# The Brothers Karamazov, Both Together

Братья Карамазовы · Fyodor Dostoevsky · Book III — The Sensualists

Source: https://1732studios.com/books/karamazov/b3-c10. Data: https://1732studios.com/books/karamazov/b3-c10.json.


Вышел же Алеша из дома отца в состоянии духа разбитом и подавленном еще больше, чем давеча, когда входил к отцу.  
Alyosha came out of his father's house in a state of mind even more broken and crushed than earlier, when he had gone in to him.
> Inverted verb-first opening with «же»: The sentence opens with the perfective verb «вышел» (came out) before the subject «Алеша», throwing the action into focus and binding this paragraph to the previous scene. The particle «же» here is not contrastive 'but' so much as a soft connective 'now/and so', resuming the narrative thread.
> Instrumental? No — prepositional after «в»: «в состоянии… разбитом и подавленном» is the prepositional case (location/state after «в»), with the two participial adjectives «разбитом» (shattered) and «подавленном» (crushed, depressed) agreeing in case. Note the bookish post-positioning of the adjectives after «духа».
> «давеча» — "a little while ago": A colloquial, slightly old-fashioned adverb meaning "earlier today" or "a short while ago." It recurs throughout this chapter; here it points back to Alyosha's arrival at his father's house earlier the same day.

Ум его был тоже как бы раздроблен и разбросан, тогда как сам он вместе с тем чувствовал, что боится соединить разбросанное и снять общую идею со всех мучительных противоречий, пережитых им в этот день.  
His mind too was as if splintered and scattered, while at the same time he felt that he was afraid to gather up what had scattered and draw a single idea out of all the agonizing contradictions he had lived through that day.
> Short-form passive participles as predicate: «раздроблен» (broken up) and «разбросан» (scattered) are short-form past passive participles serving as the predicate of «ум его был» — the bookish way to state a resulting condition. «как бы» ('as if') hedges the metaphor.
> Reflexive «боится» governing perfective infinitives: «боится» is a reflexive -ся verb (бояться, 'to fear') that exists only in the -ся form; it governs the perfective infinitives «соединить» and «снять», framing the dreaded act as a single completed whole he shrinks from.
> Past passive participle + instrumental agent: «пережитых» is a past passive participle (from «пережить», to live through) agreeing with «противоречий» in the genitive plural; the agent «им» ('by him') stands in the instrumental — the standard way Russian names the doer of a passive.
> «тогда как» — "whereas, while": A bookish subordinating phrase meaning 'whereas / while at the same time', drawing a contrast between Alyosha's scattered mind and his simultaneous fear of gathering it.

Что-то граничило почти с отчаянием, чего никогда не бывало в сердце Алеши.  
Something verged almost on despair, which had never before been in Alyosha's heart.
> Indefinite «что-то» and genitive of negation in «чего… не бывало»: «Что-то» ('something', specific but unidentified) is picked up by the relative «чего», which stands in the genitive because the negated existential «не бывало» (had never been) demands the genitive of negation rather than a nominative subject.
> Iterative imperfective «бывало»: «бывало» is the past of the iterative imperfective «бывать» ('to be, repeatedly/habitually'), stronger than plain «быть»: not 'was never' but 'had never on any occasion happened' in Alyosha's heart.

Надо всем стоял, как гора, главный, роковой и неразрешимый вопрос: чем кончится у отца с братом Дмитрием пред этою страшною женщиной?  
Over everything there loomed, like a mountain, the chief, fatal, and insoluble question: how would it end between his father and his brother Dmitri before this terrible woman?
> Inversion: predicate before subject: The sentence leads with the prepositional phrase «надо всем» ('over everything') and verb «стоял», delaying the grammatical subject «вопрос» (question) to the end for monumental weight — mirroring the simile «как гора» (like a mountain).
> Archaic «пред» + instrumental, archaic endings: «пред» is the bookish/archaic form of modern «перед» ('before, in front of'), governing the instrumental «этою страшною женщиной»; the long instrumental endings «-ою/-ою» (for «этой страшной») are the period-literary variants of the modern «-ой».
> Perfective future «кончится» in an embedded question: «кончится» is the simple (perfective) future of «кончиться» — a -ся verb meaning 'to end' — used in the indirect question 'how it would end'. The phrase «у отца с братом» ('between father and brother') stacks genitive «у отца» with instrumental «с братом».

Теперь уж он сам был свидетелем.  
Now he had become a witness himself.
> Instrumental of the predicate after «был»: After past-tense «был», the predicate noun «свидетелем» (witness) takes the instrumental, not the nominative — the standard pattern that frames a role as something assumed or entered into. «уж» is an emphatic particle ('now indeed').

Он сам тут присутствовал и видел их друг пред другом.  
He had been present there himself and had seen the two of them face to face.
> Reciprocal «друг пред другом» — 'face to face': «друг друга» is the reciprocal construction 'one another'; here the preposition «пред» is inserted between the two halves («друг пред другом», 'one before the other / face to face'), the regular way Russian builds reciprocals with a preposition.
> Intensifying «сам» — 'in person': «сам» ('himself, in person') is the intensive pronoun stressing that Alyosha was personally present, not merely informed. The imperfective «присутствовал» views the being-present as a state, paired with perfective «видел» for the act of seeing.

Впрочем, несчастным, вполне и страшно несчастным, мог оказаться лишь брат Дмитрий: его сторожила несомненная беда.  
And yet only his brother Dmitri stood to be the wretched one, wholly and terribly wretched: an unmistakable disaster lay in wait for him.
> Instrumental predicate with «оказаться»: «оказаться» ('to turn out to be') takes its predicate in the instrumental, so «несчастным» (the wretched one) is instrumental, fronted before the verb for emphasis. «лишь» = 'only', restricting the wretchedness to Dmitri alone.
> Object-first word order: «его» before the verb: The accusative object «его» (him) precedes both verb «сторожила» and subject «беда» (disaster) — 'a disaster was lying in wait for him'. Free case-marked word order lets Dostoevsky keep the topic (Dmitri) up front while the news (the lurking disaster) lands last.
> «сторожить» — "to lie in wait, stand guard over": Literally 'to guard/keep watch over'; applied to «беда» (disaster) it personifies the calamity as something stalking Dmitri, lying in ambush. Vivid and slightly sinister.

Оказались тоже и другие люди, до которых всё это касалось и, может быть, гораздо более, чем могло казаться Алеше прежде.  
There turned out to be other people too whom all of this concerned, and perhaps far more than it had seemed to Alyosha before.
> Relative «который» with preposition «до»: «до которых» is the relative pronoun «который» agreeing with «люди» (people) in number but taking the genitive case demanded by «до» — here in the idiom «касаться до» ('to concern'), a slightly archaic alternative to plain «касаться» + genitive.
> Dative experiencer with «казаться»: «казаться» ('to seem') puts the one to whom something seems into the dative: «Алеше» (to Alyosha). This dative-experiencer framing — the person something appears to, with no nominative subject of seeming — pervades Dostoevsky's inner narration.

Выходило что-то даже загадочное.  
Something even enigmatic was emerging.
> Imperfective «выходило» — an unfolding 'it was turning out': The imperfective past «выходило» ('was emerging / turning out') views the realization as an ongoing process rather than a finished fact, matching the tentative «что-то… загадочное» ('something even enigmatic'). «даже» ('even') heightens the strangeness.

Брат Иван сделал к нему шаг, чего так давно желал Алеша, и вот сам он отчего-то чувствует теперь, что его испугал этот шаг сближения.  
His brother Ivan had taken a step toward him, the very thing Alyosha had so long wished for, and now for some reason he himself felt that this step toward closeness had frightened him.
> Neuter relative «чего» summing up a whole clause: «чего» (genitive of «что») here refers back not to a single noun but to the whole idea 'Ivan's taking a step', and stands in the genitive because «желать» ('to wish for') governs the genitive. This clausal «что/чего» is a bookish, compact relative.
> Historic present and indefinite «отчего-то»: Dostoevsky slips from past narration into the present «чувствует» ('feels') for immediacy. «отчего-то» is the indefinite adverb 'for some reason' (with the specific-but-unknown clitic -то), conveying that even Alyosha can't say why the rapprochement frightened him.

А те женщины?  
And those women?
> Topic-shifting «А» and demonstrative «те»: The lone interrogative fragment is launched by «А», the mild contrastive conjunction that signals a turn to a new topic ('And as for…?'). «те» is the far demonstrative 'those', distancing the women already on Alyosha's anxious mind.

Странное дело: давеча он направлялся к Катерине Ивановне в чрезвычайном смущении, теперь же не чувствовал никакого; напротив, спешил к ней сам, словно ожидая найти у ней указания.  
A strange thing: earlier that day he had set off to Katerina Ivanovna's in extraordinary confusion, but now he felt none at all; on the contrary, he was hurrying to her of his own accord, as though expecting to find in her some guidance.
> «давеча… теперь же» contrast and negative concord: The «давеча… теперь же» pairing pivots past against present, with «же» marking the contrast. «не чувствовал никакого» shows negative concord: the negated verb «не чувствовал» plus the negative «никакого» (any at all), two negatives for one meaning.
> Present gerund «ожидая» — 'as though expecting': «ожидая» is the imperfective present gerund (деепричастие) of «ожидать», expressing an action simultaneous with «спешил» ('he was hurrying… expecting'). «словно» ('as though') colours it as Alyosha's own felt impression.
> «у ней» — older variant of «у неё»: «ней» for genitive «неё» is a 19th-century / colloquial variant common in Dostoevsky. The meaning is identical ('at her place, with her'); it simply flavours the prose as period Russian.

А, однако, передать ей поручение было видимо теперь тяжелее, чем давеча: дело о трех тысячах было решено окончательно, и брат Дмитрий, почувствовав теперь себя бесчестным и уже безо всякой надежды, конечно, не остановится более и ни пред каким падением.  
And yet to deliver his message to her was now plainly harder than earlier: the matter of the three thousand had been settled once and for all, and his brother Dmitri, feeling himself now dishonored and already without any hope, would surely not stop at anything more, not before any depth of ruin.
> Infinitive subject with comparative predicate: The whole infinitive phrase «передать ей поручение» ('to deliver the message to her') is the subject; the predicate is the comparative «тяжелее» ('harder'), an impersonal evaluation. «чем давеча» supplies the standard of comparison ('than earlier').
> Past gerund «почувствовав» + reflexive «себя» + instrumental: «почувствовав» is the perfective past gerund ('having felt'), naming a prior cause. «себя» is the reflexive pronoun pointing back to Dmitri, and the predicate «бесчестным» ('dishonored') stands in the instrumental as the felt-state complement.
> Emphatic «ни» — 'not before any depth of ruin': «ни пред каким падением» uses «ни» to intensify the negation of «не остановится» ('will not stop'): not before any fall whatever. The verb keeps «не» while «ни» drives the totality — Russian's obligatory negative concord.

К тому же еще велел передать Катерине Ивановне и только что происшедшую у отца сцену.  
On top of that, he had been told to report to Katerina Ivanovna the scene that had just taken place at their father's as well.
> «велел» + infinitive — 'told (him) to convey': «велеть» ('to order, bid') governs a bare infinitive «передать» with an unexpressed addressee. The object «сцену» (the scene) is linked by «и… также» logic ('the scene as well'). The subject of «велел» is Dmitri, understood from context.
> Past active participle «происшедшую»: «происшедшую» is the past active participle of «произойти» ('to occur'), agreeing with «сцену» in the accusative feminine: 'the scene that had just taken place'. It compresses a «которая»-clause into one modifier — a hallmark of literary density.

Было уже семь часов и смеркалось, когда Алеша пошел к Катерине Ивановне, занимавшей один очень просторный и удобный дом на Большой улице.  
It was already seven o'clock and growing dark when Alyosha set out for Katerina Ivanovna's; she occupied one very spacious and comfortable house on Bolshaya Street.
> Impersonal time and weather: «смеркалось»: «смеркалось» ('it was growing dark') is a subjectless impersonal verb in neuter form — like «холодно» or «темнеет» — naming a state of the world with no nominative subject. «было семь часов» likewise reports the hour impersonally.
> Past active participle «занимавшей»: «занимавшей» is an active participle of «занимать» ('to occupy') agreeing with «Катерине Ивановне» in the dative — 'who occupied a house'. The participle replaces a «которая занимала» clause, packing the description into a single modifier.

Алеша знал, что она живет с двумя тетками.  
Alyosha knew that she lived with two aunts.
> Numeral «двумя» + genitive after «с»: «с двумя тетками» combines the preposition «с» (with) governing the instrumental with the numeral «два/две», which here appears in its own instrumental form «двумя» and pulls «тетками» into the plural — 'with two aunts'.

Одна из них приходилась, впрочем, теткой лишь сестре Агафье Ивановне; это была та бессловесная особа в доме ее отца, которая ухаживала за нею там вместе с сестрой, когда она приехала к ним туда из института.  
One of them, however, was actually only the aunt of her sister Agafya Ivanovna; she was that wordless person in her father's house who had looked after Katerina there together with her sister when she had come to them from the boarding school.
> «приходиться» + instrumental + dative for kinship: «приходиться кому-то кем-то» is the idiom for stating a family relation: the relative «теткой» (aunt) goes in the instrumental, the person related «сестре» in the dative — 'she was aunt to the sister'. A neat triple-case construction.
> Correlative «та… которая» relative clause: The far demonstrative «та» sets up a correlative with the relative «которая» ('that person… who looked after'). «за нею» is «за» + instrumental in the idiom «ухаживать за» ('to care for'), with the older instrumental «нею» for «ней».
> «бессловесная» — "wordless, mute, meek": Built from «без-» (without) + «слово» (word), 'speechless'. Of a person it means silent and unassertive, almost dumb-creature-like — here marking the poor aunt's effaced, voiceless presence in the household.

Другая же тетка была тонная и важная московская барыня, хотя и из бедных.  
The other aunt, on the other hand, was a refined and imposing Moscow lady, though one of impoverished means.
> Concessive «хотя и» — 'though one of the poor': «хотя и» ('although, even though') concedes a point; «из бедных» ('of/among the poor') is «из» + genitive plural denoting membership of a class — a refined lady, but of impoverished gentry.
> «тонная барыня» — a 'genteel, mannered lady': «тонный» (from French ton) means affectedly refined, putting on airs of good tone. «барыня» is the lady of a gentry household, mistress to servants — together a polished but slightly pretentious Moscow grande dame.

Слышно было, что обе они подчинялись во всем Катерине Ивановне и состояли при ней единственно для этикета.  
It was understood that both of them deferred in everything to Katerina Ivanovna and attended on her solely for the sake of decorum.
> Impersonal «слышно было» — 'it was heard/understood': «слышно было» is an impersonal predicative ('it was audible / it was understood') with no nominative subject, introducing a «что»-clause of reported information. Such subjectless predicatives (слышно, видно, известно) are everywhere in Russian narration.
> Reflexive «подчинялись» + dative: «подчиняться» ('to submit/defer to') is a -ся verb taking a dative object «Катерине Ивановне». Paired with «состояли при ней» ('attended on her'), the imperfectives describe a standing, habitual arrangement.
> «для этикета» — "for the sake of decorum": «этикет» (etiquette, propriety) here means keeping up appearances: the aunts live with Katerina purely to lend a young unmarried woman the respectable presence of chaperones, as social convention required.

Катерина же Ивановна подчинялась лишь своей благодетельнице, генеральше, оставшейся за болезнию в Москве и к которой она обязана была посылать по два письма с подробными известиями о себе каждую неделю.  
Katerina Ivanovna, for her part, deferred only to her benefactress, the general's widow, who had stayed behind on account of illness in Moscow and to whom she was obliged to send two letters a week with detailed news of herself.
> Past active participle «оставшейся» + archaic «за болезнию»: «оставшейся» is the past active participle of «остаться» ('to remain'), agreeing with «генеральше» in the dative. «за болезнию» ('on account of illness') uses «за» causally with the archaic instrumental ending «-ию» for modern «болезнью».
> Relative «к которой» and distributive «по два»: «к которой» is «который» governed by «к» (dative). «по два письма» uses distributive «по» to mean 'two letters each (week)' — «по» + the numeral expressing rate or apportionment.

Когда Алеша вошел в переднюю и попросил о себе доложить отворившей ему горничной, в зале, очевидно, уже знали о его прибытии (может быть, заметили его из окна), но только Алеша вдруг услышал какой-то шум, послышались чьи-то бегущие женские шаги, шумящие платья: может быть, выбежали две или три женщины.  
When Alyosha entered the hall and asked the maid who opened the door to announce him, in the drawing room they had evidently already learned of his arrival (perhaps they had noticed him from the window), but Alyosha suddenly heard some sort of noise, the sound of running women's footsteps and rustling dresses: perhaps two or three women had hurried out.
> Past active participle «отворившей» modifying the maid: «отворившей» (past active participle of «отворить», to open) agrees with «горничной» in the dative: 'the maid who had opened to him'. Russian routinely packs such a relative into a pre-noun participle. «доложить о себе» = 'to have oneself announced'.
> Present active participles «бегущие», «шумящие»: «бегущие» (running) and «шумящие» (rustling) are present active participles agreeing with «шаги» and «платья» — capturing the noises as ongoing at that instant. «чьи-то» ('someone's') adds the indefinite -то.
> «горничная» — a housemaid: A «горничная» is a female servant who waits on the household — answers the door, attends the ladies. Her opening the door and announcing the guest is the everyday machinery of a genteel home.

Алеше показалось странным, что он мог произвести своим прибытием такое волнение.  
It struck Alyosha as strange that his arrival could have produced such a commotion.
> Dative experiencer + instrumental predicate «странным»: A double pattern: «Алеше» (dative) is the one to whom it seemed, and «странным» (instrumental) is the predicate of «показалось» ('seemed strange'). 'It struck Alyosha as strange that…' — a quintessentially Russian subjectless framing of perception.
> Instrumental of means: «своим прибытием»: «своим прибытием» ('by his arrival') is the instrumental of means/cause, answering 'by what'. The reflexive possessive «своим» refers back to the clause subject (Alyosha), and «произвести волнение» = 'to produce a stir'.

Его, однако, тотчас же ввели в залу.  
He was, however, shown into the drawing room at once.
> Subjectless third-person plural — agentless 'they': «ввели» is third-person plural with no stated subject, the standard Russian impersonal passive: 'he was shown in' / 'they showed him in', with the doers left vague. The object «его» is fronted as topic. «однако же» = 'however, nonetheless'.

Это была большая комната, уставленная элегантною и обильною мебелью, совсем не по-провинциальному.  
It was a large room, furnished with elegant and abundant furniture, not at all in the provincial manner.
> Past passive participle + instrumental of means: «уставленная» ('set / filled with') is a past passive participle agreeing with «комната»; the furniture «мебелью» that fills it stands in the instrumental of means. Note again the archaic long endings «элегантною», «обильною».
> «по-провинциальному» — 'in provincial style': The «по-…-ому» adverb pattern means 'in the manner of': «по-провинциальному» = 'provincially, in the provincial way'. The denial «совсем не» stresses that this furnishing is metropolitan, not the dowdy taste expected of a country town.

Было много диванов и кушеток, диванчиков, больших и маленьких столиков; были картины на стенах, вазы и лампы на столах, было много цветов, был даже аквариум у окна.  
There were many sofas and settees, small couches, large and little tables; there were pictures on the walls, vases and lamps on the tables, there were many flowers, there was even an aquarium by the window.
> Existential «было/были» with anaphoric repetition: The catalogue runs on the existential verb «быть» in the past, agreeing as singular «было» with «много» + genitive plural, but plural «были» with countable plural nouns, and singular «был» with «аквариум». The drumbeat repetition of 'there was/were' builds the inventory of luxury.
> Diminutives «диванчик», «столик»: «диванчик» (little sofa) and «столик» (little table) carry the diminutive suffix -чик/-ик. Here they denote genuinely smaller pieces, but the clustering of cosy diminutives also colours the room as snug and over-furnished.

От сумерек в комнате было несколько темновато.  
Because of the dusk the room was somewhat dim.
> Impersonal «было темновато» with causal «от»: Another subjectless predicative: «было темновато» ('it was somewhat dim') with no nominative subject, the dimness caused by «от сумерек» ('from the dusk', «от» + genitive). The suffix in «темновато» softens 'dark' to 'a bit dim'.

Алеша разглядел на диване, на котором, очевидно, сейчас сидели, брошенную шелковую мантилью, а на столе пред диваном две недопитые чашки шоколату, бисквиты, хрустальную тарелку с синим изюмом и другую с конфетами.  
Alyosha made out on the sofa, where someone had evidently just been sitting, a tossed-aside silk mantilla, and on the table before the sofa two half-finished cups of chocolate, biscuits, a crystal dish of blue raisins, and another of sweets.
> Relative «на котором» + agentless plural «сидели»: «на котором» is «который» (the sofa) governed by «на» in the prepositional. Inside the relative clause «сидели» is again subjectless third-plural ('someone had just been sitting'), the doer left unspecified.
> Past passive participle «брошенную» as attribute: «брошенную» (from «бросить», to throw) is a past passive participle used attributively in the accusative feminine: 'a tossed-aside mantilla'. The participle conveys the result-state of having been flung down in haste.
> Mantilla, raisins, sweets — the bric-à-brac of refinement: «мантилья» is a light silk cape; «синий изюм» 'blue (dark) raisins' a delicacy; «конфеты» bonbons; «шоколат» the old form of «шоколад». The half-finished chocolate and crystal dishes paint a scene of fashionable, slightly self-indulgent comfort.
> Numeral «две» + genitive singular «чашки» + partitive «шоколату»: After «две», the noun «чашки» takes the genitive singular as numerals 2–4 require. «шоколату» shows the old partitive genitive in «-у» ('some chocolate'), and «недопитые» is a negated past passive participle 'not drunk up, half-finished'.

Кого-то угощали.  
Someone was being entertained.
> Agentless plural again: 'someone was being entertained': A two-word impersonal: accusative «кого-то» ('someone', animate, hence genitive-shaped accusative) plus subjectless third-plural «угощали» ('they were entertaining / someone was being entertained'). Russian's favourite way to report an action whose agent doesn't matter.

