
> «Заблагорассудить» — to see fit: «Заблагорассудить» ('to deem it good, to see fit') is a ponderous, archaic-bureaucratic verb, built from «благо» (good) + «рассудить» (to judge). Its mock-solemn weight, applied to a half-illiterate servant's decision, carries a faint narratorial irony.
> Inceptive «стал» + infinitives: «Стал» (perfective of «становиться') plus imperfective infinitives signals the beginning of an activity, 'began to listen and look into'. This «стать + imperfective infinitive» is Russian's most common way to mark the onset of a process.

Начетливость «от божественного», разумеется, придала его физиономии еще пущую важность.  
His well-read familiarity with "the things of God" had, of course, lent his countenance an even greater gravity.
> «Начётливость» — bookish erudition: «Начётливость» means a self-taught, devout familiarity with sacred texts gained by much reading aloud («начётчик» was a lay reader of scripture). It connotes piety more than real understanding, exactly Grigory's case.
> Archaic comparative «пущую»: «Пущую» is the accusative of «пущий», an archaic comparative meaning 'greater, all the more', surviving today mainly in «пуще» and set phrases. Here it intensifies «важность» (gravity, importance): an 'even greater' solemnity of countenance.

Может быть, он склонен был к мистицизму.  
Perhaps he was inclined to mysticism.
> Short adjective «склонен» + «к»: «Склонен» is the short (predicative) form of «склонный», 'inclined', used here with «к» plus the dative «мистицизму». Short adjectives serve only as predicates and carry a bookish flavour suited to the narrator's appraising tone.

А тут как нарочно случай появления на свет его шестипалого младенца и смерть его совпали как раз с другим весьма странным, неожиданным и оригинальным случаем, оставившим на душе его, как однажды он сам впоследствии выразился, «печать».  
And here, as if on purpose, the occasion of his six-fingered infant's coming into the world and its death coincided exactly with another very strange, unexpected, and singular occasion, which left upon his soul, as he himself once expressed it afterward, a "seal."
> Past active participle «оставившим»: «Оставившим» is the past active participle of «оставить» ('which had left'), in the instrumental to agree with «случаем». It folds a whole relative clause about the strange occasion into one heavy modifier.
> «Шестипалый» and «младенец»: «Шестипалый» ('six-fingered') is the deformity that horrified Grigory. «Младенец» is the elevated, slightly biblical word for an infant (cf. the Christ-child, «Богомладенец»), lending the doomed baby a note of scriptural pathos.

Так случилось, что в тот самый день, как похоронили шестипалого крошку, Марфа Игнатьевна, проснувшись ночью, услышала словно плач новорожденного ребенка.  
It so happened that on the very day they had buried the six-fingered mite, Marfa Ignatievna, waking in the night, heard what sounded like the cry of a newborn child.
> Perfective gerund «проснувшись»: «Проснувшись» is the perfective past gerund of «проснуться» ('having woken'), marking the completed prior act that sets up Marfa's hearing the cry. The reflexive «-ся» makes 'wake up' intransitive.
> «Словно» — 'as if, like': «Словно» is a comparative particle, 'as though / like', hedging what Marfa heard: not definitely a baby's cry but something resembling one. It softens the perception into eerie uncertainty.

Она испугалась и разбудила мужа.  
She took fright and woke her husband.
> Perfective chain «испугалась… разбудила»: Two perfectives in sequence move the action forward as discrete events: she took fright, then woke him. The reflexive «испугалась» ('became frightened') shows «-ся» marking a change of inner state.

Тот прислушался и заметил, что скорее это кто-нибудь стонет, «женщина будто бы».  
He listened and remarked that it sounded rather like someone groaning, "a woman, it seemed."
> «Тот» tracking the subject: «Тот» ('that one') here points back to the husband to switch the focus cleanly from Marfa, a typical Russian use of the demonstrative to track who is now acting without naming him.
> Indefinite «кто-нибудь»: «Кто-нибудь» ('someone or other') marks a wholly non-specific, unidentified person, the «-нибудь» series, fitting Grigory's groping guess in the dark. Contrast «кто-то», which would imply a definite if unknown someone.
> «Будто бы» — hedged report: «Будто бы» ('supposedly, as if') flags Grigory's cautious, tentative identification, 'a woman, it seems'. The phrase distances the speaker from full commitment to the claim.

Он встал, оделся; была довольно теплая майская ночь.  
He got up and dressed; it was a fairly warm May night.
> Reflexive «оделся»: «Оделся» is the reflexive «-ся» form, 'dressed himself', where «-ся» turns «одеть» (to dress someone) inward upon the subject. The asyndetic pair «встал, оделся» gives brisk, stepwise action.
> Verb-first scene-setting: Placing «была» before its subject «майская ночь» is a common Russian way to introduce a new circumstance, foregrounding existence/state before the noun, 'it was a fairly warm May night'. Free word order makes this rhetorical reordering possible.

Выйдя на крыльцо, он ясно вслушался, что стоны идут из сада.  
Going out onto the porch, he listened clearly and made out that the groans were coming from the garden.
> Perfective gerund «выйдя»: «Выйдя», the perfective past gerund of «выйти» ('having gone out'), again chains a completed prior motion to the main clause. Note «на крыльцо» in the accusative, marking motion onto the porch.
> «Идут» of sound coming: «Идти» extends beyond walking to mean 'to come / emanate', here of groans «идут из сада» ('coming from the garden'). It is one of motion verbs' many figurative uses; «из» plus genitive marks the source.