Алеша догадался, что попал на гостей, и поморщился.  
Alyosha guessed that he had walked in upon guests, and he winced.
> Chain of perfectives: «догадался… попал… поморщился»: Three perfective past verbs move the moment forward event by event — guessed, had walked in, winced. «попасть на гостей» is the idiom 'to land/blunder upon guests'. Each perfective marks a single completed beat.

Но в тот же миг поднялась портьера и быстрыми, спешными шагами вошла Катерина Ивановна, с радостною восхищенною улыбкой протягивая обе руки Алеше.  
But at that very instant the portière was lifted and, with quick, hurried steps, Katerina Ivanovna came in, holding out both hands to Alyosha with a joyful, rapturous smile.
> Reflexive «поднялась» (middle) + verb-first inversion: «поднялась» is a -ся verb in its middle/intransitive sense ('the portière rose / was lifted', no agent). Both clauses put the verb before the subject, sweeping the eye to the doorway and then to Katerina's entrance.
> Present gerund «протягивая» of attendant manner: «протягивая» (imperfective present gerund of «протягивать», to hold out) describes the manner accompanying «вошла»: she entered, holding out both hands. The instrumental phrase «с… улыбкой» ('with a smile') adds the accompanying expression.
> «портьера» — a heavy door-curtain: A «портьера» (from French portière) is a thick curtain hung over a doorway in a well-appointed room, used instead of or with a door. Lifting it to enter is a touch of bourgeois elegance.

В ту же минуту служанка внесла и поставила на стол две зажженные свечи.  
At the same moment a servant brought in and set on the table two lighted candles.
> Perfective pair + numeral «две зажженные свечи»: Two perfectives «внесла… поставила» ('brought in and set down') give a crisp completed action. «две… свечи» takes the genitive singular «свечи» after «две», and «зажженные» is a past passive participle ('lighted') agreeing with it.

— Слава богу, наконец-то и вы! Я одного только вас и молила у бога весь день! Садитесь.  
"Thank God, here you are at last! I have been begging God for you alone all day! Sit down."
> Emphatic «одного только… и» — 'you alone': The accusative «одного только вас» ('you alone') is reinforced by the focusing particle «и» before the verb ('it is you alone that I prayed for'). «молить кого у бога» = to beg God for someone — note «вас» as the thing prayed for, «у бога» the one petitioned.
> Polite imperative «садитесь»: «садитесь» is the imperative of reflexive «садиться» ('to sit down') with the polite/plural «-те» plus the reflexive «-сь» — the courteous 'do sit down' a hostess addresses to a guest she calls «вы».

Красота Катерины Ивановны еще и прежде поразила Алешу, когда брат Дмитрий, недели три тому назад, привозил его к ней в первый раз представить и познакомить, по собственному чрезвычайному желанию Катерины Ивановны.  
Katerina Ivanovna's beauty had struck Alyosha even before, when his brother Dmitri, some three weeks earlier, had brought him to her for the first time to present and introduce him, at Katerina Ivanovna's own urgent wish.
> Imperfective «привозил» framing two purpose-infinitives: The imperfective «привозил» ('was bringing / had brought, on that occasion') sets the background against which the perfective «поразила» ('struck') lands. The infinitives «представить и познакомить» express purpose ('to present and introduce').
> «по» + dative of cause/initiative: «по… желанию» ('at the wish of') uses «по» with the dative «желанию» to express the prompting reason. The genitive «Катерины Ивановны» marks whose wish it was — an emphatically expressed initiative on her part.

Разговор между ними в то свидание, впрочем, не завязался.  
No conversation between them had got going at that meeting, however.
> Reflexive «завязался» (middle) with negation: «завязаться» ('to get started, strike up', of a conversation) is a -ся verb in its middle sense — the talk fails to take shape of itself. The perfective negated past states flatly that the event never came off. «впрочем» = 'however, though'.

Полагая, что Алеша очень сконфузился, Катерина Ивановна как бы щадила его и всё время проговорила в тот раз с Дмитрием Федоровичем.  
Assuming that Alyosha was very much embarrassed, Katerina Ivanovna had as it were spared him and had spent that whole visit talking with Dmitri Fyodorovich.
> Present gerund «полагая» — 'assuming that…': «полагая» is the imperfective present gerund of «полагать» ('to suppose'), giving the simultaneous mental ground for her behaviour: 'assuming Alyosha was embarrassed, she…'. The gerund shares the main subject, Katerina.
> Perfective «проговорила» — 'spent the whole time talking': The prefix «про-» on perfective «проговорить» gives a delimitative sense: to spend a stretch of time in talking. With «всё время» it means she talked the entire visit through — a completed span. «как бы щадила» ('as it were spared') uses imperfective for the ongoing tact.

Алеша молчал, но многое очень хорошо разглядел.  
Alyosha had said nothing, but he had observed a great deal quite well.
> Imperfective state vs perfective achievement: «молчал» (imperfective) holds the standing state 'he kept silent', while «разглядел» (perfective) marks the completed achievement 'made out / observed'. The pair neatly contrasts Alyosha's outward stillness with his inward taking-in.

Его поразила властность, гордая развязность, самоуверенность надменной девушки.  
He had been struck by the imperiousness, the proud ease, the self-assurance of this haughty girl.
> Object-first inversion before a triple subject: The accusative «его» (him) opens, the verb «поразила» follows, and only then comes the heaped subject «властность… развязность… самоуверенность». Russian's free order lets the experiencer lead while the three abstract nouns of the new impression accumulate as the comment.
> «развязность», «надменный» — easy boldness and hauteur: «развязность» is an over-free, unbuttoned manner (here 'proud ease'); «надменный» means haughty, arrogant. Both pin down the imperious self-possession that first strikes Alyosha in Katerina — qualities he will soon revise.

И всё это было несомненно.  
And all of this was beyond doubt.
> Predicative short form «несомненно»: «несомненно» is the short neuter form ('beyond doubt, undoubted') used predicatively after «было», agreeing with neuter «всё это». Short-form adjectives only ever predicate, lending the statement a clipped, categorical finality.

Алеша чувствовал, что он не преувеличивает.  
Alyosha felt that he was not exaggerating.
> Imperfective present «преувеличивает» in reported thought: The imperfective present «преувеличивает» ('is exaggerating') stands in the «что»-clause as Alyosha's felt judgment, kept in the present from his point of view inside the past narration. «не» negates the verb directly.

Он нашел, что большие черные горящие глаза ее прекрасны и особенно идут к ее бледному, даже несколько бледно-желтому продолговатому лицу.  
He had found that her large, black, burning eyes were beautiful and especially suited to her pale, even somewhat pale-yellow, elongated face.
> Present active participle «горящие» + short-form «прекрасны»: «горящие» ('burning', present active participle of «гореть») sits among the attributes of «глаза», while the predicate «прекрасны» is a short-form adjective ('are beautiful'). Note «ее» placed after the noun-phrase, a literary order.
> «идти к» + dative — 'to suit/become': «идти к чему-то» in the sense 'to suit, become' governs the dative «лицу» ('suit her face'). The verb of motion «идти» here is wholly idiomatic — a fixed expression for things being becoming.

Но в этих глазах, равно как и в очертании прелестных губ, было нечто такое, во что, конечно, можно было брату его влюбиться ужасно, но что, может быть, нельзя было долго любить.  
But in those eyes, as in the outline of her lovely lips, there was something with which his brother might, of course, have fallen terribly in love, but which, perhaps, could not be loved for long.
> Relative «во что / что» governed by the verbs in each clause: The indefinite «нечто такое» ('something of a kind') is taken up twice: «во что» (with «в» + accusative, since «влюбиться в» 'to fall in love with' needs it) and bare accusative «что» (object of «любить'). The relative bends to the case each clause demands.
> Impersonal «можно / нельзя» + infinitive, aspect contrast: The impersonal modals «можно было» ('it was possible') and «нельзя было» ('it was impossible') take infinitives with no subject. The aspect is pointed: perfective «влюбиться» (to fall in love, a single event) versus imperfective «любить» (to go on loving, a process).

Он почти прямо высказал свою мысль Дмитрию, когда тот после визита пристал к нему, умоляя его не утаить, какое он вынес впечатление, повидав его невесту.  
He had said his thought almost outright to Dmitri when, after the visit, his brother had pressed him, imploring him not to conceal what impression he had carried away from seeing his bride.
> Two gerunds: simultaneous «умоляя» and prior «повидав»: «умоляя» (imperfective present gerund, 'imploring') runs alongside «пристал» ('pressed him'), while «повидав» (perfective past gerund of «повидать», 'having seen') marks the prior cause — the impression Alyosha carried away after seeing the bride. Two gerunds in one sentence is classic Dostoevskian texture.
> Negated perfective infinitive «не утаить»: «не утаить» ('not to conceal') is a negated perfective infinitive after «умоляя» — a plea aimed at a single, complete non-act (don't hide it, this once). «пристать к кому-то» = 'to pester, badger someone'.

— Ты будешь с нею счастлив, но, может быть… неспокойно счастлив.  
"You will be happy with her, but perhaps… an uneasy happiness."
> Compound future «будешь… счастлив» with short adjective: «будешь» is the future of «быть» (here as copula, not as future-auxiliary of an infinitive), linking to the short-form adjective «счастлив» ('happy'). The short form, predicate-only, is the natural choice after the future copula.

— То-то брат, такие такими и остаются, они не смиряются пред судьбой. Так ты думаешь, что я не буду ее вечно любить?  
"That's just it, brother — such women stay just as they are; they do not submit before fate. So you think I won't love her forever?"
> Demonstrative play «такие… такими» + instrumental predicate: Dmitri's vehement «такие такими и остаются» ('such [women] stay just such') uses «такой» twice — nominative subject «такие», then instrumental predicate «такими» after «остаются» ('remain'), which like «быть» takes an instrumental complement. The particle «и» emphasizes.
> Reflexive «смиряются» + archaic «пред» + instrumental: «смиряться» ('to humble oneself, submit') is a -ся verb; «пред судьбой» is the bookish «пред» (for «перед») + instrumental, 'before fate'. The negated imperfective states a permanent trait: such women never bow to fate.
> «То-то» — "that's just it / exactly": A colloquial exclamatory particle of confirmation or rueful agreement: 'that's just the point', 'precisely'. Here it opens Dmitri's reply with eager seizing-on of Alyosha's words.

— Нет, может быть, ты будешь ее вечно любить, но, может быть, не будешь с нею всегда счастлив…  
"No, perhaps you will love her forever, but perhaps you won't always be happy with her…"
> Compound future of an imperfective vs of the copula: Two futures with «быть»: «будешь… любить» is the compound (imperfective) future built on the infinitive «любить» ('will go on loving'); «не будешь… счастлив» is «быть» as copula plus short adjective ('won't be happy'). The repeated «может быть» ('perhaps') hedges both.

Алеша произнес тогда свое мнение, краснея и досадуя на себя, что, поддавшись просьбам брата, высказал такие «глупые» мысли.  
Alyosha had given his opinion then, blushing and vexed with himself that, having yielded to his brother's entreaties, he had voiced such "foolish" thoughts.
> Paired present gerunds «краснея и досадуя»: Two imperfective present gerunds, «краснея» (blushing) and «досадуя» (vexing himself), give the simultaneous manner of «произнес» ('uttered'). «досадовать на себя» = 'to be annoyed at oneself', with the reflexive «себя».
> Past gerund «поддавшись» + dative object: «поддавшись» is the perfective past gerund of reflexive «поддаться» ('to give in to'), expressing the prior act ('having yielded'). It governs the dative «просьбам» ('to the entreaties'), the case «поддаться» requires.

Потому что ему самому его мнение показалось ужасно как глупым тотчас же, как он его высказал.  
Because his opinion had struck him himself as dreadfully foolish the moment he had voiced it.
> Dative experiencer «ему самому» + instrumental «глупым»: «ему» (dative) is the one to whom it seemed, intensified by «самому» ('to himself, of all people'); «глупым» is the instrumental predicate of «показалось». 'His opinion struck even him as foolish.' The reflexive-emphatic «сам» agrees in dative.
> Intensifier «ужасно как» — 'dreadfully': «ужасно как» is a colloquial doubling for 'awfully, terribly so', heaping intensity onto «глупым». The bookish «потому что» opening the sentence subordinates it as the reason.

Да и стыдно стало ему высказывать так властно мнение о женщине.  
And besides, he had felt ashamed to pronounce judgment on a woman so authoritatively.
> Dative-subject «стыдно стало ему» + imperfective infinitive: A textbook dative-experiencer: «стыдно» (the impersonal predicative 'ashamed'), «стало» ('became'), and the experiencer «ему» in the dative — 'he came to feel ashamed'. The imperfective infinitive «высказывать» frames the judging as an activity. «Да и» = 'and besides'.

Тем с большим изумлением почувствовал он теперь при первом взгляде на выбежавшую к нему Катерину Ивановну, что, может быть, тогда он очень ошибся.  
It was with all the greater astonishment, then, that he felt now, at his first glance at Katerina Ivanovna as she hurried out to him, that perhaps he had been very much mistaken back then.
> Correlative «тем… что» of degree: «тем с большим изумлением» ('with all the greater astonishment') is the «тем + comparative» of proportion, answered by the «что»-clause stating the content of the realization. The instrumental «изумлением» expresses manner ('with astonishment').
> Past active participle «выбежавшую» (prefixed motion): «выбежавшую» is the past active participle of «выбежать» ('to run out'), a prefixed motion verb, agreeing with «Катерину Ивановну» in the accusative: 'Katerina Ivanovna as she ran out to him'. The prefix «вы-» adds the direction 'out'.

В этот раз лицо ее сияло неподдельною простодушною добротой, прямою и пылкою искренностью.  
This time her face shone with an unfeigned, simple-hearted kindness, with a frank and ardent sincerity.
> Instrumental of manner with «сияло»: «сиять» ('to shine, beam') takes the instrumental to say what the face shone with: «добротой… искренностью» ('with kindness… sincerity'). Again the archaic long endings «-ою» («неподдельною», «прямою»).
> «неподдельный», «простодушный» — unfeigned, guileless: «неподдельный» is 'genuine, not counterfeit'; «простодушный» 'simple-hearted, open'. Together they mark the moral reversal: the haughtiness Alyosha first saw gives way to an artless goodness.

Изо всей прежней «гордости и надменности», столь поразивших тогда Алешу, замечалась теперь лишь одна смелая, благородная энергия и какая-то ясная, могучая вера в себя.  
Of all the former "pride and haughtiness" that had so struck Alyosha at the time, only one thing was now noticeable: a bold, noble energy and a kind of clear, mighty faith in herself.
> Reflexive-passive «замечалась» + fronted genitive: «замечалась» is the imperfective reflexive passive of «замечать» ('was [being] noticed'), agreeing with «энергия». The phrase «изо всей прежней гордости» ('out of all the former pride', «из» → «изо» before a cluster) is fronted, the new subject delayed.
> Past active participle «поразивших» + bookish «столь»: «поразивших» (past active participle of «поразить», to strike) agrees with «гордости и надменности» in the genitive plural: 'which had so struck Alyosha'. «столь» is the bookish 'so/to such a degree', more elevated than «так».

Алеша понял с первого взгляда на нее, с первых слов, что весь трагизм ее положения относительно столь любимого ею человека для нее вовсе не тайна, что она, может быть, уже знает всё, решительно всё.  
Alyosha understood, from his first glance at her, from her first words, that the whole tragedy of her position with regard to the man she so loved was not in the least a secret to her, that she perhaps already knew everything, decidedly everything.
> Present passive participle «любимого» + instrumental agent: «любимого» is the rare bookish present passive participle of «любить» ('beloved, the one loved'), agreeing with «человека» in the genitive; the agent «ею» ('by her') stands in the instrumental — 'the man so loved by her'. A markedly literary construction.
> Zero-copula present + genitive of negation flavour: In the present, Russian uses no 'is': «трагизм… не тайна» ('the tragedy… is not a secret'), with «для нее» ('to/for her') in the genitive after «для». «вовсе не» intensifies the negation ('not in the least').

И однако же, несмотря на то, было столько света в лице ее, столько веры в будущее.  
And yet, in spite of that, there was so much light in her face, so much faith in the future.
> «столько» + genitive in an existential: «столько» ('so much') governs the genitive «света… веры» in the existential «было столько…» ('there was so much light… faith'). The quantifier-plus-genitive pattern, with singular «было», builds the anaphoric crescendo.
> Concessive «несмотря на то» — 'in spite of that': «несмотря на» ('despite', literally 'not looking at') governs the accusative «то» ('that'), a frozen concessive idiom. With «И однако же» ('and yet, nonetheless') it doubly underscores the contrast.

Алеша почувствовал себя пред нею вдруг серьезно и умышленно виноватым.  
Alyosha suddenly felt himself, before her, seriously and deliberately to blame.
> «почувствовать себя» + instrumental predicate: «почувствовать себя кем-то/каким-то» ('to feel oneself [to be] …') takes the reflexive «себя» plus an instrumental predicate «виноватым» ('to blame, guilty'). The instrumental frames the guilt as a felt, occasioned state.

Он был побежден и привлечен сразу.  
He was conquered and drawn to her at once.
> Periphrastic passive: «был» + short passive participles: «был побежден и привлечен» is the analytic passive — past copula «был» plus short-form past passive participles ('was conquered and drawn'). The short form is exactly the predicate-only shape this construction requires; the agent (Katerina) is left unnamed.

Кроме всего этого, он заметил с первых же слов ее, что она в каком-то сильном возбуждении, может быть очень в ней необычайном, — возбуждении, похожем почти даже на какой-то восторг.  
Besides all this, he noticed from her very first words that she was in some kind of intense excitement, perhaps quite uncharacteristic of her — an excitement bordering almost even on a kind of rapture.
> Zero-copula present in a «что»-clause + indefinite «каком-то»: Inside the «что»-clause the present 'is' is unexpressed: «она в… возбуждении» ('she [is] in… excitement'), a bare prepositional-phrase predicate. «каком-то» ('some kind of', with -то) leaves the excitement vaguely specified.
> «похожий на» + accusative: «похожий на что-то» ('resembling, like') governs the accusative «какой-то… восторг» ('a kind of rapture'). The adjective «похожем» agrees with «возбуждении» in the prepositional, modifying it after the dash.

— Я потому так ждала вас, что от вас от одного могу теперь узнать всю правду — ни от кого больше!  
"I have been waiting for you so because it is from you alone that I can now learn the whole truth — from no one else!"
> Emphatic «от вас от одного» and «ни от кого»: The doubled preposition «от вас от одного» ('from you, from you alone') is an emphatic repetition for stress. Its negative foil «ни от кого больше» ('from no one else') uses «ни» with «от» + genitive — negative concord with the earlier positive claim implied.
> Correlative «потому… что» of cause: «потому… что» splits the causal conjunction around the verb: «потому так ждала… что» ('the reason I waited so… is that'). Foregrounding «потому» heightens the explanatory emphasis. «ждала» is imperfective — an ongoing, drawn-out waiting.

— Я пришел… — пробормотал Алеша, путаясь, — я… он послал меня…  
"I have come…" Alyosha muttered, faltering, "I… he sent me…"
> Present gerund «путаясь» — 'getting muddled': «путаясь» is the imperfective present gerund of reflexive «путаться» ('to get confused, stumble over words'), describing the manner of «пробормотал» ('muttered'). The gerund renders Alyosha's faltering simultaneously with his speech.

— А, он послал вас, ну так я и предчувствовала. Теперь всё знаю, всё! — воскликнула Катерина Ивановна с засверкавшими вдруг глазами.  
"Ah, he sent you — well, that is just what I had a presentiment of. Now I know everything, everything!" cried Katerina Ivanovna, her eyes suddenly flashing.
> Confirming «так… и» — 'just as I sensed': The «так… и» frame with the focusing particle «и» confirms an expectation: 'that is just what I had a presentiment of'. The imperfective «предчувствовала» views the foreboding as a lingering state, not a point-event.
> Past active participle «засверкавшими» as instrumental modifier: «засверкавшими» (past active participle of «засверкать», 'to begin to flash', with inceptive «за-») agrees with «глазами» in the instrumental after «с» ('with eyes that had suddenly flashed'). The participle compresses a whole event into one descriptive phrase.

— Постойте, Алексей Федорович, я вам заранее скажу, зачем я вас так ожидала.  
"Wait, Alexei Fyodorovich, let me tell you in advance why I have been waiting for you so.
> Polite imperative «постойте» + full name-and-patronymic: «постойте» is the perfective imperative of «постоять» here meaning 'wait, hold on', with polite «-те». Her addressing Alyosha by the full «Алексей Федорович» (first name + patronymic) is the respectful, formal mode of address.
> Perfective future «скажу» + embedded «зачем»-question: «скажу» is the simple (perfective) future of «сказать» ('I will tell'), with the dative addressee «вам». It introduces an indirect question with «зачем» ('why, to what end I waited for you so'). «ожидала» imperfective again stresses the prolonged waiting.

Видите, я, может быть, гораздо более знаю, чем даже вы сами; мне не известий от вас нужно.  
You see, I perhaps know far more than even you yourselves do; it is not news from you that I need.
> Comparative «более» + «чем»: «Гораздо более» is the bookish analytic comparative — «более» ('more') intensified by «гораздо» ('far, by much') — with the standard of comparison introduced by «чем». A speaker might prefer the synthetic «гораздо больше»; the periphrastic «более» here lends Katerina's protest a shade of formality.
> Genitive of negation: «не известий»: Under the negated «не… нужно» the object «известия» (news, reports) shifts from nominative/accusative to the genitive plural «известий» — the genitive of negation. The fronting of «мне» and the negated noun packs the contrast: it is not news she wants.
> Intensifier «сами» — 'you yourselves': «Сам/сама/сами» is the emphatic intensifier 'oneself', agreeing with its pronoun; «вы сами» = 'you yourselves'. Distinct from the reflexive «себя», it underscores the very person, sharpening Katerina's claim to know more than Alyosha does.

Мне вот что от вас нужно: мне надо знать ваше собственное, личное последнее впечатление о нем, мне нужно, чтобы вы мне рассказали в самом прямом, неприкрашенном, в грубом даже (о, во сколько хотите грубом!) виде — как вы сами смотрите на него сейчас и на его положение после вашей с ним встречи сегодня?  
Here is what I need from you: I must know your own, personal, latest impression of him; I need you to tell me in the most direct, unvarnished, even coarse terms (oh, as coarse as you like!) — how you yourself look upon him now and upon his situation after your meeting with him today.
> Dative-experiencer «мне надо / нужно»: Twice the sentence runs impersonally: the dative «мне» plus «надо»/«нужно» frames need with no nominative subject ('I must know', 'I need that…'). This dative-first construction is the native Russian way of voicing compulsion and want, and Dostoevsky leans on it for inner urgency.
> «чтобы» + past-form verb: After «нужно», the willed outcome is expressed by «чтобы» plus the past-tense form «рассказали» — the irrealis construction (чтобы = что + бы). It does not report a fact but demands one: 'I need that you tell me'.
> «неприкрашенный» — unvarnished: A past passive participle turned adjective from «прикрасить» (to embellish, prettify) with the negating «не-»: 'not embellished, unvarnished'. Stacked with «прямом» and «грубом», it builds Katerina's plea for the unsoftened truth.
> «во сколько хотите» — 'as much as you like': An idiomatic free-relative concession: literally 'into however much you wish coarse', i.e. 'as coarse as you please'. The embedded «хотите» (2nd-pl) addresses Alyosha directly, an aside breaking the syntactic flow.

Это будет, может быть, лучше, чем если б я сама, к которой он не хочет больше ходить, объяснилась с ним лично.  
That will perhaps be better than if I myself, whom he no longer wishes to visit, were to have it out with him in person.
> Conditional «если б… объяснилась»: «Если б» (= «если бы») with the past-form perfective «объяснилась» builds a counterfactual: 'than if I myself were to have it out with him'. The mobile particle «бы», clipped to «б», marks the whole clause as hypothetical and unrealized.
> Relative «к которой» + multidirectional «ходить»: The relative «который» here takes the dative «к которой» ('to whom') as governed by «ходить к» (to go visiting). «Ходить» is the multidirectional motion verb — repeated, habitual visits — so «не хочет больше ходить» = 'no longer wishes to keep coming round'.
> «объясниться» — to have it out: The reflexive «объясниться» (from «объяснить», to explain) means to talk something through, settle a matter, or 'have it out' with someone — often emotionally charged, a frank reckoning between two people. The «-ся» gives it its reciprocal, person-to-person sense.

Поняли вы, чего я от вас хочу?  
Have you understood what I want from you?
> Inverted question + genitive «чего»: Verb-first «Поняли вы…?» fronts the perfective past for an insistent yes/no question. The embedded object is the genitive «чего» (not «что»), because «хотеть» governs the genitive of an indefinite thing wished for — 'what I want of you'.

Теперь с чем же он вас послал ко мне (я так и знала, что он вас пошлет!) — говорите просто, самое последнее слово говорите!..  
Now, with what message did he send you to me (I just knew he would send you!) — speak plainly, give me his very last word!.."
> Emphatic «так и» + perfective future «пошлет»: «Так и знала» — 'I just knew it (all along)' — uses «так и» to assert that the event matched her expectation exactly. «Пошлет» is the perfective present-form = simple future ('he would send'), here reported within her past certainty.
> Particle «же» insisting: The modal particle «же» adds insistent pressure to the question — 'with what, then, did he send you?' — conveying her impatience. English carries this only with stress or 'on earth'; Russian writes it into the sentence.
> Imperative «говорите», repeated for urgency: The polite/plural imperative «говорите» frames both commands; the repetition with the object fronted in the second ('the very last word — speak it!') is rhetorical insistence, the doubled imperative dramatizing her need.

— Он приказал вам… кланяться, и что больше не придет никогда… а вам кланяться.  
"He bade me… send his regards, and say that he will never come again… yes, send his regards to you."
> «приказать» + dative + infinitive: «Приказать» (to order, bid) takes a dative addressee in general; but here «вам» is the dative object of «кланяться» (кланяться кому = to send regards TO someone = Katerina), not the one ordered — the person bidden (Alyosha) is unnamed: '[Dmitri] ordered [me] to send regards to you (вам)'. This dative-plus-infinitive frame is the standard pattern for verbs of ordering and asking.

— Кланяться? Он так и сказал, так и выразился?  
"His regards? That is just how he put it, that is the very word he used?"
> «так и» — 'just so, exactly thus': Repeated «так и» insists on the literal exactness of the wording: 'is that just how he said it, just how he put it?'. Katerina's whole hope rides on the precise word, so she demands confirmation that it was verbatim.
> «выразиться» — to put it, phrase it: The reflexive «выразиться» (from «выразить», to express) means 'to express oneself, to put something a certain way'. Paired with «сказал», it narrows from 'said' to 'chose those very words' — the distinction Katerina is fixated on.

— Да.  
"Yes."

— Мельком, может быть, нечаянно, ошибся в слове, не то слово поставил, какое надо?  
"In passing, perhaps, by accident — slipped on the word, put down the wrong word, not the one he meant?"
> «не то… какое надо» — 'not the word that was needed': «Не то слово» ('not that word') is picked up by the relative «какое надо» ('which was needed'), with «какое» agreeing in gender/number with «слово». The clipped «какое надо» leaves «было/поставить» elided — telegraphic, anxious speech.
> «мельком» — in passing, fleetingly: An adverb meaning 'in passing, with a glance, casually' — that the word slipped out unweighed. Katerina floats it as an exonerating possibility: perhaps Dmitri did not mean «кланяться» as a deliberate blow.

— Нет, он велел именно, чтоб я передал это слово: «кланяться». Просил раза три, чтоб я не забыл передать.  
"No, he charged me precisely to pass on this very word: 'his regards.' He asked some three times that I not forget to deliver it."
> «велеть» + «чтоб» + past form: «Велеть» (to bid, order) governs «чтоб» (= чтобы) with the past-form verb «передал»: 'he charged that I pass on this word'. The «чтобы»-clause expresses the willed content of the command, not a fact.
> «раза три» — approximate number, genitive singular: Inverting the numeral after the noun («раза три» rather than «три раза») signals approximation — 'some three times'. With «два/три/четыре» the counted noun stands in the genitive singular, hence «раза»; «чтоб… не забыл» again gives the negated purpose.

Катерина Ивановна вспыхнула.  
Katerina Ivanovna flushed.
> «вспыхнуть» — to flush, flare up: A perfective verb meaning literally 'to blaze up, catch fire', used of a sudden flush of the face or a flare of feeling. Of Katerina it captures the instantaneous rush of blood and emotion — a single completed flare, marked by the perfective.

— Помогите мне теперь, Алексей Федорович, теперь-то мне и нужна ваша помощь: я вам скажу мою мысль, а вы мне только скажите на нее, верно или нет я думаю.  
"Help me now, Alexei Fyodorovich — now is just when I need your help: I will tell you my thought, and you have only to tell me whether I am thinking rightly or not.
> Imperative «помогите» + dative: «Помочь» (to help) governs the dative of the person helped, so the polite imperative «помогите» pairs with «мне»: 'help me'. The dative object is built into the verb's government, not optional.
> Emphatic clitic «-то» + «и»: The clitic «-то» on «теперь» singles out the moment — 'now, precisely now' — and the following «и» reinforces it ('it is just now that I need your help'). This is the topic-emphasizing «-то», distinct from the indefinite «кто-то».
> Embedded yes/no with «или нет»: An indirect question — 'whether I am thinking rightly or not' — rendered with the adverb «верно» and the bare «или нет». Russian could mark it with «ли», but the colloquial «верно или нет» keeps the appeal direct and pleading.

Слушайте, если б он велел мне кланяться мельком, не настаивая на передаче слова, не подчеркивая слова, то это было бы всё… Тут был бы конец!  
Listen: if he had bidden me his regards in passing, without insisting on the delivery of the word, without underscoring the word, then that would have been everything… That would have been the end!
> Full counterfactual: «если б… бы»: A classic past counterfactual: protasis «если б он велел» and apodosis «это было бы всё», both carrying «бы». The doubled particle frames an unreal scenario she rejects — 'had he bidden it carelessly, that would have been the end'.
> Negated imperfective gerunds «настаивая», «подчеркивая»: Two present (imperfective) деепричастия in «-я», negated by «не», describe attendant manner — 'without insisting on… without underscoring…'. They share the subject «он» and compress accompanying circumstance into the main clause, a hallmark of literary syntax.
> «Тут был бы конец» — 'that would have been the end': «Тут» here is not spatial 'here' but the discourse 'at that point, in that case'. With «был бы» it closes the counterfactual: in the careless scenario, all hope would be over.

Но если он особенно настаивал на этом слове, если особенно поручал вам не забыть передать мне этот поклон, — то, стало быть, он был в возбуждении, вне себя, может быть?  
But if he insisted so particularly on this word, if he so particularly charged you not to forget to convey this bow to me — then it must mean he was in a state of agitation, beside himself, perhaps?
> «стало быть» — 'therefore, it follows': «Стало быть» is a fossilized inferential phrase ('consequently, it must mean'), drawing the conclusion of the conditional set up by «если». It belongs to reasoning, deductive speech — Katerina building her case logically out of the single word «кланяться».
> Stacked infinitives + dative «мне»: «Поручал» (entrusted, charged) is followed by the negated infinitive «не забыть» and a further infinitive «передать», with the dative «мне» as recipient: 'charged you not to forget to convey to me'. Russian readily chains infinitives under one governing verb.
> «вне себя» — beside oneself: An idiom, literally 'outside oneself', meaning overcome by emotion — beside oneself with agitation. Built on the genitive reflexive «себя» governed by «вне» (outside, + genitive), it intensifies «в возбуждении».

Решился и решения своего испугался!  
He made his decision and took fright at his own decision!
> Reflexive «решиться» + «испугаться» governing genitive: Two «-ся» verbs drive the line: «решился» ('he resolved', middle sense of decision) and «испугался», which governs the genitive of what one fears — «решения своего» ('took fright at his own decision'). The reflexive possessive «своего» points the decision back to the subject.

Не ушел от меня твердым шагом, а полетел с горы.  
He did not walk away from me with a firm step, but went tumbling down a hill.
> Contrastive «а» pairing prefixed motion verbs: The contrastive conjunction «а» opposes two prefixed perfective motion verbs: «ушел» ('walked away', у- = away) versus «полетел» ('went flying/tumbling', по- inceptive on «лететь'). The figure paints Dmitri not leaving steadily but plunging headlong.
> «полететь с горы» — to go tumbling down a hill: An expressive figure: literally 'flew down from the mountain', i.e. plunged headlong, lost all footing. Against «твердым шагом» ('with a firm step') it dramatizes Dmitri's loss of control after his decision.

Подчеркивание этого слова может означать одну браваду…  
The underscoring of that word may signify nothing but bravado…"
> «бравада» — bravado: A French loan («bravade») meaning a show of reckless defiance masking fear or weakness. Katerina reads Dmitri's emphatic «кланяться» as exactly this — not finality but a desperate flourish, which keeps her hope alive.
> Verbal noun «подчеркивание»: «Подчеркивание» is a deverbal noun in «-ние» ('the underscoring'), formed from the imperfective «подчёркивать» and serving as the abstract subject of «может означать». Such nominalizations are a bookish way to make an action the topic of a sentence.

— Так, так! — горячо подтвердил Алеша, — мне самому так теперь кажется.  
"Just so, just so!" Alyosha eagerly confirmed. "It seems so to me myself now."
> Dative-experiencer «мне… кажется» + intensifier «самому»: «Кажется» ('it seems') is impersonal, taking the dative experiencer «мне»; the intensifier «самому» (dative of «сам») agrees with it — 'it seems so to me myself'. Alyosha's whole assent is framed in the dative-subject mold of inner impression.
> «горячо» — warmly, eagerly: The adverb «горячо» (from «горячий», hot) means 'warmly, ardently, eagerly' of speech or feeling. Dostoevsky tags Alyosha's «подтвердил» with it to mark how readily he wants to share Katerina's hope.

— А коли так, то он еще не погиб! Он только в отчаянии, но я еще могу спасти его.  
"And if so, then he is not yet lost! He is only in despair, but I can still save him.
> «коли» — archaic/colloquial 'if': «Коли» is a folksy, somewhat archaic equivalent of «если» ('if'), paired here with the correlative «то' ('then'). Its homely register colors Katerina's reasoning; «погиб» is the perfective past of «погибнуть» (to perish), 'he is not yet lost'.

Стойте: не передавал ли он вам что-нибудь о деньгах, о трех тысячах?  
Wait: did he not pass on anything to you about money, about the three thousand?"
> Imperative «Стойте» — 'Wait, stop': «Стойте» is the polite/plural imperative of «стоять», used interjectionally to halt the conversation: 'wait, hold on'. A small command that punctuates her racing train of thought.
> Negative question with «ли» + indefinite «что-нибудь»: The interrogative particle «ли» follows the fronted negated verb to form a tentative yes/no question ('did he not perhaps pass on…?'). «Что-нибудь» is the non-specific indefinite ('anything at all'), fitting her uncertainty about whether any message exists.

— Не только говорил, но это, может быть, всего сильнее убивало его.  
"He not only spoke of it, but it was perhaps the thing that was destroying him most of all.
> Correlative «не только… но» + imperfective «убивало»: «Не только… но» ('not only… but') links the two clauses; the imperfective past «убивало» ('was killing, destroying') views the torment as an ongoing process rather than a finished act — the durative force of the imperfective.

Он говорил, что лишен теперь чести и что теперь уже всё равно, — с жаром ответил Алеша, чувствуя всем сердцем своим, как надежда вливается в его сердце и что в самом деле, может быть, есть выход и спасение для его брата.  
He said that he was now stripped of his honor and that now nothing mattered any longer," Alyosha answered warmly, feeling with all his heart how hope was flowing into his own heart and how there might in fact be a way out and salvation for his brother.
> Short passive participle «лишен» + genitive: «Лишён» is the short-form past passive participle of «лишить» (to deprive), predicative and agreeing with the masculine subject; «лишить» governs the genitive of what is taken away — «чести» ('of honor'). 'He is deprived of honor' — a bookish, resultative construction.
> Imperfective gerund «чувствуя»: The present деепричастие «чувствуя» ('feeling') sets Alyosha's simultaneous inner state alongside «ответил», sharing its subject. It opens a long participial tail typical of Dostoevsky's introspective narration, with «вливается» imperfective for the ongoing inflow of hope.
> «всё равно» — 'it makes no difference': An idiomatic predicate, literally 'all (is) equal', meaning 'it's all the same, nothing matters'. Reinforced by «уже» ('already, now'), it voices Dmitri's reported despair: stripped of honor, he feels indifferent to everything.

— Но разве вы… про эти деньги знаете? — прибавил он и вдруг осекся.  
"But do you really… know about this money?" he added, and suddenly broke off.
> Particle «разве» — incredulous question: «Разве» introduces a question tinged with surprise or disbelief: 'do you really…?'. It expects that the answer might upset the speaker's assumptions — Alyosha is startled that Katerina already knows about the money.
> «осечься» — to break off, falter: The perfective reflexive «осечься» means to stop short in mid-speech, to falter (originally of a gun misfiring). It marks Alyosha catching himself, realizing he has said too much — a single, abrupt check, hence the perfective.

— Давно знаю, и знаю наверно.  
"I have known for a long time, and I know it for certain.
> «наверно» — for certain (19th-c. sense): In Dostoevsky's usage «наверно» means 'for certain, beyond doubt', not the modern hedging 'probably'. «Знаю наверно» = 'I know it for sure' — Katerina asserting solid, verified knowledge.

Я в Москве телеграммой спрашивала и давно знаю, что деньги не получены.  
I inquired by telegram in Moscow and have long known that the money was not received.
> Instrumental of means: «телеграммой»: «Телеграммой» is the instrumental of «телеграмма», naming the means of the action — 'inquired by telegram'. The bare instrumental for instrument/means needs no preposition.
> Short passive participle «не получены»: «Получены» is the short-form past passive participle of «получить» (to receive), agreeing with plural «деньги», negated: 'the money was not received'. The быть-copula is zero in the present, so the bare short participle states the result.

Он деньги не послал, но я молчала.  
He did not send the money, but I kept silent.
> Word order + aspect contrast: Topicalizing «деньги» before the negated «не послал» foregrounds the money as the issue. The aspect splits the two clauses: perfective «послал» (a single completed non-act) against imperfective «молчала» (her sustained silence over time).

В последнюю неделю я узнала, как ему были и еще нужны деньги…  
This past week I learned how he was in still further need of money…
> Dative «ему» + «нужны» (predicate need): Need is again framed impersonally: the dative «ему» with «нужны» agreeing in plural with «деньги» — 'how money was needed by him'. The intercalated «и еще» ('still more, in addition') and the past «были» place the need firmly in past time.

Я поставила во всем этом одну только цель: чтоб он знал, к кому воротиться и кто его самый верный друг.  
In all this I set myself but one aim: that he should know to whom to turn and who is his truest friend.
> Purpose «чтоб» + embedded «к кому воротиться»: «Чтоб» with past-form «знал» states her single aim; embedded inside is the indirect question «к кому воротиться» ('to whom to return'), an interrogative pronoun «кому» in the dative governed by «к», plus a bare infinitive of deliberation.
> «воротиться» — to return (archaic/colloquial): «Воротиться» is an older, more colloquial synonym of «вернуться» (to come back). It carries a homelier, slightly folk register than the neutral «вернуться», common in 19th-century prose.

Нет, он не хочет верить, что я ему самый верный друг, не захотел узнать меня, он смотрит на меня только как на женщину.  
No, he will not believe that I am his truest friend, he has refused to know me, he looks upon me only as a woman.
> «смотреть на… как на…» — 'to regard as': The idiom «смотреть на X как на Y» means 'to look upon / regard X as Y', with both nouns in the accusative after «на». Here 'he looks upon me only as a woman' — the wound of being reduced from confidante to mere object of passion.
> Aspect pair «не хочет / не захотел»: The same root in two aspects: imperfective present «хочет» (his ongoing refusal to believe) and perfective past «захотел» ('did not come to want', a decisive past refusal to know her). The pairing tracks a settled disposition hardening into an act.

Меня всю неделю мучила страшная забота: как бы сделать, чтоб он не постыдился предо мной этой растраты трех тысяч?  
All week a terrible worry has tormented me: how to manage things so that he would not be ashamed before me of having squandered the three thousand?
> Object-first word order: «Меня… мучила забота»: The accusative object «меня» opens the sentence while the nominative subject «забота» ('worry') comes last — topic-comment order that foregrounds the sufferer and saves the cause for the stressed close. The case endings keep subject and object unambiguous despite the inversion.
> «как бы… чтоб» — deliberative with «бы»: «Как бы сделать» ('how to manage') uses «бы» with an infinitive to muse over a means, and «чтоб он не постыдился» gives the negated purpose with a past-form verb. The reflexive «постыдиться» governs the genitive «этой растраты» ('be ashamed of this squandering').
> «растрата» — squandering, embezzlement: «Растрата» (from «растратить», to fritter/embezzle away) denotes the wasteful or illicit spending of money entrusted to one — close to 'misappropriation'. The word quietly frames Dmitri's use of Katerina's three thousand as something near a breach of trust.

То есть пусть стыдится и всех и себя самого, но пусть меня не стыдится.  
That is, let him be ashamed before everyone and before himself, but let him not be ashamed before me.
> Third-person imperative with «пусть»: «Пусть» plus a 3rd-person present forms the jussive — 'let him be ashamed'. Repeated and then negated («пусть меня не стыдится»), it draws Katerina's anguished line: let him feel shame before all but her. «Стыдиться» governs the genitive of what shames.

Ведь богу он говорит же всё, не стыдясь.  
After all, to God he tells everything without shame.
> Particles «ведь» and «же» + gerund «не стыдясь»: «Ведь» appeals to shared truth ('after all, you know') and «же» insists, stacking emphasis. The negated imperfective gerund «не стыдясь» ('without shame') adds attendant manner. «Богу» is dative, governed by «говорить» ('he tells God everything').

Зачем же не знает до сих пор, сколько я могу для него вынести?  
Why does he still not know how much I can bear for his sake?
> Embedded «сколько… вынести»: «Сколько» ('how much') opens an indirect question object of «не знает»; «вынести» is the perfective infinitive 'to bear, endure (to the end)'. «Для него» ('for his sake') uses «для» + genitive. The whole asks why Dmitri cannot gauge her capacity for sacrifice.

Зачем, зачем не знает меня, как он смеет не знать меня после всего, что было?  
Why, why does he not know me — how dare he not know me, after all that has passed?
> «сметь» + negated infinitive: «Смеет» (from «сметь», to dare) governs the infinitive «не знать»: 'how dare he not know me'. The negation falls on the infinitive, not «сметь» — she is not asking how he dares to know, but how he dares persist in not knowing her.
> «после всего, что было» + correlative: «После» governs the genitive «всего» ('after all'), modified by the relative «что было» ('that has been/passed'). The neuter «что» picks up the indefinite «всё» — a compact, weighted phrase for the whole shared history between them.

Я хочу его спасти навеки.  
I want to save him forever.
> «навеки» — forever, for all ages: An elevated adverb 'forever, eternally', built on «век» (age, century) — loftier than the plain «навсегда». Its near-liturgical ring suits Katerina's swelling vow to save Dmitri for all time.

Пусть он забудет меня как свою невесту!  
Let him forget me as his bride!
> Jussive «пусть… забудет» + «как» + accusative: «Пусть» plus perfective «забудет» ('let him forget') forms the third-person command, and «как свою невесту» ('as his bride') keeps the accusative after «как». The reflexive possessive «свою» ties 'bride' back to the subject — let him forget that she is his betrothed.

И вот он боится предо мной за честь свою!  
And yet here he is, afraid before me for his honor!
> «бояться» + «за» (accusative) + archaic «предо»: «Бояться за» + accusative means to fear for something — «за честь свою» ('for his honor'). «Предо мной» uses the archaic/euphonic variant of «передо» ('before me'), and «свою» again reflexively binds the honor to its possessor.

Ведь вам же, Алексей Федорович, он не побоялся открыться?  
Why, to you, Alexei Fyodorovich, he was not afraid to open himself?
> Double particle «ведь… же» + reflexive «открыться»: «Ведь» and «же» together press the appeal hard ('why, to you he wasn't afraid…'). «Открыться» is the reflexive 'to open oneself, confide'; «не побоялся» (perfective 'was not afraid') governs the infinitive. The dative «вам» fronted with «же» throws the contrast onto Alyosha.