Но сад был на ночь запираем со двора на замок, попасть же в него, кроме этого входа, нельзя было, потому что кругом всего сада шел крепкий и высокий забор.  
But the garden was locked for the night with a padlock on the yard side, and there was no getting into it apart from this entrance, since a strong, high fence ran all the way around the garden.
> Present passive participle «запираем»: «Запираем» is the rare present passive participle (short form) of «запирать», 'was [habitually] locked'. Joined to «был», it states a recurring passive state, an archaic, distinctly bookish construction.
> Impersonal «нельзя было»: «Нельзя было» is an impersonal predicate of impossibility with no nominative subject, 'it was not possible [to get in]'. The particle «же» adds a mild 'moreover / and besides', linking back to the locked gate.
> «Шёл» of a fence running round: Once more a motion verb is figurative: «шёл забор» means the fence 'ran' around the garden. «Кругом» plus the genitive «всего сада» frames the encircling, reinforcing that the garden is sealed.

Воротясь домой, Григорий засветил фонарь, взял садовый ключ и, не обращая внимания на истерический ужас своей супруги, всё еще уверявшей, что она слышит детский плач и что это плачет, наверно, ее мальчик и зовет ее, молча пошел в сад.  
Returning to the house, Grigory lit a lantern, took the garden key, and, paying no heed to the hysterical terror of his wife, who still kept insisting that she could hear a child crying and that it was surely her own boy crying and calling for her, went in silence into the garden.
> Archaic gerund «воротясь»: «Воротясь» is the perfective past gerund of «воротиться» ('having returned'), a folk-archaic synonym of «вернуться». The «-ясь» ending and the verb itself give a homely, old-fashioned colouring suited to Grigory.
> Negated gerund «не обращая внимания»: «Не обращая внимания на» is a present imperfective gerund idiom, 'paying no attention to', running concurrently with the main verb. «Свою супругу» uses the reflexive possessive «свой» to bind 'wife' to the subject Grigory.
> Participle «уверявшей» heading a long clause: «Уверявшей» (past active participle of «уверять», 'who kept insisting') governs a sprawling что-clause of Marfa's frantic claims. Stacking a participle over embedded «что»-clauses lets Dostoevsky pour her hysteria into one breathless span.

Тут он ясно уразумел, что стоны идут из их баньки, стоявшей в саду, недалеко от калитки, и что стонет взаправду женщина.  
There he made out clearly that the groans were coming from their little bathhouse, which stood in the garden not far from the gate, and that it was indeed a woman who was groaning.
> «Уразуметь» — to apprehend: «Уразуметь» is an elevated, Church-Slavonic-flavoured verb for 'to grasp, comprehend', built on «разум» (reason). It dignifies Grigory's dawning realization with a touch of scriptural gravity.
> Participle «стоявшей»: «Стоявшей» is the past active participle of «стоять» ('which stood'), agreeing in feminine genitive with «баньки» to modify it, a compact relative: 'their little bathhouse, which stood in the garden'.
> Diminutives «банька», «калитка»: «Банька» (a little bathhouse) and «калитка» (a small garden gate/wicket) are everyday diminutives that domesticate the setting, sketching the humble, intimate scale of the servants' garden.

Отворив баню, он увидел зрелище, пред которым остолбенел: городская юродивая, скитавшаяся по улицам и известная всему городу, по прозвищу Лизавета Смердящая, забравшись в их баню, только что родила младенца.  
Opening the bathhouse, he saw a sight before which he stood rooted to the spot: the town's holy fool, who wandered the streets and was known to the whole town by the nickname of Lizaveta the Stinking, having got into their bathhouse, had only just given birth to an infant.
> Perfective gerund «отворив»: «Отворив», the perfective past gerund of «отворить» ('having opened'), launches the climactic discovery. «Отворить» is the slightly elevated, older verb for opening a door, beside the plainer «открыть».
> Relative «который» + archaic «пред»: «Пред которым» is a relative clause where «который» takes the instrumental governed by the preposition «пред» (the bookish, shortened form of «перед»). The construction agrees with «зрелище» in number but carries its own case.
> «Остолбенеть» — turned to a post: «Остолбенеть», literally 'to turn into a post/pillar' (from «столб»), is the vivid Russian verb for being struck motionless with shock. It conveys Grigory frozen, rooted to the spot.
> Reflexive gerund «забравшись»: «Забравшись» is the perfective gerund of «забраться» ('having got/clambered in'), the «-ся» giving the sense of working one's way into a place. It compresses how Lizaveta came to be inside the bathhouse into a single attendant clause.

Младенец лежал подле нее, а она помирала подле него.  
The infant lay beside her, and she was dying beside it.
> Balanced «а» and «подле»: The mild contrastive «а» pivots between the two clauses, setting the living infant against the dying mother in grim symmetry. «Подле» ('beside') is an archaic preposition governing the genitive «нее»/«него», quieter and older than «рядом с».

Говорить ничего не говорила, уже по тому одному, что не умела говорить.  
She said nothing at all, for the simple reason that she did not know how to speak.
> Tautological infinitive + negative concord: Fronting the infinitive «говорить» before the finite «не говорила» is an emphatic, folk-flavoured topicalization, 'as for speaking, she said nothing'. With «ничего» it forms the required double negative: 'said nothing at all'.
> «По тому… что» — 'for the reason that': «По тому одному, что» means 'for the single reason that', with «по» plus dative «тому» heading a causal clause closed by «что». «Уметь» here is 'to know how to', so she literally could not speak.

Но всё это надо бы разъяснить особо.  
But all this needs to be explained separately.
> Impersonal «надо бы» + infinitive: «Надо бы… разъяснить» is an impersonal modal construction with no nominative subject: necessity plus the perfective infinitive «разъяснить». The «бы» softens the obligation to a hedged 'ought really to be explained', and the narrator uses it to pivot into the next chapter.
---

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.