Отчего я до сих пор не заслужила того же?  
Why have I not until now deserved as much?"
> «отчего» + genitive object «того же»: «Отчего» ('why, for what reason') opens the rhetorical question; «заслужить» here governs the genitive «того же» ('that same thing') under negation — 'why have I not deserved as much?'. «До сих пор» = 'up to now, still'.

Последние слова она произнесла в слезах; слезы брызнули из ее глаз.  
She spoke the last words in tears; the tears gushed from her eyes.
> Perfective «брызнули» — sudden onset: «Брызнули» is the perfective past of «брызнуть» (to spurt, gush), capturing the instantaneous outbreak of tears as a single completed burst. «Из её глаз» uses «из» + genitive ('from her eyes'). Aspect makes the tears suddenly spring, not merely flow.

— Я должен вам сообщить, — произнес тоже дрожащим голосом Алеша, — о том, что сейчас было у него с отцом.  
"I must inform you," Alyosha said, in a voice that trembled too, "of what just took place between him and his father."
> Instrumental of manner + present participle «дрожащим»: «Дрожащим голосом» ('in a trembling voice') is the instrumental of manner. «Дрожащий» is a present active participle from «дрожать» (to tremble), declined and agreeing with «голосом» — a compressed 'voice that was trembling'.
> Correlative «о том, что…»: «Сообщить о том, что…» uses the prepositional «о том» as a placeholder ('about that') resolved by the «что»-clause. «У него с отцом» ('between him and his father') uses «у» + genitive for the parties to the scene.

— И он рассказал всю сцену, рассказал, что был послан за деньгами, что тот ворвался, избил отца и после того особенно и настоятельно еще раз подтвердил ему, Алеше, идти «кланяться»… — Он пошел к этой женщине… — тихо прибавил Алеша.  
And he told the whole scene — told how he had been sent for the money, how the other had burst in, beaten their father, and afterward, especially and insistently, had once more charged him, Alyosha, to go and "send his regards"… "He has gone to that woman…" Alyosha added softly.
> Past passive «был послан» + «за» + instrumental: «Был послан» is the periphrastic passive: «быть» plus the short past passive participle of «послать» ('was sent'). «За деньгами» ('for the money') uses «за» + instrumental to mean 'to fetch' — the directional-purpose sense of «за».
> Demonstrative «тот» tracking referents: «Тот» ('the other one, that one') distinguishes Dmitri from the father within a crowded clause — a topic-tracking device that lets Russian keep multiple male referents straight without pronouns. The perfectives «ворвался», «избил», «подтвердил» chain the events forward.
> Apposition «ему, Алеше» + dative: The dative pronoun «ему» is glossed in apposition by the dative «Алеше» ('to him, to Alyosha') — the narrator clarifying the referent. «Подтвердил… идти кланяться» joins the perfective with an infinitive of the charged command.

— А вы думаете, что я эту женщину не перенесу? Он думает, что я не перенесу?  
"And do you think that I cannot endure this woman? Does he think I cannot endure her?
> Object-fronting + perfective future «не перенесу»: The accusative object «эту женщину» is fronted before the negated perfective future «не перенесу» ('will not endure'), throwing weight onto 'this woman'. «Перенести» here means to bear, put up with; the perfective future denies a completed act of enduring.

Но он на ней не женится, — нервно рассмеялась она вдруг, — разве Карамазов может гореть такою страстью вечно?  
But he will not marry her," she suddenly broke into a nervous laugh, "can a Karamazov burn with such a passion forever?
> «разве» + instrumental «такою страстью»: «Разве» frames an incredulous rhetorical question. «Гореть» ('to burn') takes the instrumental of what one burns with — «такою страстью» ('with such a passion'); «такою» is the older instrumental ending (-ою for modern -ой), period-elevated.
> «рассмеяться» — to burst out laughing: The perfective reflexive «рассмеяться» (рас- inceptive + «смеяться») means to break into laughter. With «нервно» ('nervously') it signals the brittle, half-hysterical mood beneath Katerina's bravura claims about Grushenka.

Это страсть, а не любовь.  
It is passion, not love.
> Zero copula + contrastive «а не»: No verb 'to be' is needed in the present: «Это страсть» ('This is passion') with a bare nominative predicate. «А не любовь» uses the contrastive «а» with «не» to draw the antithesis — 'passion, and not love' — the sharp distinction Katerina insists on.

Он не женится, потому что она и не выйдет за него… — опять странно усмехнулась вдруг Катерина Ивановна.  
He will not marry her, because she herself will not marry him either…" Katerina Ivanovna again gave a strange sudden smile.
> «потому что» + perfective future «не выйдет за»: «Потому что» ('because') opens the causal clause; «выйти замуж за» (lit. 'to go out [in marriage] for') is the idiom for a woman marrying, governing «за» + accusative «него». The perfective future «не выйдет» denies it as a completed future act, with «и» emphasizing 'either'.
> «усмехнуться» — to smirk, give a wry smile: «Усмехнуться» (perfective reflexive) is a faint, often ironic or bitter smile — not a full «улыбнуться». «Странно усмехнулась» ('gave a strange smile') flags the unsettling current beneath Katerina's words about Grushenka.

— Он, может быть, женится, — грустно проговорил Алеша, потупив глаза.  
"He may, perhaps, marry her," Alyosha said sadly, casting down his eyes.
> Perfective gerund «потупив»: «Потупив» is a past (perfective) деепричастие from «потупить» (to cast down, lower one's eyes), expressing a prior/accompanying completed act: 'casting down his eyes, he said'. It shares Alyosha's subject and adds the bodily gesture of his sad reluctance.
> «потупить глаза» — to lower the eyes: «Потупить» (взор / глаза) is a bookish set phrase for dropping the gaze in modesty, shame, or sorrow. Of Alyosha it marks the gentle pain of having to contradict Katerina's hope.

— Он не женится, говорю вам! Эта девушка — это ангел, знаете вы это? Знаете вы это! — воскликнула вдруг с необыкновенным жаром Катерина Ивановна.  
"He will not marry her, I tell you! This girl — she is an angel, do you know that? Do you know that!" Katerina Ivanovna suddenly cried with extraordinary fervor.
> «говорю вам» — emphatic parenthetical: «Говорю вам» ('I tell you') is an insistent parenthetical reinforcing the assertion. «Жениться» is the verb for a man marrying (intransitive, governing «на» + prepositional), distinct from a woman's «выйти замуж».
> Predicate «это ангел» + inverted «знаете вы это»: Bare-nominative predication «это ангел' ('she is an angel') with zero copula, followed by the verb-fronted question «знаете вы это?» for emphatic appeal. The repetition with falling intonation conveys Katerina's feverish insistence.
> «жар» — fervor, heat of feeling: «Жар» literally is 'heat, fever'; figuratively it is ardor, passionate fervor. «С необыкновенным жаром» ('with extraordinary fervor') marks the almost feverish intensity of Katerina's praise of her rival.

— Это самое фантастическое из фантастических созданий!  
"She is the most fantastical of fantastical creatures!
> Superlative «самое… из…»: «Самое фантастическое» is the periphrastic superlative with «самый» (here neuter, agreeing with «создание»), and «из фантастических созданий» ('of fantastical creatures') gives the partitive genitive plural set. The figura etymologica — repeating the root — heightens the rhetoric.

Я знаю, как она обольстительна, но я знаю, как она и добра, тверда, благородна.  
I know how alluring she is, but I also know how good she is, how steadfast, how noble.
> Short-form predicate adjectives «добра, тверда, благородна»: A run of short-form adjectives in the predicate — «добра», «тверда», «благородна» — all feminine, agreeing with «она». The short form, more bookish and stating an essential quality, is favored here over the long form for this elevated catalogue of virtues.
> «обольстительный» — alluring, seductive: From «обольстить» (to seduce, beguile), «обольстительный» means captivatingly alluring, with an edge of dangerous enchantment. In short form «обольстительна», it concedes Grushenka's seductive power even as Katerina insists on her nobility.

Чего вы смотрите так на меня, Алексей Федорович?  
Why do you look at me so, Alexei Fyodorovich?
> «Чего» as 'why' (colloquial): Here «чего» (genitive of «что») functions colloquially as 'why, what for' rather than 'what' — 'why do you look at me so?'. This idiomatic, slightly reproachful «чего» belongs to lively spoken register.

Может быть, удивляетесь моим словам, может быть, не верите мне?  
Perhaps you are amazed at my words, perhaps you do not believe me?
> «удивляться» + dative «моим словам»: The reflexive «удивляться» (to be amazed at) governs the dative of what astonishes — «моим словам» ('at my words'). The repeated «может быть» ('perhaps') hedges as Katerina anxiously reads Alyosha's expression.

Аграфена Александровна, ангел мой! — крикнула она вдруг кому-то, смотря в другую комнату, — подите к нам, это милый человек, это Алеша, он про наши дела всё знает, покажитесь ему!  
Agrafena Alexandrovna, my angel!" she suddenly called out to someone, looking into the next room. "Come in to us — this is a dear man, this is Alyosha, he knows all about our affairs, show yourself to him!"
> Imperatives «подите», «покажитесь»: «Подите» is the polite imperative of «пойти/подойти» ('come here'), slightly archaic in flavor; «покажитесь» is the reflexive imperative of «показаться» ('show yourself'), governing the dative «ему». A string of warm commands welcoming Grushenka in.
> «ангел мой» — 'my angel': A tender endearment, 'my angel', with the possessive following the noun for affectionate emphasis. Lavished on Grushenka, it is strikingly effusive — the warmth so excessive that it reads as strained, given who Grushenka is to Katerina.

— А я только и ждала за занавеской, что вы позовете, — произнес нежный, несколько слащавый даже, женский голос.  
"I was only waiting behind the curtain for you to call me," said a tender, even somewhat saccharine, woman's voice.
> «только и… что» — 'did nothing but': The frame «только и ждала… что вы позовете» means 'I was only waiting for you to call' — «только и» + verb + «что» conveys exclusive, sole occupation. «За занавеской» ('behind the curtain') uses «за» + instrumental for location.
> «слащавый» — cloyingly sweet: «Слащавый» (from «сладкий», sweet) means saccharine, mawkishly or affectedly sweet — a faintly negative word. The narrator's tag «несколько слащавый» on Grushenka's voice plants the first note of something cloying beneath her charm.

Поднялась портьера, и… сама Грушенька, смеясь и радуясь, подошла к столу.  
The portière was lifted, and… Grushenka herself, laughing and beaming, came up to the table.
> Paired imperfective gerunds «смеясь и радуясь»: Two present деепричастия from reflexive verbs — «смеясь» (laughing) and «радуясь» (rejoicing, beaming) — frame Grushenka's manner as she approaches, simultaneous with «подошла». The intensifier «сама» ('herself') heightens the moment of her entrance.
> «портьера» — door-curtain (French loan): «Портьера» (from French portière) is a heavy curtain hung over a doorway, a fixture of well-appointed 19th-century interiors. That Grushenka emerges from behind one — having eavesdropped — is staged like a theatrical reveal.

В Алеше как будто что передернулось.  
Something in Alyosha seemed to flinch.
> Impersonal «что передернулось» + «как будто»: «Что» here is the bare indefinite 'something' (= «что-то'), subject of the reflexive «передернулось» ('twitched, flinched'), all softened by «как будто» ('as if'). The location «в Алеше» ('in Alyosha') frames an involuntary inner spasm with no agent — a quintessentially Dostoevskian register of the soul.

Он приковался к ней взглядом, глаз отвести не мог.  
He fastened his gaze upon her, unable to take his eyes away.
> «приковаться» + instrumental «взглядом»; genitive of negation «глаз»: «Приковаться» ('to be riveted', lit. chained) takes «к ней» (dative via «к») and the instrumental of means «взглядом' ('with his gaze'). In the second clause, the negated «не мог отвести» pulls the object «глаз» into the genitive of negation — 'could not tear his eyes away'.

Вот она, эта ужасная женщина — «зверь», как полчаса назад вырвалось про нее у брата Ивана.  
Here she was, this terrible woman — the "beast," as his brother Ivan had let slip about her half an hour earlier.
> Impersonal reflexive «вырвалось» + «у» of source: «Вырвалось» (reflexive, 'it burst out, escaped [him]') frames the word «зверь» as slipping out involuntarily; the speaker is marked obliquely with «у брата Ивана» ('from brother Ivan', «у» + genitive). The construction makes the slur something that escaped Ivan rather than a deliberate act.
> «зверь» — beast: «Зверь» is a wild beast or brute; applied to a person it imputes savage, predatory, untamed sensuality. Ivan's blurted «зверь» about Grushenka frames her as something feral — which the narrator immediately, ironically contrasts with the ordinary, sweet woman now before Alyosha.

И однако же, пред ним стояло, казалось бы, самое обыкновенное и простое существо на взгляд, — добрая, милая женщина, положим красивая, но так похожая на всех других красивых, но «обыкновенных» женщин!  
And yet there stood before him, to all appearances, the most ordinary and simple of beings — a kind, sweet woman, beautiful, granted, but so like all the other beautiful, "ordinary" women!
> Archaic «пред» + inverted word order: «Пред» is the bookish, shortened form of «перед» ('before'). Verb-first «стояло… существо» (neuter agreement with «существо», 'being') with the subject delayed throws the rhetorical weight onto the surprising ordinariness — topic-comment inversion for effect.
> Present participle phrase «похожая на…»: «Похожая на» ('resembling, like') governs «на» + accusative «всех других… женщин» (animate accusative = genitive plural «женщин»). The adjective agrees with «существо»'s implied feminine referent, packing a relative-clause sense into a modifier.

Правда, хороша она была очень, очень даже, — русская красота, так многими до страсти любимая.  
True, she was very lovely, very lovely indeed — a Russian beauty, the sort so passionately loved by many.
> Short adjective «хороша» fronted: The feminine short-form adjective «хороша» ('lovely, good-looking') is fronted before «она была» for emphasis — the bookish short predicate stating her beauty as a settled fact. Doubling «очень, очень даже» piles on the narrator's concession.
> Passive participle «любимая» + instrumental agent «многими»: «Любимая» is the present passive participle of «любить» ('beloved'), agreeing with «красота»; its agent stands in the instrumental — «многими» ('by many') — and «до страсти» ('to the point of passion') intensifies. A dense, bookish appositional phrase closing the chapter's portrait.

Это была довольно высокого роста женщина, несколько пониже, однако, Катерины Ивановны (та была уже совсем высокого роста), полная, с мягкими, как бы неслышными даже движениями тела, как бы тоже изнеженными до какой-то особенной слащавой выделки, как и голос ее.  
She was a woman of fairly tall stature, though somewhat shorter than Katerina Ivanovna (who was very tall indeed), full-figured, with soft movements of the body that seemed almost soundless, movements that, like her voice, seemed pampered into some peculiar, cloyingly sweet finish.
> Comparative + genitive of comparison: «Пониже» is the predicative comparative «ниже» (lower / shorter) softened by the prefix «по-» ('a bit shorter'). The thing compared, «Катерины Ивановны», stands in the genitive — the bare genitive of comparison, an alternative to «чем» — so it reads 'somewhat shorter than Katerina Ivanovna'. The inserted «однако» ('however') marks the concession.
> Instrumental of accompanying description after «с»: The preposition «с» here governs the instrumental «с… движениями» to attach a descriptive feature to the woman ('with… movements'). The whole adjective string «мягкими, как бы неслышными» agrees with «движениями» in the instrumental plural, a chain Dostoevsky lengthens to build the cat-soft impression.
> «слащавый» — cloyingly sweet: «Слащавый» means sugary to the point of being mawkish or affected — sweetness that has gone false. «Выделка» is the 'finish' or 'workmanship' of a manufactured thing; applied to a human body it is faintly contemptuous, as though she were a confected object. The pairing forecasts the narrator's wariness of Grushenka's whole manner.

Она подошла не как Катерина Ивановна — мощною бодрою походкой; напротив, неслышно.  
She came forward not as Katerina Ivanovna had — with a vigorous, brisk stride; on the contrary, she made no sound at all.
> Perfective prefixed motion verb «подойти»: «Подошла» is the perfective past of «подойти» (to come up, approach), the prefix «под-» giving 'approach toward'. Once the directional prefix is added, the old идти/ходить opposition collapses into an ordinary aspect pair (подходить/подойти); the perfective here marks a single completed entrance.
> Instrumental of manner; archaic -ою ending: «Мощною бодрою походкой» is an instrumental of manner ('with a vigorous, brisk stride'), the case Russian uses to say how an action is performed. Note the bookish 19th-century feminine instrumental in «-ою» (мощною for modern мощной) — a literary-archaic flourish very common in Dostoevsky.

Ноги́ ее на полу совсем не было слышно.  
Her feet could not be heard on the floor in the slightest.
> Impersonal «слышно» + genitive of negation: This is a subjectless impersonal construction built on the predicative «слышно» ('audible') with neuter «было». Under negation the thing not heard, «ноги», drops out of the nominative into the genitive — the genitive of negation — yielding literally 'of her foot there was not at all audibility on the floor'.

Мягко опустилась она в кресло, мягко прошумев своим пышным черным шелковым платьем и изнеженно кутая свою белую как кипень полную шею и широкие плечи в дорогую черную шерстяную шаль.  
Softly she lowered herself into the armchair, her sumptuous black silk dress softly rustling, and with a pampered air she wrapped her full neck, white as foam, and her broad shoulders in a costly black woolen shawl.
> Reflexive «-ся» + fronted adverb: «Опустилась» is the reflexive/middle «опуститься» (to lower oneself, sink down), where «-ся» turns the transitive 'lower' into an intransitive change of state. The sentence opens with the adverb «мягко» fronted for rhythmic emphasis, pushing subject «она» after the verb — topic-comment word order in action.
> Two gerunds: perfective «-в» and imperfective «-я»: The sentence hangs two adverbial participles («деепричастия») off «опустилась»: «прошумев» is the perfective past gerund in «-в» (having rustled), «кутая» the imperfective present gerund in «-я» (wrapping, simultaneously). Both share the main subject «она» and pile attendant circumstance onto a single action — a hallmark of literary narration.
> «кипень» — white as foam: «Кипень» is the seething white froth of boiling water; the set simile «белый как кипень» means dazzlingly, foamy-white. It is a folk-poetic, slightly archaic comparison — more vivid than the everyday «белоснежный» (snow-white) — fitting the lush, sensuous register of the description.

Ей было двадцать два года, и лицо ее выражало точь-в-точь этот возраст.  
She was twenty-two years old, and her face declared that age exactly.
> Dative of age; case after the numeral: Russian states age impersonally: the person goes in the dative («ей», 'to her') with neuter «было», so literally 'to her it was twenty-two years'. The numeral governs the noun's case — compound numbers ending in «два» take the genitive singular, hence «два года» not «лет».
> «точь-в-точь» — exactly, to a T: An expressive colloquial intensifier meaning 'precisely, exactly so', formed by reduplicating the old «точь» (point). Here it insists that her face 'declared that age exactly' — twenty-two and looking it.

Она была очень бела лицом, с высоким бледно-розовым оттенком румянца.  
Her complexion was very white, touched high on the cheeks with a pale rose blush.
> Short-form adjective predicate + instrumental of respect: «Бела» is the predicative short form of «белый» (feminine singular), used here as the predicate 'was white' — the bookish short form lending an absolute, descriptive flavour. «Лицом» is an instrumental of respect: white *in respect of* the face, i.e. 'white-faced'.

Очертание лица ее было как бы слишком широко, а нижняя челюсть выходила даже капельку вперед.  
The contour of her face was, as it were, a little too broad, and her lower jaw jutted forward even by a hair.
> Imperfective for a standing state: «Выходила» (imperfective past of «выходить») describes not an event but a permanent condition of the jaw — it 'jutted forward'. Russian uses the imperfective for such timeless, descriptive states, where English would use a simple past. The diminutive adverb «капельку» ('by a tiny drop, a hair') softens the observation.
> Contrastive «а»: The two clauses hinge on «а», the mild contrastive conjunction that shifts the topic ('the contour… *while* the lower jaw…') without strong opposition. This untranslatable 'and/but' is the natural connective for moving the eye from one facial feature to the next.

Верхняя губа была тонка, а нижняя, несколько выдавшаяся, была вдвое полнее и как бы припухла.  
Her upper lip was thin, while the lower one, projecting somewhat, was twice as full and looked as though it were swollen.
> Short adjectives and a comparative as predicates: The lips are described entirely with predicative short forms: «тонка» (thin), «полнее» (the comparative 'fuller'), and «припухла» (the short past-passive-flavoured form of «припухнуть», swollen). Short forms are the bookish, 19th-century way to predicate a state, giving the portrait its clinical poise.
> Past active participle «выдавшаяся»: «Выдавшаяся» is the past active participle of the reflexive «выдаться» (to protrude), in «-вш-» plus adjective endings and agreeing with «губа» (feminine). It compresses a «которая выдалась» relative clause into a single modifier — 'the lower lip, having projected somewhat' — typical of dense literary description.

Но чудеснейшие, обильнейшие темно-русые волосы, темные соболиные брови и прелестные серо-голубые глаза с длинными ресницами заставили бы непременно самого равнодушного и рассеянного человека, даже где-нибудь в толпе, на гулянье, в давке, вдруг остановиться пред этим лицом и надолго запомнить его.  
But her hair, of the most marvelous and abundant kind, dark chestnut, her dark sable brows, and her enchanting gray-blue eyes with their long lashes would, without fail, have made even the most indifferent and absent-minded of men — somewhere in a crowd, say, out walking, in a crush — stop short before that face and remember it for a long time.
> Conditional «бы» + perfective infinitives: «Заставили бы» is the conditional/subjunctive — perfective past «заставили» plus the particle «бы» — projecting a hypothetical 'would have made'. It governs two perfective infinitives of result, «остановиться» (to stop short) and «запомнить» (to commit to memory), each viewing the action as a single completed whole.
> Bookish superlative in «-ейший»: «Чудеснейшие» (most marvelous) and «обильнейшие» (most abundant) are synthetic superlatives in «-ейший», declined and agreeing with «волосы». This suffixal superlative is markedly literary, where ordinary speech prefers «самый чудесный» — its weight matches the rhapsodic tone.
> «соболиные» — sable: From «соболь», the sable. «Соболиные брови» ('sable brows') is a stock epithet of Russian beauty — dark, glossy, luxuriant — drawn from the same folk-poetic register as «белый как кипень» above. It marks Grushenka as a beauty of the native type.

Алешу поразило всего более в этом лице его детское, простодушное выражение.  
What struck Alyosha most of all in that face was its childlike, guileless expression.
> Object-first word order; «поразило» agrees with the real subject: The accusative object «Алешу» ('Alyosha') is fronted as topic, while the grammatical subject is «выражение» (neuter), with which the verb «поразило» agrees — literally 'Alyosha it struck most of all… the childlike expression'. The free, case-marked word order lets the person affected lead and the new information (the expression) land last.

Она глядела как дитя, радовалась чему-то как дитя, она именно подошла к столу, «радуясь» и как бы сейчас чего-то ожидая с самым детским нетерпеливым и доверчивым любопытством.  
She looked out like a child, she rejoiced at something like a child; indeed she had come up to the table “rejoicing,” and as though waiting at that very moment for something, with the most childlike, impatient, trusting curiosity.
> Present gerunds of simultaneous action: «Радуясь» (rejoicing) and «ожидая» (awaiting) are imperfective present gerunds in «-я», naming actions going on at the same time as the main verb «подошла» — she came up *while* rejoicing and awaiting. The first is even set in quotation marks, as if the narrator borrows Katerina's own gushing word.
> Indefinite «-то»: a specific but unnamed something: «Чему-то» is the dative of «что-то», the indefinite formed with the clitic «-то» marking a specific but unidentified referent — she rejoiced at *some* particular thing, though neither she nor we can name it. Contrast «чему-нибудь», which would mean 'at anything at all'.

Взгляд ее веселил душу — Алеша это почувствовал.  
Her gaze gladdened the soul — Alyosha felt it.
> Imperfective «веселил» as a continuing effect: «Веселил» (imperfective past of «веселить», to gladden) frames the gaze's effect as an ongoing, repeated working on the soul rather than a single event — 'her gaze [kept] gladdening the soul'. The em-dash then springs to Alyosha's instantaneous perception.

Было и еще что-то в ней, о чем он не мог или не сумел бы дать отчет, но что, может быть, и ему сказалось бессознательно, именно опять-таки эта мягкость, нежность движений тела, эта кошачья неслышность этих движений.  
There was something else in her too, something he could not, or could not have managed to, account for, but which perhaps spoke to him as well, unconsciously — namely, again, that very softness, that tenderness of the body's movements, that catlike soundlessness of those movements.
> Indicative and conditional side by side: Two negated modals are paired: plain indicative «не мог» (could not) and conditional «не сумел бы» (could not have managed to), the «бы» shifting the second into the hypothetical. The fine distinction — what he actually couldn't do versus what he wouldn't have been able to do — is exactly the kind of psychological hedging Dostoevsky loves.
> Reflexive «-ся» as a middle voice: «Сказалось» is the reflexive «сказаться» (to make itself felt, tell on), where «-ся» gives a middle, agentless sense — something in her 'spoke to him' or 'told on him' of its own accord. The subjectless feel suits a stirring he registers but cannot author.

И однако ж, это было мощное и обильное тело.  
And yet it was a powerful and ample body.
> Concessive «однако ж»; zero copula in the past replaced by «было»: «Однако ж» ('and yet'), with the clipped emphatic particle «ж» (a reduced «же»), pivots against the preceding catlike softness. In the present Russian would drop the copula, but the past requires «было», here agreeing as neuter with «тело» ('it was a powerful body').

Под шалью сказывались широкие полные плечи, высокая, еще совсем юношеская грудь.  
Beneath the shawl one could sense broad, full shoulders and a high bosom still quite girlish.
> Reflexive «сказывались» + inverted word order: «Сказывались» is again the middle reflexive «сказываться» (to make themselves felt, show through), plural to agree with «плечи» and «грудь». The prepositional phrase «под шалью» ('beneath the shawl') is fronted as the scene-setting topic, the subject following — 'beneath the shawl there showed through…'.

Это тело, может быть, обещало формы Венеры Милосской, хотя непременно и теперь уже в несколько утрированной пропорции, — это предчувствовалось.  
This body, perhaps, promised the forms of the Venus de Milo, though without fail already in somewhat exaggerated proportion even now — one sensed it in advance.
> Reflexive «-ся» as an impersonal passive: «Предчувствовалось» is the imperfective reflexive of «предчувствовать» (to sense in advance), here impersonal and agentless — 'it was sensed beforehand', without saying by whom. This «-ся» passive is the natural Russian way to register a perception that belongs to no named perceiver.

Знатоки русской женской красоты могли бы безошибочно предсказать, глядя на Грушеньку, что эта свежая, еще юношеская красота к тридцати годам потеряет гармонию, расплывется, самое лицо обрюзгнет, около глаз и на лбу чрезвычайно быстро появятся морщиночки, цвет лица огрубеет, побагровеет может быть, — одним словом, красота на мгновение, красота летучая, которая так часто встречается именно у русской женщины.  
Connoisseurs of Russian female beauty could have foretold without error, looking at Grushenka, that this fresh, still girlish beauty would by the age of thirty lose its harmony, would spread, the face itself would grow bloated, fine little wrinkles would appear about the eyes and on the brow with extreme rapidity, the complexion would coarsen, perhaps turn ruddy — in a word, beauty for a moment, a fleeting beauty such as one so often meets precisely in the Russian woman.
> Conditional frame governing a chain of perfective futures: «Могли бы предсказать» is conditional ('could have foretold'); inside the «что»-clause a string of perfective verbs — «потеряет», «расплывется», «обрюзгнет», «появятся», «огрубеет», «побагровеет» — are all simple (perfective) futures, each conjugated like a present but naming a single completed future event. The cascade enacts the prophesied decay step by step.
> Relative «которая» + reflexive «встречается»: «Которая» introduces a relative clause and agrees with «красота» in gender and number, while taking nominative as the subject of its own clause. Its verb «встречается» is the reflexive «встречаться» in a middle/passive sense — 'is met with, is encountered' — a beauty of a kind one so often comes across.
> «морщиночки» — fine little wrinkles: A double diminutive of «морщина» (wrinkle): «морщин-к-» then «-очк-», so 'tiny little wrinkles'. The tender suffix is almost pitying here, softening the harsh forecast of coarsening flesh — a characteristic Russian way of making the cruel observation gentle in sound.

Алеша, разумеется, не думал об этом, но, хоть и очарованный, он, с неприятным каким-то ощущением и как бы жалея, спрашивал себя: зачем это она так тянет слова и не может говорить натурально?  
Alyosha, of course, was not thinking of any of this; but, charmed as he was, he asked himself with some unpleasant sensation, and as though with regret: why does she draw out her words so and cannot speak naturally?
> Concessive «хоть»; participle and gerund stacked: The clause layers a concessive «хоть и» ('though') over the past passive participle «очарованный» (charmed) and the present gerund «жалея» (as though regretting), all bearing on «спрашивал себя» ('asked himself'). The reflexive pronoun «себя» — object, not the clitic «-ся» — turns the questioning inward.
> Imperfective «тянет» for a habitual mannerism: «Тянет» (imperfective present of «тянуть», to drag/draw out) names a repeated, characteristic habit of her speech, not a single act — she habitually 'draws out her words'. The little particle «это» after «зачем» is an emphatic colloquial filler, lending the question a puzzled, conversational ring.

Она делала это, очевидно находя в этом растягивании и в усиленно слащавом оттенении слогов и звуков красоту.  
She did this, evidently, finding a kind of beauty in this drawl, in this overdone, sugary lengthening of the syllables and sounds.
> Present gerund «находя» of attendant reason: «Находя» is the imperfective present gerund of «находить» (to find), here giving the reason that accompanies the main verb «делала» — she did it, *finding* a kind of beauty in the drawl. The gerund shares the subject «она» and packs a whole causal clause into one word.
> «оттенение» — shading, nuancing: «Оттенение» (from «оттенять», to shade, set off) is the deliberate coloring or 'nuancing' of the syllables — a bookish noun in «-ение». Paired again with «слащавый» (cloyingly sweet), it pins down the affected, over-sugared way she shades each sound.

Это была, конечно, лишь дурная привычка дурного тона, свидетельствовавшая о низком воспитании, о пошло усвоенном с детства понимании приличного.  
It was, of course, merely a bad habit of bad tone, testifying to a low upbringing, to a vulgar notion of the genteel absorbed from childhood.
> Past active participle + «о» governing the prepositional: «Свидетельствовавшая» is the past active participle of «свидетельствовать» (to testify), feminine to agree with «привычка» — 'a bad habit… testifying'. The verb takes «о» + prepositional case («о низком воспитании», о понимании), the construction for 'testifying *to* / about' something.
> «дурной тон» — bad form, vulgarity: «Дурной тон» ('bad tone') is the calque of French *mauvais ton* — ill-bred manners, the opposite of «хороший тон». The whole sentence is the narrator's class verdict: her drawl betrays «низкое воспитание» (low upbringing) and a «пошло усвоенное» (vulgarly absorbed) idea of «приличное» (the genteel, the done thing).

И однако же, этот выговор и интонация слов представлялись Алеше почти невозможным каким-то противоречием этому детски простодушному и радостному выражению лица, этому тихому, счастливому, как у младенца, сиянию глаз!  
And yet this enunciation and intonation of the words struck Alyosha as an almost impossible sort of contradiction to that childishly guileless and joyful expression of the face, to that quiet, happy, infant-like radiance of the eyes!
> Dative experiencer + instrumental predicate after «представляться»: «Представлялись Алеше» puts the perceiver in the dative ('seemed *to* Alyosha'), the reflexive «-ся» giving 'appeared'. The predicate noun «противоречием» (contradiction) takes the instrumental, as the complement of «представляться» — they 'struck Alyosha *as* a contradiction'. This dative-of-experience plus instrumental-predicate pattern is pure Russian.
> «младенец» — infant, babe: «Младенец» is the elevated, slightly biblical word for a baby (cf. the Christ-child, «младенец Иисус»), warmer and more solemn than the plain «ребёнок». Comparing the 'radiance of her eyes' to an infant's keeps Grushenka's contradictory innocence in a near-sacred light — even as the narrator has just dissected her vulgarity.

Катерина Ивановна мигом усадила ее в кресло против Алеши и с восторгом поцеловала ее несколько раз в ее смеющиеся губки.  
Katerina Ivanovna at once settled her into the armchair facing Alyosha and rapturously kissed her several times on her smiling little lips.
> Perfective pair driving the action forward: Both verbs are perfective past — «усадила» (seated her, from «усадить») and «поцеловала» (kissed, from «поцеловать») — each a single completed act that moves the narrative one step on, against the long imperfective description that preceded. «Мигом» ('in a flash') underscores the swift, finished gestures.
> «губки» — little lips (diminutive): «Губки» is the affectionate diminutive of «губы» (lips). Katerina kisses Grushenka 'on her smiling little lips' — the caressing suffix conveying her infatuated tenderness, which the next sentence names outright as being 'in love' with the other woman.

Она точно была влюблена в нее.  
She was positively in love with her.
> Short-form participle «влюблена» as predicate; particle «точно»: «Влюблена» is the predicative short form of the past passive participle «влюблённый» (in love, smitten), feminine, joined to «была» — 'she was [positively] in love'. The particle «точно» here is asseverative, 'as if / positively', lending the narrator's wry certainty.

— Мы в первый раз видимся, Алексей Федорович, — проговорила она в упоении, — я захотела узнать ее, увидать ее, я хотела идти к ней, но она по первому желанию моему пришла сама.  
“We are meeting for the first time, Alexei Fyodorovich,” she said in rapture. “I wanted to know her, to see her; I meant to go to her, but at my very first wish she came herself.
> Inceptive perfective «захотела» vs imperfective «хотела»: Katerina shifts aspect mid-breath: «захотела» (perfective, with «за-» giving the inceptive 'I came to want, I conceived the wish') for the sudden onset of desire, then «хотела» (imperfective, the steady ongoing 'I wanted / meant'). The pair shows aspect as a tool of nuance, not mere tense.

Я так и знала, что мы с ней всё решим, всё! Так сердце предчувствовало… Меня упрашивали оставить этот шаг, но я предчувствовала исход и не ошиблась.  
I just knew that she and I would settle everything between us, everything! So my heart foretold… They begged me to give up this step, but I foresaw the outcome and was not mistaken.
> «мы с ней» — the inclusive 'she and I': «Мы с ней» literally 'we with her' is the idiomatic Russian way to say 'she and I' — a first-person plural pronoun joined by «с» + instrumental to the companion. The verb «решим» is accordingly plural perfective future ('we will settle'). English must unpack it as 'she and I'.
> Subjectless third-person-plural 'they': «Упрашивали» is an agentless 3rd-plural ('they begged', i.e. people did) with no stated subject — the standard Russian way to say 'I was begged' without naming who. «Упрашивать» (imperfective, with «у-») means to beg persistently, conveying repeated entreaty.

Грушенька всё разъяснила мне, все свои намерения; она, как ангел добрый, слетела сюда и принесла покой и радость…  
Grushenka has explained everything to me, all her intentions; like a good angel she has flown down here and brought peace and joy…”
> Perfective «слетела»; post-posed adjective «добрый»: «Слетела» is perfective past of «слететь» (to fly down), the prefix «с-» giving downward motion — 'flew down here' as a single completed swoop. The adjective in «ангел добрый» follows its noun («good angel'), an inverted, slightly elevated order that lends a fairy-tale, hagiographic ring.

— Не погнушались мной, милая, достойная барышня, — нараспев протянула Грушенька всё с тою же милою, радостной улыбкой.  
“You did not disdain me, sweet, worthy young lady,” Grushenka drawled in a singsong, still with that same sweet, joyful smile.
> Negated «погнушаться» + instrumental object: «Погнушаться» (to disdain, scorn) governs the instrumental — «мной» ('by me / of me') — a verb whose object stands in the instrumental rather than the accusative. The perfective with «по-» here reads as 'you did not [come to] disdain me'. The dropped subject «вы» is recoverable from the polite plural verb.
> «нараспев» — in a singsong drawl: «Нараспев» ('in a chant, singsong') and «протянула» (drew out, from «протянуть») together render Grushenka's signature manner of speech, the affected lengthening the narrator anatomized earlier. The tag recurs almost as a refrain whenever she speaks, marking the studied sweetness.

— И не смейте говорить мне такие слова, обаятельница, волшебница! Вами-то гнушаться?  
“And don't you dare say such things to me, you enchantress, you sorceress! Disdain you?
> Negative imperative «не смейте» + imperfective infinitive: «Не смейте» is the polite-plural negative imperative of «сметь» (to dare) — 'don't you dare' — and like most negative commands it takes an imperfective infinitive, «говорить». Russian strongly prefers the imperfective under a prohibition, where a perfective would imply warning against a single accidental act.
> Emphatic clitic «-то»; instrumental object fronted: The clitic «-то» on «Вами» emphasizes the known topic — 'disdain *you*, of all people?' — distinct from the indefinite «-то». The object «Вами» is instrumental (governed by «гнушаться») and fronted before a bare infinitive used as an indignant rhetorical question.
> «обаятельница, волшебница» — enchantress, sorceress: Two feminine «-ница» agent-nouns of flattery: «обаятельница» (a charmer, from «обаяние», charm) and «волшебница» (a sorceress, from «волшебство», magic). Katerina heaps on the magical vocabulary, casting Grushenka as a bewitching creature — irony the reader feels, since Grushenka is indeed working a spell of a colder kind.

Вот я нижнюю губку вашу еще раз поцелую.  
Here, I'll kiss your lower lip once more.
> Perfective future «поцелую» for an imminent single act: «Поцелую» is the simple (perfective) future of «поцеловать» — conjugated like a present but meaning 'I will kiss [once]'. With «вот» ('here, now') it announces an action about to be done on the spot. «Губку» is again the diminutive 'little lip'.

Она у вас точно припухла, так вот чтоб она еще больше припухла, и еще, еще…  
It looks a little swollen on you — well then, let it swell more still, and again, and again…”
> «чтоб» + past-form irrealis as a wish: «Чтоб» (a clipped «чтобы») plus the past-tense form «припухла» builds an optative — a willed wish 'let it swell still more'. The «чтобы»-construction always takes the past/irrealis form (the hidden «бы»), here voicing Katerina's playful command to the lip itself.

Посмотрите, как она смеется, Алексей Федорович, сердце веселится, глядя на этого ангела… — Алеша краснел и дрожал незаметною малою дрожью.  
“Look how she smiles, Alexei Fyodorovich; the heart rejoices, looking at this angel…” — Alyosha flushed and trembled with a faint, imperceptible tremor.
> Reflexive «веселится» + present gerund «глядя»: «Веселится» is the reflexive «веселиться» (to rejoice, make merry), the «-ся» giving an intransitive, self-directed sense — 'the heart rejoices'. «Глядя» is the present gerund of «глядеть» (looking), simultaneous: the heart rejoices *while* looking at the angel.
> Archaic instrumental «-ою»; «дрожь»: «Дрожь» (a tremor, shiver) appears in the instrumental of manner, 'trembled *with* a faint small tremor'. Note the period-bookish feminine instrumental in «-ою» (незаметною, малою for modern -ой) — the same literary-archaic ending seen earlier in «мощною бодрою походкой».

— Нежите вы меня, милая барышня, а я, может, и вовсе не стою ласки вашей.  
“You pamper me, sweet young lady, and I, perhaps, am not worth your caresses at all.”
> Genitive of negation after «не стою»: «Стоить» ('to be worth') governs the genitive, and under negation the object stays genitive: «не стою ласки» — 'I am not worth [your] caress'. The inserted «может» (= «может быть», 'perhaps') and intensifier «вовсе не» ('not at all') give the self-deprecation its mock-humble lilt.
> «нежить» — to pamper, coddle: «Нежить» (from «нежный», tender) means to pamper, to make a fuss of with caresses. Grushenka's 'you pamper me, sweet young lady' keeps up the honeyed deference even as she gently deflects the caresses — the soft sparring of the whole scene.

— Не стоит! Она-то этого не стоит! — воскликнула опять с тем же жаром Катерина Ивановна, — знайте, Алексей Федорович, что мы фантастическая головка, что мы своевольное, но гордое-прегордое сердечко!  
“Not worth them! She not worth them!” Katerina Ivanovna exclaimed again with the same fervor. “You must know, Alexei Fyodorovich, that we are a fanciful little head, that we are a willful but proud — oh so proud — little heart!”
> The affectionate “we” (мы) for “she”: Katerina gushes about Grushenka using «мы» (“we”) with first-person plural agreement — «мы фантастическая головка», «мы… сердечко» — yet she means Grushenka alone. This affectionate-condescending “we,” used about a person one is fond of or talking up, has no English equivalent, so we keep it literal: 'we are a fanciful little head'.
> Intensive reduplication «-пре-»; diminutives: «Гордое-прегордое» reduplicates the adjective with the intensive prefix «пре-» ('proud — oh so proud'), a colloquial superlative-by-repetition. Paired with the diminutives «головка» (little head) and «сердечко» (little heart), it pours on cooing affection — the cloying register that makes the scene curdle.

Мы благородны, Алексей Федорович, мы великодушны, знаете ли вы это?  
We are noble, Alexei Fyodorovich, we are magnanimous — do you know that?
> Interrogative particle «ли»: «Ли» turns the statement into a literary yes/no question, attaching to the fronted focus «знаете» — 'do you know this?'. More formal than mere rising intonation, «знаете ли» is also half-frozen as a conversational appeal ('you know'), suiting Katerina's heightened, rhetorical pitch.

Мы были лишь несчастны.  
We were only unhappy.
> Short-form adjective «несчастны» + the “we” for “she”: «Несчастны» is the predicative short form of «несчастный» (unhappy), plural to agree with the affectionate «мы». The short form gives the bookish, summary flavour of a verdict, 'we were only unhappy'. Note again the «мы» standing in for Grushenka alone.

Мы слишком скоро готовы были принести всякую жертву недостойному, может быть, или легкомысленному человеку.  
We were too quick, too ready to sacrifice anything for a man who was perhaps unworthy, or frivolous.
> Dative of the beneficiary after «принести жертву»: «Принести жертву» (to bring/make a sacrifice) sends the one sacrificed-*for* into the dative: «недостойному… человеку» ('for an unworthy man'). «Готовы были» is the short adjective «готовы» (ready) + «были», and «принести» is the perfective infinitive of a single completed sacrifice.

Был один, один тоже офицер, мы его полюбили, мы ему всё принесли, давно это было, пять лет назад, а он нас забыл, он женился.  
There was one man, an officer too; we loved him, we gave him everything — it was long ago, five years back — and he forgot us, he married.
> Existential «был» fronted; reduplicated «один»: The clause opens with the verb «был» ('there was'), the existential-presentative order that introduces a new character — 'there was one man'. The repetition «один, один» dramatizes the singling-out, a spoken stammer of emphasis as Katerina builds her tale.
> Perfective chain of completed events; contrastive «а»: A run of perfectives narrates the affair as discrete completed acts: «полюбили» (came to love — inceptive «по-»), «принесли» (gave/brought), «забыл» (forgot), «женился» (married). The pivot «а он нас забыл» uses contrastive «а» to swing from their devotion to his betrayal.

Теперь он овдовел, писал, он едет сюда, — и знайте, что мы одного его, одного его только любим до сих пор и любили всю жизнь!  
Now he is widowed; he has written, he is coming here — and you must know that it is he alone, he alone whom we have loved to this very day and have loved all our life!
> Animate accusative = genitive; emphatic repetition: «Его» and «одного» are accusative objects of «любим», and for an animate masculine the accusative borrows the genitive form — hence «одного его» ('him alone'). The doubled «одного его, одного его только» hammers the exclusivity: he and he only.
> Imperative «знайте» + present/past imperfective span: «Знайте» is the polite imperative of «знать». The dependent verbs are imperfective — present «любим» (we love, up to now) and past «любили» (we have loved, all our life) — together spanning a love continuous from past into present, exactly what the imperfective is for.

Он приедет, и Грушенька опять будет счастлива, а все пять лет эти она была несчастна.  
He will come, and Grushenka will be happy again; but all these five years she has been unhappy.
> Compound future short adjective vs imperfective past; numeral case: «Будет счастлива» pairs the future of «быть» with the short adjective «счастлива» (happy) — the analytic way to predicate a future state. Against it the imperfective «была несчастна» frames the whole stretch of misery. «Пять лет» shows the genitive plural «лет» demanded by 'five and above'.

Но кто же попрекнет ее, кто может похвалиться ее благосклонностью!  
Yet who would reproach her, who can boast of her favor!
> Emphatic «же»; rhetorical perfective future: The particle «же» after «кто» sharpens the rhetorical question — 'who, then / who on earth would reproach her?'. «Попрекнёт» is perfective future used rhetorically (no one will / could), and «похвалиться» is the reflexive «-ся» verb 'to boast of', governing the instrumental «благосклонностью».

Один этот старик безногий, купец, — но он был скорей нашим отцом, другом нашим, оберегателем.  
Only that one old man, the legless one, the merchant — but he was rather a father to us, a friend to us, a protector.
> Instrumental of the predicate after «был»: All three predicate nouns — «отцом», «другом», «оберегателем» — stand in the instrumental as complements of past «был» ('he was rather a father, a friend, a protector to us'). The instrumental frames these as roles he assumed, the standard choice with «быть» in the past, where the present would take a bare nominative.

Он застал нас тогда в отчаянии, в муках, оставленную тем, кого мы так любили… да ведь она утопиться тогда хотела, ведь старик этот спас ее, спас ее!  
He found us then in despair, in torment, abandoned by the one we had loved so… why, she meant to drown herself then, and that old man saved her, he saved her!”
> Past passive participle + instrumental agent + correlative «тем, кого»: «Оставленную» is the past passive participle of «оставить» (abandoned), accusative feminine singular; it does not formally agree with «нас» (which is accusative plural and genderless) but by sense (constructio ad sensum) with the single feminine person referred to, sharing only the accusative case with «нас». The agent stands in the instrumental: «тем» ('by the one'). «Тем, кого» is the correlative pair — demonstrative «тот» plus relative «кто» (here accusative-genitive «кого», animate) — 'by the one whom we so loved'.
> Appealing particle «ведь»: «Ведь» twice appeals to shared, self-evident knowledge — 'why, after all, she meant to drown herself… and that old man, you see, saved her'. This little particle, untranslatable by a single English word, presses the listener to agree, and is one of the textures that make Dostoevsky's spoken Russian so urgent.
> Reflexive «утопиться» — to drown oneself: «Утопиться» is the reflexive of «утопить» (to drown someone); the «-ся» turns it into the true reflexive 'to drown oneself' — suicide. The perfective infinitive under «хотела» views the intended act as a single completed whole.

— Очень уж вы защищаете меня, милая барышня, очень уж вы во всем поспешаете, — протянула опять Грушенька.  
“You defend me too much, sweet young lady, you are too hasty in everything,” Grushenka drawled again.
> Imperfective for ongoing reproach; intensifying «уж»: Both verbs are imperfective present — «защищаете» (you [keep] defending) and «поспешаете» (you are hasty) — describing a continuing manner Grushenka chides. The particle «уж» (a clipped «уже») intensifies, 'really too much', adding a note of weary, reproachful insistence.

— Защищаю? Да нам ли защищать, да еще смеем ли мы тут защищать?  
“Defend you? Is it for us to defend, and do we even dare defend here?
> Interrogative «ли» + dative subject of obligation: «Нам ли защищать» pairs the question particle «ли» with a dative-subject infinitive construction — literally 'is it for us to defend?', the dative «нам» marking the ones to whom the action would fall. The second «смеем ли мы» again uses «ли», stacking incredulous rhetorical questions.

Грушенька, ангел, дайте мне вашу ручку, посмотрите на эту пухленькую, маленькую, прелестную ручку, Алексей Федорович; видите ли вы ее, она мне счастье принесла и воскресила меня, и я вот целовать ее сейчас буду, и сверху и в ладошку, вот, вот и вот!  
Grushenka, angel, give me your little hand; look at this plump, little, enchanting hand, Alexei Fyodorovich — do you see it? It brought me happiness and raised me from the dead, and here, I am going to kiss it this very moment, both on top and on the palm — there, and there, and there!”
> Imperative «дайте» + compound future «буду целовать»: «Дайте» is the polite imperative of «дать» (give). «Целовать… буду» is the imperfective compound future — future of «быть» plus imperfective infinitive — framing the kissing as a drawn-out, repeated action she is about to launch into, fitting the lingering 'there, and there, and there'.
> Diminutive shower: «ручка», «ладошка»: Katerina drowns the sentence in diminutives — «ручка» (little hand, repeated), «пухленькая» (plump little), «ладошка» (little palm). The cascade of «-к-» and «-еньк-» suffixes performs her swooning tenderness, the same overflow of endearment the narrator finds 'a little too much'.
> Perfective «воскресить» — to raise from the dead: «Воскресила» is the perfective past of «воскресить» (to resurrect, bring back to life), a verb of strong religious colour — the root of «воскресение» (Resurrection) and «воскресенье» (Sunday). Katerina says the little hand literally 'raised me from the dead', a hyperbole steeped in Easter imagery.

— И она три раза как бы в упоении поцеловала действительно прелестную, слишком, может быть, пухлую ручку Грушеньки.  
And three times, as though in rapture, she kissed Grushenka's truly enchanting, and perhaps too plump, little hand.
> Numeral «три раза» + perfective; accusative object: «Три раза» ('three times') uses the genitive singular «раза» after «три» (the 2–4 rule), and «поцеловала» is perfective for the completed, countable acts of kissing. The diminutive «ручку» stays the object in the accusative. Together with «как бы в упоении» the narrator quietly distances himself from the rapture.

Та же, протянув эту ручку, с нервным, звонким прелестным смешком следила за «милою барышней», и ей видимо было приятно, что ее ручку так целуют.  
The other, holding out that little hand, watched the “sweet young lady” with a nervous, ringing, charming little laugh, and she was evidently pleased that her hand was being kissed so.
> Demonstrative «та» as subject; perfective gerund «протянув»: «Та» ('the other one') is the demonstrative «тот» pressed into service as a pronoun to track Grushenka — Russian's way of switching reference without a name. «Протянув» is the perfective past gerund of «протянуть» (having held out), a prior completed act framing «следила» (watched, imperfective). The verb «следить за» governs the instrumental «барышней».
> Dative subject of feeling + agentless 'they kiss': «Ей было приятно» is the dative-experiencer impersonal — 'it was pleasant *to her*', the affected person in the dative with neuter «было» and the predicative «приятно». The «что»-clause uses 3rd-plural «целуют» with no subject, the standard agentless 'her hand was being kissed'.

«Может быть, слишком уж много восторга», — мелькнуло в голове Алеши.  
“Perhaps a little too much rapture,” flashed through Alyosha's head.
> Perfective «мелькнуло» for an instantaneous flash: «Мелькнуло» (perfective past of «мелькнуть», to flash/flit by) names a single momentary event — a thought that 'flashed through' Alyosha's head. The semelfactive «-ну-» suffix marks one quick, instantaneous occurrence, perfectly capturing the dart of an unbidden thought.

Он покраснел.  
He blushed.

Сердце его было всё время как-то особенно неспокойно.  
His heart was somehow peculiarly uneasy the whole time.
> Predicative «неспокойно»; indefinite «как-то»: «Неспокойно» is an invariable neuter predicative ('uneasy'), agreeing with «сердце», joined to «было» for the past state. «Как-то» is the indefinite adverb formed with the clitic «-то» — 'somehow, in some way he couldn't pin down' — registering an unease whose cause stays vague.

— Не устыдите ведь вы меня, милая барышня, что ручку мою при Алексее Федоровиче так целовали.  
“You won't shame me, will you, sweet young lady, for having kissed my hand like that in front of Alexei Fyodorovich.”
> Perfective future «устыдите» + appealing «ведь»: «Устыдите» is the perfective future of «устыдить» (to put to shame), negated — 'you won't shame me'. The particle «ведь» turns it into a coaxing appeal for agreement ('you won't, will you?'), a soft trap typical of Grushenka's honeyed manoeuvring.

— Да разве я вас тем устыдить хотела? — промолвила несколько удивленно Катерина Ивановна, — ах, милая, как вы меня дурно понимаете!  
“But did I mean to shame you by it?” Katerina Ivanovna said with some surprise. “Ah, my dear, how badly you understand me!”
> Particle «разве» of incredulous question; instrumental «тем»: «Разве» fronts an astonished rhetorical question expecting 'no' — 'do you really suppose I meant to shame you by that?'. «Тем» is the instrumental of «то», 'by that [act]' — the instrumental of means. «Да» opens the retort with spoken urgency.
> Imperfective «понимаете» for an ongoing state: «Понимаете» is imperfective present — 'how badly you [keep] understand[ing] me' — describing not an act but a persisting condition of misunderstanding. The adverb «дурно» (badly, ill) is the bookish counterpart of «плохо», fitting Katerina's heightened diction.

— Да вы-то меня, может, тоже не так совсем понимаете, милая барышня, я, может, гораздо дурнее того, чем у вас на виду.  
“And you, perhaps, don't quite understand me either, sweet young lady; perhaps I am far worse than I seem to you.
> Emphatic clitic «-то» turning the tables: Grushenka echoes Katerina's complaint back, fronting «вы-то» with the emphatic clitic «-то» — 'and *you*, for your part, don't quite understand me either'. This «-то» highlights a known contrastive topic (you, as opposed to me), the conversational counter-move that quietly seizes the upper hand.
> Comparative «дурнее» intensified by «гораздо»: «Дурнее» is the predicative comparative of «дурной» (worse, more wicked), strengthened by «гораздо» ('far, much') — 'far worse than I appear'. The set phrase «у вас на виду» means 'in your sight, as you see me', so she claims to be much worse than the version Katerina perceives.

Я сердцем дурная, я своевольная.  
I am wicked at heart, I am willful.
> Long-form adjective predicate + instrumental of respect: Here Grushenka predicates with the long forms «дурная» and «своевольная» (wicked, willful) rather than short forms — the colloquial, present-tense choice that states a settled trait of character. «Сердцем» is an instrumental of respect, 'wicked *in heart*', the case for the domain in which something holds.

Я Дмитрия Федоровича, бедного, из-за насмешки одной тогда заполонила.  
I ensnared poor Dmitri Fyodorovich back then out of a single jest.”
> Causal «из-за» + genitive; perfective «заполонила»: «Из-за» governs the genitive «насмешки» to give a cause, here a discreditable one — 'out of a single jest, a mockery'. «Заполонила» is the perfective past of «заполонить» (to capture, ensnare wholly), a single completed act of seduction; she admits she ensnared Dmitri on a whim.

— Но ведь теперь вы же его и спасете. Вы дали слово.  
“But now it is you who will save him. You gave your word.
> Stacked particles «ведь… же… и»; perfective future: Three little particles crowd this line: «ведь» appeals to shared knowledge, «же» emphasizes the contrast ('it is *you* who'), and «и» before the verb means 'precisely, the very one who'. «Спасёте» is the perfective future of «спасти» (to save) — a single decisive rescue Katerina projects onto Grushenka.

Вы вразумите его, вы откроете ему, что любите другого, давно, и который теперь вам руку свою предлагает…  
You will bring him to reason, you will reveal to him that you love another, and have for a long time, a man who is now offering you his hand…”
> Perfective futures + dative indirect object: «Вразумите» (will bring to reason) and «откроете» (will reveal) are perfective futures of completed acts. «Откроете ему» puts the person told-to in the dative — 'reveal *to him*' — while «что любите другого» is a «что»-clause of reported fact with an animate accusative object «другого» ('another [man]').
> Relative «который» + reflexive possessive «свою»: «Который» introduces a relative clause for the 'other' man, taking nominative as its own subject. «Руку свою» uses the reflexive possessive «свой» — his *own* hand — referring back to the subject of its clause (the suitor), and «предлагать руку» is the idiom 'to offer one's hand' in marriage.

— Ах нет, я вам не давала такого слова. Вы это сами мне всё говорили, а я не давала.  
“Ah no, I gave you no such word. You said all that to me yourself, while I gave nothing.”
> Imperfective negated «не давала» + genitive of negation: Grushenka chooses the imperfective «давала» (was giving / did give) under negation, denying the very process — 'I gave no such word'. Under negation the object slips into the genitive: «такого слова» (genitive of negation). The contrastive «а» sets her denial against Katerina's claim.

— Я вас не так, стало быть, поняла, — тихо и как бы капельку побледнев, проговорила Катерина Ивановна. — Вы обещали…  
“Then I misunderstood you,” Katerina Ivanovna said softly, and as though turning a shade pale. “You promised…”
> «стало быть» — a fixed inference marker: «Стало быть» (literally 'it has become to be') is a frozen parenthetical meaning 'so then, therefore, it follows that' — a slightly old-fashioned, deliberative connective. Katerina uses it to draw the chastened conclusion 'then I misunderstood you', «поняла» being the perfective past of «понять».
> Perfective past gerund «побледнев»: «Побледнев» is the perfective past gerund of «побледнеть» (to turn pale), in «-в», naming a prior completed change that accompanies her speaking — 'having gone a shade pale, she said'. The hedges «как бы» ('as it were') and the diminutive «капельку» ('by a drop') soften the visible blanch into something barely perceived.

— Ах нет, ангел-барышня, ничего я вам не обещала, — тихо и ровно всё с тем же веселым и невинным выражением перебила Грушенька.  
“Ah no, angel-young-lady, I promised you nothing,” Grushenka cut in softly and evenly, still with the same gay and innocent expression.
> Negative concord: «ничего… не»: «Ничего… не обещала» is textbook negative concord — the «ни»-word «ничего» (nothing) co-occurs obligatorily with the verb's «не», two negatives making one emphatic denial. «Ничего» is also the genitive form standing as the object of a negated verb, doubling as genitive of negation: 'I promised you nothing at all'.
> «ангел-барышня» — angel-young-lady: Grushenka fuses her two pet-names for Katerina into one hyphenated address, «ангел-барышня» ('angel-young-lady'), at the very moment she calmly withdraws the promise Katerina counted on. The unbroken sweetness of the vocative against the content of the refusal is the scene's quiet knife — honeyed words, cold denial.

— Вот и видно сейчас, достойная барышня, какая я пред вами скверная и самовластная.  
“So you see now, worthy young lady, what a vile and high-handed creature I am before you.
> «барышня» — the young lady of the gentry: «Барышня» is the polite term for an unmarried young woman of the gentry or merchant class — a status word. Grushenka's repeated, honeyed «достойная барышня» / «милая барышня» drips with mock-deference toward the well-bred Katerina Ivanovna, sharpening the social gulf she is about to exploit.
> «скверная» and «самовластная»: «Скверная» means vile, foul, nasty; «самовластная» is literally 'self-ruling' — wilful, despotic, doing exactly as she pleases. Grushenka mockingly casts herself as the lowly, ungovernable creature in contrast to the noble barishnya.
> Bookish «пред» for «перед»: «Пред» is the elevated, literary variant of «перед» ('before, in front of'), governing the instrumental «вами». The shortened form lends Grushenka's speech a faintly archaic, theatrical solemnity that runs through the whole scene.

Мне что захочется, так я так и поступлю.  
Whatever I take a fancy to, that's just what I'll do.
> Dative-experiencer «мне захочется»: «Захотеться» is an impersonal reflexive: the wanter stands in the dative («мне»), with no nominative subject, and the verb is fixed in the neuter/3rd-singular. The construction frames desire as something that simply comes over her — perfectly suited to Grushenka's capricious self-portrait.
> Correlative «что… так… так и» + perfective future: The folk-flavoured correlative pattern ('whatever… that's just what…') pairs «что захочется» with the resumptive «так и». «Поступлю» is a perfective present-form, so it reads as future: 'that's just how I'll act.' The doubled «так… так и» gives the line its insistent, sing-song defiance.

Давеча я, может, вам и пообещала что, а вот сейчас опять думаю: вдруг он опять мне понравится, Митя-то, — раз уж мне ведь он очень понравился, целый час почти даже нравился.  
A while ago I may have promised you something, but now I'm thinking again: what if he takes my fancy once more, Mitya, that is — for he did take my fancy once, very much; nearly a whole hour he pleased me.
> «давеча» — a little while ago: «Давеча» is a colloquial, slightly homely adverb meaning 'a short time ago, earlier today.' It tolls four times across this passage as Grushenka's refrain, marking her abrupt swerve from her earlier promise — the texture of unlettered, sing-song speech.
> «вдруг» + perfective future for a sudden possibility: Here «вдруг» does not mean 'suddenly' but 'what if, suppose' — introducing a hypothetical. «Понравится» is the perfective future of an impersonal-leaning verb: the liked thing is grammatical subject, the experiencer «мне» stands in the dative ('what if he should take my fancy again').
> Topic-emphatic clitic «-то» and diminutive «Митя»: «Митя» is the affectionate short form of Дмитрий; the tacked-on «-то» is the emphatic topic clitic — 'Mitya, I mean,' singling him out as the known subject. The pairing is warm and gossipy, exactly Grushenka's register.
> Particles «уж» and «ведь»: «Раз уж» means 'seeing as, since after all,' and «ведь» appeals to shared knowledge ('he did, you know'). These modal particles, untranslatable except by stress, carry the coaxing, confiding tone of her excuse.

Вот я, может быть, пойду да и скажу ему сейчас, чтоб он у меня с сего же дня остался… Вот я какая непостоянная…  
Maybe I'll go this very moment and tell him to come and stay with me from this very day… That's how inconstant I am…”
> «да и» + paired perfective futures: «Да и» links the two perfective futures «пойду… скажу» with a sense of impulsive resolve — 'I'll just up and go and tell him.' The colloquial «да и» adds the flavour of a sudden, headstrong decision.
> «чтоб» + past form for an indirect command: «Чтоб(ы)» introduces a willed outcome and obligatorily takes the past-tense form «остался» (the irrealis after чтобы), not a future. So 'tell him that he should stay' — the past form is grammatical, not temporal.
> Archaic «сего» — 'this very day': «Сего» is the genitive of the bookish archaic demonstrative «сей» ('this'), reinforced by emphatic «же»: 'from this very day.' The elevated «сей» in Grushenka's mouth is part of her mock-ceremonious play-acting.
> «вот я какая» — exclamatory self-display: The exclamatory frame «вот я какая…» ('that's the kind of [woman] I am') uses interrogative «какая» as an intensifier with a short-flavoured predicate adjective «непостоянная» (inconstant, fickle). It is a self-presenting flourish, half boast, half taunt.

— Давеча вы говорили… совсем не то… — едва проговорила Катерина Ивановна.  
“A while ago you said… something altogether different…” Katerina Ivanovna barely managed to say.
> «едва» + perfective «проговорила»: «Едва» ('barely, scarcely') with the perfective past «проговорила» captures a single, strained act of utterance — she just managed to get the words out. The prefix про- here lends the sense of speaking something through with effort.
> Negated «не то» — 'something quite different': «Не то» negates the demonstrative «то» ('that'), so 'not that [at all], something entirely different,' intensified by «совсем». Katerina Ivanovna is pointing back to Grushenka's earlier, kinder words now contradicted.

— Ах, давеча! А ведь я сердцем нежная, глупая. Ведь подумать только, что он из-за меня перенес!  
“Ah, a while ago! Why, I'm tender at heart, foolish. Only think what he has suffered on my account!
> Instrumental of respect «сердцем»: «Сердцем» is an instrumental of respect — 'tender in (with respect to) the heart.' Russian uses the bare instrumental to specify the domain in which a quality holds (умом, душой, сердцем). The zero copula leaves «я… нежная» without 'am.'
> «ведь» + infinitive exclamation «подумать только»: «Подумать только!» is a fixed exclamatory infinitive — 'just think!, only imagine!' Fronted by the appeal-particle «ведь», it invites the listener to share her wonder at what Mitya has endured.
> «из-за» + genitive of cause: «Из-за меня» means 'because of me, on my account': the compound preposition «из-за» governs the genitive and here marks the cause/fault. «Перенёс» (perfective) sums up everything Mitya has 'borne through' as a completed whole.

А вдруг домой приду да и пожалею его — тогда что?  
And what if I go home and start to pity him — what then?”
> «а вдруг» — 'and what if': «А вдруг» opens a worried hypothetical ('and what if…'), driving two paired perfective futures «приду… пожалею» ('I come home and start to pity him'). The «да и» again signals an impulsive, almost involuntary turn of feeling.
> Elliptical «тогда что?»: A clipped, idiomatic question — 'then what?' — with the verb and everything else left to inference. Such terse, fragmentary lines mimic the rhythm of agitated colloquial speech.

— Я не ожидала…  
“I did not expect…”
> Imperfective «ожидала» under negation, broken off: «Ожидать» (to expect) is imperfective and naturally takes a genitive complement; here the sentence is broken off mid-thought, the dash marking Katerina Ivanovna's faltering. The feminine past «ожидала» agrees in gender with the woman speaking.

— Эх, барышня, какая вы предо мной добрая, благородная выходите.  
“Eh, young lady, how kind, how noble you turn out to be beside me.
> Archaic «предо мной»: «Предо мной» is the bookish «пред» plus a buffer -о before the instrumental «мной» — 'before me, beside me.' The elevated form again colours Grushenka's mock-humble flattery with theatrical loftiness.
> «выходить» — 'turn out to be': Here «выходите» does not mean 'go out' but 'turn out, prove to be': 'how kind and noble you turn out [to be].' The adjectives «добрая, благородная» stand as predicates with no copula. The verb's surprise-flavour underscores Grushenka's feigned admiration.

Вот вы теперь, пожалуй, меня, этакую дуру, и разлюбите за мой характер.  
Now, perhaps, you'll even stop loving me, a fool like me, for my character.
> Verbal prefix «раз-» of undoing in «разлюбить»: «Разлюбить» is built from «любить» with the prefix «раз-», which here reverses the action — 'to fall out of love, cease to love.' The perfective «разлюбите» (future) names that change as a single completed turn. «Этакую дуру» ('a fool such as me') is an accusative appositive to «меня».
> «за» + accusative of cause: «За» with the accusative here gives the ground or reason — 'for (because of) my character.' This causal «за» (as in любить за что-то, наказать за что-то) is distinct from its spatial 'behind' sense with the instrumental.

Дайте мне вашу милую ручку, ангел-барышня, — нежно попросила она и как бы с благоговением взяла ручку Катерины Ивановны.  
Give me your sweet little hand, angel-young-lady,” she asked tenderly, and as though with reverence she took Katerina Ivanovna's hand.
> Polite imperative «дайте» with dative + accusative: «Дайте» is the polite/plural imperative of «дать» (give), the -те marking deference. The giving frame distributes its arguments classically: recipient in the dative («мне»), gift in the accusative («ручку»).
> Diminutive «ручка» — the caressing 'little hand': «Ручка» is the diminutive of «рука» (hand). Across this scene «ручка» is repeated obsessively, an instrument of Grushenka's cloying tenderness — the affectionate suffix turning into a weapon of mockery as the hand-kiss is withheld.
> «как бы» — 'as though, as if': «Как бы» ('as though, as if') flags the gesture as a performance — she takes the hand 'as if with reverence.' Dostoevsky's narrator uses «как бы» constantly to mark the gap between seeming and being, central to this treacherous scene.
> «благоговение» — pious reverence: «Благоговение» is a solemn, churchly word for reverent awe, the feeling proper before the sacred. Applied to a hand-kiss, it is darkly ironic: the religiose register heightens the cruelty of the mock-worship Grushenka is staging.
> «ангел-барышня» — coined endearment: An ad-hoc compound, 'angel-young-lady,' fusing «ангел» (angel) with «барышня». Grushenka improvises these saccharine compounds («ангел-барышня», «раскрасавица») as caressing address — the sweeter the name, the sharper the coming betrayal.

— Вот я, милая барышня, вашу ручку возьму и так же, как вы мне, поцелую.  
“Here, sweet young lady, I'll take your little hand and kiss it just as you kissed mine.
> Paired perfective futures «возьму… поцелую»: Two perfective present-forms read as future ('I'll take… and kiss'), promising a single completed deed. The comparative clause «так же, как вы мне» ('just as you [kissed] mine') gapps the verb, a natural ellipsis in speech.

Вы мне три раза поцеловали, а мне бы вам надо триста раз за это поцеловать, чтобы сквитаться.  
You kissed me three times, and I ought to kiss you three hundred times for it to be even.
> «три раза» — accusative of count: «Три раза» ('three times') is an accusative adverbial of frequency. Note the dialectal/popular «вы мне поцеловали» with a dative «мне» where standard Russian might phrase it differently — a touch of Grushenka's unschooled speech.
> Conditional «бы» softening obligation: «Мне бы… надо… поцеловать» layers a dative-experiencer obligation («мне надо») with the irrealis particle «бы», softening it to 'I really ought to.' The infinitive «поцеловать» completes the impersonal frame, with no nominative subject.
> Purpose «чтобы» + reflexive «сквитаться»: «Чтобы» here introduces purpose with an infinitive ('in order to get even'). «Сквитаться» is a reflexive perfective — 'to settle a score, become quits' — its -ся giving the reciprocal sense of two parties squaring accounts.

Да так уж и быть, а затем пусть как бог пошлет; может, я вам полная раба буду и во всем пожелаю вам рабски угодить.  
Well, so be it, and then let it be as God sends; perhaps I'll be your complete slave and wish to please you in everything, slavishly.
> Idiom «так уж и быть» — 'so be it': «Так уж и быть» is a set concessive phrase, 'all right then, so be it,' the infinitive «быть» with insistent «уж и» giving a tone of grudging consent. It marks Grushenka pretending to relent.
> Compound future «буду» + predicate «раба»: «Буду… раба» uses the imperfective compound future of быть with a predicate noun. Note the nominative «раба» ('slave,' fem.) rather than the more usual predicate instrumental — a colloquial preference that keeps the role vivid and present. Cf. the instrumental «рабою» one would expect in higher style.
> Adverb «рабски» — 'slavishly': «Рабски» is the adverb from «раб» (slave) — 'in a slavish manner.' Paired with «угодить» ('to please, gratify'), it casts abject servility, the same scare-quoted «рабски» the narrator will pick up later as Katerina Ivanovna recoils.

Как бог положит, пусть так оно и будет безо всяких между собой сговоров и обещаний.  
As God disposes, so let it be, with no pacts or promises between us.
> Hortative «пусть… будет»: «Пусть» plus a 3rd-person future («будет») forms a third-person command/wish — 'let it be so.' «Положит» here is an old idiom 'as God ordains/disposes,' parallel to «как бог пошлёт» above. The resumptive «так оно и будет» echoes the folk-correlative rhythm.
> «без» + genitive, and reflexive «между собой»: «Безо» (the -о variant of без before clusters) governs the genitive plural «сговоров и обещаний» ('without any pacts or promises'). «Между собой» uses the reflexive «собой» — 'between ourselves,' pointing back to the two of them as the implied subject.

Ручка-то, ручка-то у вас милая, ручка-то! Барышня вы милая, раскрасавица вы моя невозможная!  
What a hand, what a hand you have, sweet hand! You are a sweet young lady, my impossible beauty!”
> Emphatic «-то» and exclamatory repetition: The threefold «ручка-то» pins the topic with the emphatic clitic «-то» ('that hand of yours, the hand!'), the obsessive repetition mounting toward the trap. «У вас милая» is the possessive 'have' frame (у + genitive) with a zero-copula predicate adjective.
> «раскрасавица» — intensified beauty: «Раскрасавица» is «красавица» ('a beauty') heightened by the augmentative prefix «рас-/раз-»: 'a ravishing beauty, a beauty beyond beauties.' With «невозможная» ('impossible') it forms hyperbolic, folk-poetic flattery — the high-water mark of false tenderness.

Она тихо понесла эту ручку к губам своим, правда, с странною целью: «сквитаться» поцелуями.  
She slowly carried that hand to her own lips, though, it is true, with a strange aim: to “make it even” with kisses.
> Reflexive possessive «своим» + dative-governing «к»: «К губам своим» — «к» governs the dative ('toward her lips'), and the reflexive possessive «своим» fixes the lips as her own (the clause's subject's). Inverting noun before possessive («губам своим») is a literary, slightly archaic word-order touch.
> Old-style instrumental «-ою» in «странною целью»: «Странною целью» ('with a strange aim') is instrumental after «с»; the feminine adjective ending «-ою» (for modern «-ой») is the longer, bookish 19th-century variant Dostoevsky favours. The whole phrase frames the means/manner of the act.

Катерина Ивановна не отняла руки: она с робкою надеждой выслушала последнее, хотя тоже очень странно выраженное обещание Грушеньки «рабски» угодить ей; она напряженно смотрела ей в глаза: она видела в этих глазах всё то же простодушное, доверчивое выражение, всё ту же ясную веселость…  
Katerina Ivanovna did not withdraw her hand: with timid hope she listened to Grushenka's last promise, oddly worded though it was, to please her “slavishly”; she gazed tensely into her eyes — in those eyes she saw still the same guileless, trusting expression, still the same bright gaiety…
> Genitive of negation «руки»: Under the negated verb «не отняла» the object slips from accusative to genitive «руки» — the genitive of negation, idiomatic with verbs of withdrawal and refusal. Without the negation it would be «отняла руку».
> Instrumental of manner «с робкою надеждой»: «С робкою надеждой» ('with timid hope') is с + instrumental describing the manner of the listening; again the archaic feminine «-ою». «Выслушала» (perfective) frames hearing the promise out to its end as a completed act.
> Past passive participle «выраженное»: «Выраженное» is a long-form past passive participle from «выразить» ('express'), agreeing with neuter «обещание»: 'the promise, [though] oddly worded.' Such participial modifiers compress a whole relative clause and are a staple of Dostoevsky's dense narration.
> Imperfective «видела» of sustained looking: The imperfective past «видела» (and «смотрела») holds the gaze as an ongoing process against the perfective acts around it. «Всё то же» ('still the same') uses «то же» ('the same') to stress the unchanging, guileless look — the very mask that disarms Katerina Ivanovna.

«Она, может быть, слишком наивна!» — промелькнуло надеждой в сердце Катерины Ивановны.  
“Perhaps she is too naïve!” flashed with hope through Katerina Ivanovna's heart.
> Instrumental «надеждой» of manner + neuter «промелькнуло»: «Промелькнуло» ('flashed by') is impersonal-neuter, its subject the quoted thought; «надеждой» is an instrumental of manner — the thought flashed 'as/with hope.' The perfective про- + мелькнуть captures a single instantaneous flicker through her heart.
> Short adjective «наивна»: «Наивна» is the short (predicative) form of «наивный» — 'naïve.' The short form, more bookish than the long, states it as a momentary verdict: 'perhaps she is too naïve.' A Gallicism in lexis, fitting Katerina Ivanovna's polished milieu.

Грушенька меж тем как бы в восхищении от «милой ручки» медленно поднимала ее к губам своим.  
Grushenka, meanwhile, as though in delight at the “sweet little hand,” slowly raised it toward her own lips.
> Bookish «меж тем» + «как бы»: «Меж тем» is the shortened, literary form of «между тем» ('meanwhile'). With «как бы» ('as though in delight') the narrator once more flags Grushenka's rapture as feigned — the steady «как бы» drumbeat that keeps the reader ahead of the victim.
> Imperfective «поднимала» — slow, unfinished raising: The imperfective past «поднимала» stretches the gesture out as a deliberate, in-progress motion ('was slowly raising'), priming the reader for the sudden perfective interruption «задержала» in the next sentence.

Но у самых губ она вдруг ручку задержала на два, на три мгновения, как бы раздумывая о чем-то.  
But just at her very lips she suddenly held the hand back for two or three moments, as though pondering something.
> Perfective «задержала» cutting the imperfective flow: Against the imperfective 'was raising,' the perfective «задержала» ('held back, arrested') with «вдруг» marks the abrupt, decisive break — the pivot of the whole scene. «На два, на три мгновения» is «на» + accusative of duration.
> Imperfective gerund «раздумывая»: «Раздумывая» is a present (imperfective) деепричастие — 'while pondering' — sharing the subject of «задержала» and naming the attendant circumstance. «О чём-то» ('about something') uses the indefinite «-то» for a real but unnamed object.

— А знаете что, ангел-барышня, — вдруг протянула она самым уже нежным и слащавейшим голоском, — знаете что, возьму я да вашу ручку и не поцелую. — И она засмеялась маленьким развеселым смешком.  
“You know what, angel-young-lady,” she suddenly drawled in the very tenderest, most sugary little voice, “you know what, I think I'll just up and not kiss your little hand after all.” And she burst into a small, merry little laugh.
> Idiom «знаете что» — 'you know what': «А знаете что» ('you know what') is a conversational opener seizing attention before the blow. The polite «знаете» (2nd-plural present) keeps up the deferential address even as Grushenka prepares to humiliate.
> Superlative «слащавейший» + diminutive «голосок»: «Слащавейшим» is the bookish -ейший superlative of «слащавый» ('cloying, saccharine'), here biting and ironic; «голоском» is the diminutive of «голос» (voice). The combination — 'in the most sugary little voice' — drips with the narrator's contempt for the performance.
> «возьму да и не поцелую» — 'I'll just up and not kiss': The «возьму да (и)» construction with a second perfective verb expresses a sudden, wilful act ('I'll just go and…'), here negated: 'I think I'll just NOT kiss your hand.' The interposed «не» before «поцелую» lands the refusal as the punchline.
> «смешок» — a little laugh: «Смешок» is a diminutive of «смех» (laughter), a short, light little laugh; «развесёлый» ('merry, gay-as-can-be') has the intensifying раз-. The petite, gleeful laugh seals the triumph of her ambush.

— Как хотите… Что с вами? — вздрогнула вдруг Катерина Ивановна.  
“As you wish… What is the matter with you?” Katerina Ivanovna started suddenly.
> Idiom «как хотите» — 'as you wish': «Как хотите» ('as you like, suit yourself') is a fixed polite formula, «хотите» the 2nd-plural present of «хотеть». Clipped here, it shows Katerina Ivanovna struggling to keep composure as alarm breaks through.
> Idiom «что с вами?» — 'what's the matter with you?': «Что с вами?» literally 'what [is] with you?' — «с» + instrumental «вами» — is the standard way to ask what is wrong. The copula is dropped, as always in the zero-copula present.
> Semelfactive perfective «вздрогнула»: «Вздрогнуть» is a perfective verb of a single momentary jolt — 'gave a start, shuddered once.' The -ну- type marks one instantaneous occurrence, perfectly fitting the sudden flinch «вдруг» announces.

— А так и оставайтесь с тем на память, что вы-то у меня ручку целовали, а я у вас нет. — Что-то сверкнуло вдруг в ее глазах.  
“Just this — so you'll be left with the memory that you kissed my hand, while I did not kiss yours.” Something suddenly flashed in her eyes.
> Imperative «оставайтесь» + «с тем, что…»: «Оставайтесь» is the polite imperative of the reflexive «оставаться» ('remain'). «С тем» ('with that') is the instrumental of «то», pointing forward to the «что»-clause: 'stay with [the fact] that…' — a correlative that frames the cruel keepsake.
> Contrastive «а» + emphatic «вы-то»: The mild contrastive «а» pivots between the two clauses ('you kissed mine, but I…'), while «вы-то» fronts and stresses the contrasted subject with the clitic «-то». The gapped «а я у вас нет» ('and I — not from you') leaves the verb out, biting in its brevity.
> Indefinite subject «что-то» + perfective «сверкнуло»: «Что-то» ('something,' specific but unnamed) is the neuter subject of «сверкнуло» ('flashed once'), a perfective semelfactive. The narrator withholds what flashed, letting menace gleam without naming it.

Она ужасно пристально глядела на Катерину Ивановну.  
She stared with dreadful intensity at Katerina Ivanovna.
> Imperfective «глядела» of an intent, held gaze: The imperfective past «глядела» ('was gazing, kept staring') with the intensifying adverbs «ужасно пристально» ('with dreadful fixity') stretches the stare into an unbearable, ongoing moment — the predatory pause before the open insult.

— Наглая! — проговорила вдруг Катерина Ивановна, как бы вдруг что-то поняв, вся вспыхнула и вскочила с места.  
“Insolent creature!” Katerina Ivanovna said suddenly, as though something had abruptly dawned on her; she flushed all over and sprang up from her seat.
> «наглая» — insolent, brazen: «Наглая» ('insolent, shameless, brazen') is hurled here as a substantivized adjective — 'insolent [one]!' It opens the volley of escalating abuse (наглая → мерзавка → продажная тварь) that marks Katerina Ivanovna's collapse from poise into fury.
> Perfective past gerund «поняв»: «Поняв» is a perfective past деепричастие from «понять» ('having understood'), naming a completed prior act: 'as though she had suddenly grasped something.' It shares the subject of «проговорила». The «как бы» keeps even her dawning realization tentative.
> Chained perfectives «вспыхнула… вскочила»: Two perfective pasts move the action forward in quick succession — 'flushed all over and sprang up.' «Вся» ('all over,' agreeing fem.) intensifies the blush; «с места» is 'from her seat' (с + genitive of place).

Не спеша поднялась и Грушенька.  
Grushenka rose too, without haste.
> Negated gerund «не спеша» + fronting for contrast: «Не спеша» ('without hurrying, unhurriedly') is a frozen negated gerund used adverbially. Fronting it before «поднялась и Грушенька» throws the unhurried calm into relief — Grushenka's icy composure against Katerina Ivanovna's frenzy. The «и» here means 'too' (Grushenka also rose).

— Так я и Мите сейчас перескажу, как вы мне целовали ручку, а я-то у вас совсем нет. А уж как он будет смеяться!  
“So I'll just tell Mitya, the very same way, how you kissed my hand while I didn't kiss yours at all. And oh, how he'll laugh!”
> Prefix «пере-» of relaying in «пересказать»: «Пересказать» ('to retell, relay, repeat to someone') carries the пере- of passing a thing across. The dative «Мите» is the recipient. «Так… и» frames it as a gleeful threat: 'that's just how I'll tell Mitya all about it.'
> «уж как» exclamative + imperfective future: «А уж как… будет смеяться!» is an emphatic exclamation ('and oh, how he'll laugh!'), «уж как» heightening the degree. «Будет смеяться» is the imperfective compound future (быть + infinitive), naming the laughter as ongoing, drawn-out delight.

— Мерзавка, вон!  
“Vile wretch — out!”
> «мерзавка» — a vile wretch (feminine): «Мерзавка» is the feminine of «мерзавец», from «мерзкий» ('loathsome'): a contemptible, vile woman. The bare noun + «вон!» ('out!') is a furious, two-word ejection, the curtest of dismissals.
> «вон!» — 'out! get out!': «Вон» as a command means 'out! away!' — a sharp directive to leave, distinct from «вон» meaning 'over there.' Flung alone it is the rawest expulsion.

— Ах как стыдно, барышня, ах как стыдно, это вам даже и непристойно совсем, такие слова, милая барышня.  
“Ah, how shameful, young lady, ah, how shameful; that's even downright indecent of you, such words, sweet young lady.”
> Dative-experiencer «(вам) стыдно»: «Стыдно» is a predicative adverb in the impersonal shame-construction: the one ashamed stands in the dative (here implied 'to you'), with no nominative subject. The mock-reproachful «ах как стыдно» turns Katerina Ivanovna's own respectability against her.
> Dative «вам» of judgment + «непристойно»: «Вам непристойно» ('it is unseemly/indecent of you') again uses a dative of the person to whom the impersonal predicate applies. «Даже и… совсем» piles on intensifiers, Grushenka feigning prim scandal at the very crudeness she has provoked.

— Вон, продажная тварь! — завопила Катерина Ивановна.  
“Out, you creature for sale!” Katerina Ivanovna screamed.
> «продажная тварь» — 'creature for sale': «Продажная» (from «продать», to sell) means 'venal, for sale,' and as applied to a woman, 'a whore'; «тварь» ('creature') is a savage term of abuse. Together — 'a creature for sale' — it is the unforgivable accusation that ignites the rest of the scene.
> Perfective «завопила» — onset of screaming: «Завопить» is the perfective of «вопить» (to wail, screech) with the inceptive prefix «за-» marking the start of the action: 'burst into a scream.' This за- of beginning recurs as the room erupts.

Всякая черточка дрожала в ее совсем исказившемся лице.  
Every little feature was trembling in her wholly contorted face.
> Diminutive «чёрточка» — 'little feature/line': «Чёрточка» is the diminutive of «черта» ('feature, line'), here 'every little line/feature.' «Всякая» ('every single') universalizes it. The tiny suffix renders the minute trembling of her whole disfigured face.
> Past active participle «исказившемся» (reflexive): «Исказившемся» is a past active participle from the reflexive «исказиться» ('to become distorted'), declined in the prepositional to agree with «лице»: 'in her wholly distorted face.' The -ся keeps it intransitive (the face contorted itself), and the participle packs a whole который-clause into one word.

— Ну уж и продажная. Сами вы девицей к кавалерам за деньгами в сумерки хаживали, свою красоту продавать приносили, ведь я же знаю.  
“For sale, am I. And you yourself, as a girl, went to gentlemen for money at dusk, brought your beauty to sell — why, I know all about it.”
> Sarcastic echo «ну уж и продажная»: Grushenka throws the insult back with «ну уж и…», a sarcastic concessive frame ('for sale, am I…'), the particles «уж и» heavy with mocking doubt. The dropped copula leaves «продажная» bare, picked up from Katerina Ivanovna's own slur.
> Iterative «хаживали» — 'used to go (repeatedly)': «Хаживать» is the iterative/frequentative of «ходить», a folk-archaic form denoting habitual, repeated past action: 'you used to go, would go [more than once].' This expressive iterative — rare in the modern standard — gives the accusation a peasant, scornful weight.
> Reflexive possessive «свою» + purpose infinitive: «Свою красоту» ('your own beauty,' свой pointing to the clause subject 'you') is the object of the goal-infinitive «продавать» ('to sell'), which depends on «приносили» ('you brought [it] to sell'). The infinitive of purpose after a verb of motion is idiomatic.
> Double particle «ведь… же»: Both appeal-particles cluster: «ведь» ('after all') and «же» (insistence) — 'for I do know, you see.' Stacking them gives the line its triumphant, knowing finality.

Катерина Ивановна вскрикнула и бросилась было на нее, но ее удержал всею силой Алеша:  
Katerina Ivanovna cried out and would have flung herself at her, but Alyosha held her back with all his strength:
> The frustrative particle «было»: «Было» after a perfective past marks an action begun or about-to-be that was checked or undone: 'she made to fling herself / would have flung herself.' Here her lunge is arrested by Alyosha — the particle тells us the deed never completed.
> Instrumental of means «всею силой» + inverted order: «Всею силой» ('with all his strength') is the instrumental of means, with the archaic «-ею» ending («всею» for «всей»). The object «её» is fronted before the subject «Алёша» — free word order putting the restrained Katerina first, then revealing who restrains her.

— Ни шагу, ни слова! Не говорите, не отвечайте ничего, она уйдет, сейчас уйдет!  
“Not a step, not a word! Don't speak, don't answer anything — she'll go, she'll go this minute!”
> Genitive after «ни» — 'not a step, not a word': «Ни шагу, ни слова» pairs the intensifier «ни» with the genitive («шагу», «слова») in an elliptical prohibition — 'not a single step, not a word [more].' «Шагу» shows the old partitive/genitive -у. The verbless command is breathless and absolute.
> Negated imperatives (imperfective) + concord «ничего»: The prohibitions take imperfective imperatives «говорите… отвечайте» — the normal aspect for 'don't [do at all].' «Ничего» ('anything') keeps the obligatory negative concord with «не отвечайте»: a double negative making one prohibition.
> Prefixed motion «уйдёт» (perfective future): «Уйти» (у- 'away' + idti) is the perfective 'to leave, go away'; «уйдёт» is its simple future. The doubling «уйдёт, сейчас уйдёт» ('she'll go, she'll go this minute') is Alyosha urgently reassuring Katerina that the ordeal is about to end.

В это мгновение в комнату вбежали на крик обе родственницы Катерины Ивановны, вбежала и горничная.  
At that instant both of Katerina Ivanovna's kinswomen ran into the room at the cry, and the maid ran in too.
> Prefixed motion «вбежали» + «на крик»: «Вбежать» (в- 'in' + бежать) is 'to run in,' perfective. «На крик» ('at the cry') uses «на» + accusative in its reactive sense ('in response to'). The anaphoric repetition «вбежали… вбежала и горничная» piles the rushing bodies into the room.
> Feminine collective numeral «обе»: «Обе» is the feminine form of 'both' (masc./mixed «оба»), agreeing with the two female «родственницы» ('kinswomen, female relatives'). The numeral governs the noun and signals that both women, and only women, are meant.

Все бросились к ней.  
They all rushed to her.
> Reflexive perfective «бросились» + «к» + dative: «Броситься» ('to rush, fling oneself') is reflexive perfective; «все» ('everyone') its subject. «К ней» — «к» governs the dative «ней» (with the prepositional н-) — 'toward her.' A terse, fast perfective advancing the bustle.

— И уйду, — проговорила Грушенька, подхватив с дивана мантилью. — Алеша, милый, проводи-ка меня!  
“I'm going, then,” Grushenka said, snatching up her mantilla from the sofa. “Alyosha, dear, do see me out!”
> «и уйду» — concessive 'I'm going, then': The clause-initial «и» here is concessive/responsive — 'all right, I'm off then' — answering the shouted «вон!». «Уйду» is again the perfective future of «уйти». Grushenka leaves on her own terms, unhurried and triumphant.
> Perfective gerund «подхватив»: «Подхватив» is a perfective past деепричастие from «подхватить» ('snatch up'), naming a prior completed act done by the same subject: 'having snatched up [her mantilla].' It compresses the by-action of grabbing her wrap as she speaks.
> Imperative + softening particle «-ка», diminutive «Алёша»: «Проводи» is the familiar (ты) imperative of «проводить» ('to see [someone] out, escort'); the clitic «-ка» softens it to a coaxing 'do see me out.' Grushenka switches to intimate ты and the affectionate name «Алёша», suddenly tender toward him alone.

— Уйдите, уйдите поскорей! — сложил пред нею, умоляя, руки Алеша.  
“Go away, go away, quickly!” Alyosha folded his hands before her, imploring.
> Polite imperative «уйдите» + comparative «поскорей»: Alyosha keeps the formal вы («уйдите», polite imperative of «уйти»), repeated for urgency. «Поскорей» is the colloquial comparative «скорее» ('quicker, sooner') with the appeal-prefix по-: 'as quickly as possible.'
> Imperfective gerund «умоляя» + inverted order: «Умоляя» ('imploring') is a present деепричастие giving the manner of «сложил… руки» ('folded his hands'). The heavily inverted order — verb, then the inserted gerund, then object and subject last — is literary, building the gesture before naming Alyosha. «Пред нею» again the archaic «пред» + «-ею».

— Милый Алешенька, проводи! Я тебе дорогой хорошенькое-хорошенькое одно словцо скажу!  
“Dear little Alyosha, see me out! I'll tell you one lovely, lovely little word on the way!
> Double diminutive «Алёшенька»: «Алёшенька» adds the tender -еньк- suffix to the already-diminutive Алёша — an extra rung of endearment ('dear little Alyosha'). Grushenka coats Alyosha alone in this warmth, distinguishing him from her cruelty to all the rest.
> Reduplicated «хорошенькое» + diminutive «словцо»: The doubled diminutive adjective «хорошенькое-хорошенькое» ('ever so nice') intensifies by repetition, and «словцо» is the diminutive of «слово» ('a little word'). The caressing, childlike pile-up of suffixes is pure Grushenka coaxing.

Я это для тебя, Алешенька, сцену проделала. Проводи, голубчик, после понравится.  
I put on this scene for you, Alyoshenka. See me out, my dove; afterward you'll be glad of it.”
> «для» + genitive of benefit + perfective «проделала»: «Для тебя» ('for you, for your sake') is «для» + genitive. «Проделать сцену» ('to put on / pull off a scene') is perfective, framing the whole performance as a single completed act she staged deliberately — the chilling confession that it was theatre.
> Impersonal «понравится» — 'you'll come to like it': «После понравится» is an impersonal-leaning future: 'afterwards [it] will please [you],' the implied experiencer in the dative. «Голубчик» ('little dove,' a tender vocative-style address) again wraps Alyosha in affection. «Проводи» is the familiar imperative of «проводить».

Алеша отвернулся, ломая руки.  
Alyosha turned away, wringing his hands.
> Reflexive perfective «отвернулся»: «Отвернуться» ('to turn away') is a reflexive (-ся) perfective of change of orientation: Alyosha turns himself aside, a single completed movement of recoil.
> Imperfective gerund «ломая руки»: «Ломая руки» ('wringing his hands,' lit. 'breaking [his] hands') is a present деепричастие of attendant manner, simultaneous with «отвернулся». The idiom names a gesture of helpless anguish.

Грушенька, звонко смеясь, выбежала из дома.  
Grushenka, laughing ringingly, ran out of the house.
> Imperfective gerund «смеясь» + prefixed motion «выбежала»: «Смеясь» (from the -ся verb «смеяться») is a present gerund of manner — 'laughing' as she goes. «Выбежать» (вы- 'out' + бежать) is the perfective 'to run out'; «из дома» is из + genitive of source. Her ringing laugh trails her triumphant exit.

С Катериной Ивановной сделался припадок.  
Katerina Ivanovna was seized with a fit.
> Impersonal «сделался» with «с» + instrumental: «С кем-то сделался припадок» ('a fit came over someone') is a fixed impersonal frame: «с» + instrumental names the person it happens to, while the event («припадок») is the grammatical subject. Russian regularly casts seizures and ailments as things that befall a person rather than things they do.
> «припадок» — a fit, an attack: «Припадок» is a seizure or nervous fit (also the word for an epileptic attack — charged in this novel, given Smerdyakov). Here it is Katerina Ivanovna's hysterical collapse after the humiliation.

Она рыдала, спазмы душили ее.  
She sobbed, spasms choked her.
> Imperfective «рыдала… душили» of ongoing distress: Both verbs are imperfective past, painting the continuing, unbounded state — 'she was sobbing, spasms were choking her.' The imperfective is the natural aspect for describing a condition that simply goes on, with no single endpoint.

Все около нее суетились.  
Everyone fussed about her.
> Imperfective reflexive «суетились» + «около» + genitive: «Суетиться» ('to bustle, fuss about') is an imperfective -ся verb of busy, aimless motion. «Около неё» ('around her') is «около» + genitive. The imperfective holds the whole flurry as an ongoing scene around the stricken woman.

— Я вас предупреждала, — говорила ей старшая тетка, — я вас удерживала от этого шага… вы слишком пылки… разве можно было решиться на такой шаг!  
“I warned you,” the elder aunt said to her. “I tried to hold you back from this step… you are too impetuous… how could you ever resolve on such a step!
> Imperfective «предупреждала» of repeated warning: The imperfective past «предупреждала» ('I was warning / kept warning you') stresses the repeated, prior cautioning, as against a single perfective 'I warned.' The aunt is reproaching her with a whole history of unheeded counsel.
> «удерживать от» + genitive: «Удерживать от чего-либо» ('to hold someone back from something') governs the genitive «от этого шага» ('from this step'). The imperfective «удерживала» again marks the sustained effort to restrain her.
> Rhetorical «разве» + impersonal «можно было»: «Разве» fronts an indignant rhetorical question ('how could one possibly…!'). «Можно было решиться» is the impersonal modal «можно» ('it is possible/permitted') in the past with «было», plus the reflexive perfective «решиться на» ('resolve upon') + accusative.

Вы этих тварей не знаете, а про эту говорят, что она хуже всех… Нет, вы слишком своевольны!  
You don't know these creatures, and of this one they say she is the worst of them all… No, you are too willful!”
> «тварь» as a class slur: Here «тварей» (gen.-acc. pl. of «тварь», 'creature') is used contemptuously of women like Grushenka — 'such creatures.' The aunt's genteel disdain reuses the very word Katerina Ivanovna hurled, making it the scene's keyword of scorn.
> Suppletive comparative «хуже всех»: «Хуже» is the irregular (suppletive) comparative of «плохой» ('bad'); «хуже всех» ('worse than all') is the genitive-of-comparison superlative — 'the worst of them all.' «Про эту» ('about this one') uses «про» + accusative for the topic of report.
> Short adjective «своевольны» — 'too willful': «Своевольны» is the short predicative plural of «своевольный» ('self-willed, headstrong'), built from «своя воля» ('one's own will'). The short form delivers the verdict crisply — 'you are too willful' — echoing Grushenka's earlier «самовластная».

— Это тигр! — завопила Катерина Ивановна. — Зачем вы удержали меня, Алексей Федорович, я бы избила ее, избила!  
“She is a tiger!” Katerina Ivanovna screamed. “Why did you hold me back, Alexei Fyodorovich? I'd have beaten her, beaten her!”
> Zero-copula equation «это тигр»: «Это тигр!» ('she is a tiger!') is the bare nominal sentence with no copula — «это» + nominative predicate, the present-tense norm in Russian. The metaphor brands Grushenka a beast of prey.
> Conditional «бы» + perfective «избила»: «Я бы избила» is the irrealis: past-form «избила» + particle «бы» = 'I would have beaten [her].' «Избить» (perfective, из- intensive) is 'to beat thoroughly, thrash.' The repetition «избила, избила!» is her thwarted fury spilling over.

Она не в силах была сдерживать себя пред Алешей, может быть, и не хотела сдерживаться.  
She was unable to restrain herself before Alyosha — perhaps she did not even wish to.
> Idiom «не в силах» + reflexive object «себя»: «Не в силах» ('powerless, unable') is a fixed predicative phrase taking an infinitive. «Сдерживать себя» uses the full reflexive pronoun «себя» ('to restrain oneself') — distinct from the verbal -ся — as a true object pointing back to the subject. The imperfective «сдерживать» frames the failed, ongoing effort at self-control.
> Reflexive «сдерживаться» vs «сдерживать себя»: Now the same idea recurs with the -ся verb «сдерживаться» ('to restrain oneself, hold back') rather than «сдерживать себя» — Russian offers both, the -ся form being lighter and more idiomatic for the intransitive 'hold oneself in.' «И не хотела» ('did not even wish') deepens the confession.

— Ее нужно плетью, на эшафоте, чрез палача, при народе!..  
“She ought to be flogged, on a scaffold, by the hangman, before the people!..”
> Impersonal «нужно» with implied infinitive + instrumental «плетью»: «Её нужно [бить/наказать] плетью» — the impersonal modal «нужно» governs an elided infinitive, with «плетью» ('with a whip') the instrumental of means. The verb is left unsaid, the bare instruments of punishment hammering out in cold rage.
> Archaic «чрез» for «через»: «Чрез» is the elevated, contracted variant of «через» ('through, by means of'), governing the accusative «палача» — 'by [the hand of] the executioner.' The lofty form lends her tirade a grim, almost biblical solemnity.

Алеша попятился к дверям.  
Alyosha edged back toward the door.
> Reflexive perfective «попятился» + «к» + dative plural: «Попятиться» ('to back away, edge backward') is a reflexive perfective. «К дверям» — «к» + dative plural «дверям» (the plural «двери» commonly denotes a single doorway). Alyosha's recoiling step away marks his wish to flee the scene.

— Но боже! — вскрикнула вдруг Катерина Ивановна, всплеснув руками, — он-то! Он мог быть так бесчестен, так бесчеловечен!  
“But my God!” Katerina Ivanovna suddenly cried out, throwing up her hands. “He! That he could be so dishonorable, so inhuman!
> Church-Slavonic vocative «Боже»: «Боже» is the surviving vocative of «Бог» (God), preserved from Church Slavonic for direct address and exclamation — 'O God! my God!' Modern Russian has no living vocative case, so «Боже», «Господи», «отче» are cherished relics, heard exactly at such moments of outcry.
> Perfective gerund «всплеснув руками»: «Всплеснув руками» ('throwing up / clasping her hands') is a perfective past деепричастие naming the prior gesture; «руками» is the instrumental of the body part. The idiom expresses a sudden burst of dismay.
> Emphatic «он-то» + short adjective «бесчестен»: «Он-то!» fronts Dmitri with the topic-clitic «-то» in incredulous emphasis ('he, of all people!'). «Бесчестен» and «бесчеловечен» are short predicative adjectives ('dishonorable,' 'inhuman') after «мог быть», the short form lending an absolute, sweeping verdict.

Ведь он рассказал этой твари о том, что было там, в тогдашний роковой, вечно проклятый, проклятый день!  
Why, he told that creature about what happened there, on that fateful, forever accursed, accursed day!
> «ведь» + «о том, что…» correlative: «Ведь» ('why, after all') opens the accusing recognition. «О том, что было там» uses the correlative «о том» (о + prepositional «том») anticipating the «что»-clause — 'about [the thing] that happened there.' «Этой твари» ('to that creature') is the dative recipient.
> Adjective stacking + repetition «проклятый, проклятый»: A chain of agreeing modifiers ('that fateful, forever accursed, accursed day') heaps on the noun «день», all in accusative after «в» (motion-into-time). «Тогдашний» ('of that time, then-') is a relational adjective from «тогда». The doubled «проклятый» is emotive repetition, the curse spat twice.

«Приходили красу продавать, милая барышня!» Она знает!  
‘You came to sell your beauty, sweet young lady!’ She knows it!
> Imperfective «приходили» + goal infinitive «продавать»: Quoting Grushenka's taunt, Katerina Ivanovna echoes the imperfective «приходили» ('you came [repeatedly]') of habitual past, with the goal-infinitive «продавать» ('to sell'). «Краса» is the bookish/folk-poetic doublet of «красота» ('beauty').
> «краса» — poetic 'beauty': «Краса» (here accusative «красу») is the elevated, folk-poetic variant of «красота». Its old-fashioned ring sharpens the cruelty of the phrase 'you came to sell your beauty,' as if lifted from a ballad and turned into a jeer.
> Imperfective present «знает» — 'she knows!': «Знает» is the imperfective present (3rd singular) of «знать» — a verb that exists only imperfective. The bare, stressed «Она знает!» ('she knows it!') is the horror crystallized: the secret is out.

Ваш брат подлец, Алексей Федорович!  
Your brother is a scoundrel, Alexei Fyodorovich!”
> Zero-copula equation «ваш брат подлец»: 'Your brother [is] a scoundrel' — a present-tense nominal sentence with no copula, «подлец» a nominative predicate. The blunt, verbless structure delivers the verdict like a slap.
> «подлец» — a scoundrel, a base man: «Подлец» (from «подлый», 'base, vile, low') is one of Russian's strongest words for a morally contemptible man — a cad, a scoundrel. Aimed at Dmitri, it is Katerina Ivanovna's bitterest indictment of his betrayal.

Алеше хотелось что-то сказать, но он не находил ни одного слова.  
Alyosha wanted to say something, but he could not find a single word.
> Dative-experiencer «Алёше хотелось»: «Хотелось» is the impersonal reflexive of «хотеть»: the wanter «Алёше» stands in the dative, the verb fixed neuter, with no nominative subject — 'Alyosha felt like saying something.' This dative-of-impulse frame, so frequent in Dostoevsky, renders feeling as something that wells up unbidden.
> Genitive of negation «ни одного слова»: Under negation «не находил» the object goes genitive, intensified by «ни одного» ('not a single') — 'could not find a single word.' «Слова» is genitive singular here governed by «одного». The imperfective «находил» depicts the prolonged, fruitless searching for words.

Сердце его сжималось от боли.  
His heart was wrung with pain.
> Reflexive «сжималось» + «от» + genitive of cause: «Сжиматься» ('to contract, be wrung,' -ся middle/intransitive) in the imperfective past depicts the heart's continuing ache. «От боли» ('from pain') is «от» + genitive of cause. Word order «сердце его» (noun before possessive) is a literary inversion.

— Уходите, Алексей Федорович! Мне стыдно, мне ужасно!  
“Go away, Alexei Fyodorovich! I am ashamed, it is dreadful for me!
> Polite imperative «уходите» (imperfective): «Уходите» is the polite imperative of the imperfective «уходить» ('go away, leave') — the imperfective imperative urging the immediate carrying-out of the departure. She again uses the formal full name-and-patronymic for Alyosha.
> Dative-experiencer «мне стыдно… ужасно»: Two impersonal feeling-constructions: «мне стыдно» ('I am ashamed') and «мне ужасно» ('it is dreadful for me / I feel awful'), each with the experiencer «мне» in the dative and a predicative adverb, no nominative subject. The pattern lays her shame bare in the most idiomatic Russian way.

Завтра… умоляю вас на коленях, придите завтра.  
Tomorrow… I beg you on my knees, come tomorrow.”
> «на коленях» + polite imperative «придите»: «На коленях» ('on [my] knees') is на + prepositional, a figure of abject entreaty. «Придите» is the polite imperative of the prefixed motion verb «прийти» (при- + идти, 'to come, arrive') — 'come tomorrow.' The plea closes the chapter on a note of broken supplication.

Не осудите, простите, я не знаю, что с собой еще сделаю!  
Do not judge me, forgive me — I myself do not know what I may yet do with myself!
> A stacked pair of pleas: Both verbs are perfective imperatives in the polite/plural form (-те): «осудите» from «осудить» (condemn), «простите» from «простить» (forgive). The perfective frames each as a single, decisive act — condemn me not even once, forgive me outright — heightening the breathlessness of Katerina Ivanovna's appeal.
> Negated command with «не»: The negator «не» stands directly before the verb it denies, turning the imperative into a prohibition — "do not condemn (me)." Note that Russian needs no object pronoun here; the "me" is supplied by context, which English must spell out.
> Perfective future and the reflexive «себя»: «сделаю» is the conjugated perfective «сделать», which yields future meaning with no auxiliary — "what I will do." «с собой» is the reflexive pronoun «себя» in the instrumental after «с», pointing back to the speaker: literally "what I will do with myself," a veiled hint at self-harm.

Алеша вышел на улицу как бы шатаясь.  
Alyosha walked out into the street as though staggering.
> Imperfective gerund «деепричастие»: «шатаясь» is the present (imperfective) adverbial participle of «шататься» (to sway, stagger), formed in -ясь. It describes an action attendant on the main verb «вышел» — he walked out *while* staggering — and shares its subject, Alyosha. This non-finite verb-adverb is a hallmark of literary narration.
> «как бы» — "as though": The compound «как бы» (literally "as if," carrying the irrealis particle «бы») softens «шатаясь» into a simile: he walked out *as though* staggering, not actually staggering. Dostoevsky uses it to register an inner, half-real state observed from outside.
> Prefixed motion verb «выйти»: «вышел» is the perfective past of «выйти» (to go/come out), the prefix «вы-» ("out") added to the unidirectional «идти». «на улицу» takes the accusative after «на» because it expresses motion toward — out onto the street.

Ему тоже хотелось плакать, как и ей.  
He too felt like weeping, just as she had.
> Dative-subject impersonal of feeling: There is no nominative subject here: «ему» (he) stands in the dative as the one the feeling happens *to*, and «хотелось» is the neuter, reflexive impersonal of «хотеть» — "to him it was wished to weep," i.e. he felt like weeping. This experiencer-first frame, so different from English, is central to how Dostoevsky renders inner life.
> Parallel dative «ей» with «как и»: «как и ей» echoes the construction in the dative — "just as (it was) to her" — eliding the verb «хотелось». The dative «ей» (to her) mirrors «ему», quietly linking Alyosha's impulse to weep with Katerina Ivanovna's. «и» here is the emphatic "too / just as."

Вдруг его догнала служанка.  
Suddenly the servant girl caught up with him.
> Object-first word order: The clause opens with the object «его» (him, accusative), then the verb «догнала», and only last the subject «служанка» (the servant girl) — the case endings keep roles clear while the new information, who caught up, lands at the end. The fronted «Вдруг» (suddenly) sets the abrupt topic.
> Perfective «догнать»: «догнала» is the perfective past (feminine, agreeing with «служанка») of «догнать» — to catch up with, overtake. The perfective marks it as a single completed event that punctuates the narrative, fitting «вдруг» (suddenly).
> «служанка» — a maidservant: «служанка» is a female household servant or maid, from «служить» (to serve) with the feminine agent suffix -анка. In Dostoevsky's social world she is a lower-status domestic, here the messenger who restores a forgotten note to Alyosha.

— Барышня забыла вам передать это письмецо от госпожи Хохлаковой, оно у них с обеда лежит.  
— The young lady forgot to hand you this little note from Madame Khokhlakova; it has been lying at their place since dinner.
> «барышня» — the young lady: «барышня» is the respectful term a servant uses for an unmarried young lady of the gentry — here Katerina Ivanovna. It belongs to the same family as «барин» (master) and signals the speaker's deferential, below-stairs vantage.
> Diminutive «письмецо»: «письмецо» is the diminutive of «письмо» (letter), formed with -ецо. The little suffix marks it not as small but as slight, intimate, easily overlooked — fitting a note tucked aside and forgotten since dinner.
> Genitive after «от»: The preposition «от» (from) governs the genitive, so both «госпожи» and the surname «Хохлаковой» take genitive endings — "a note *from* Madame Khokhlakova." The preposition's case is half its meaning here.
> «лежит» — imperfective state, and colloquial «у них»: «лежит» is the imperfective present of «лежать» (to lie), describing an ongoing state — the note has been *lying about* since dinner. «у них» (literally "at their place") with «с обеда» ("since dinner," genitive after «с») is the servant's homely way of saying it sat with the household staff.

Алеша машинально принял маленький розовый конвертик и сунул его, почти не сознавая, в карман.  
Mechanically Alyosha took the small pink envelope and, scarcely aware of it, thrust it into his pocket.
> Two perfective verbs chain the action: «принял» (perfective of «принять», to accept/take) and «сунул» (perfective of «сунуть», to thrust, shove) are joined by «и», moving the scene forward in two clean, completed strokes — he took it and shoved it away — against which the adverbs «машинально» and «почти не сознавая» supply the dreamy background.
> Imperfective gerund of inattention: «сознавая» is the present adverbial participle «деепричастие» of «сознавать» (to be aware), with the negator «не»: "scarcely being aware (of it)." The imperfective gerund expresses a state running alongside the main action, capturing Alyosha's distracted, automatic gesture.
> Adjectives agreeing with a diminutive: «маленький» and «розовый» are long-form adjectives agreeing in masculine accusative with «конвертик», the diminutive of «конверт» (envelope). The endings repeat the noun's case, making the object visible and the whole phrase tender — a *little pink* envelope.
> Diminutive «конвертик»: «конвертик» is the affectionate diminutive of «конверт» (envelope), with -ик. Together with «розовый» (pink) and «маленький», it paints the note as a small, intimate, almost girlish object — Lise's hand behind it.
---

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.