# The Brothers Karamazov, Another Reputation Ruined

Братья Карамазовы · Fyodor Dostoevsky · Book III — The Sensualists

Source: https://1732studios.com/books/karamazov/b3-c11. Data: https://1732studios.com/books/karamazov/b3-c11.json.


От города до монастыря было не более версты с небольшим.  
From the town to the monastery was little more than a verst.
> An old Russian unit of distance: A «верста» (versta) is a pre-metric Russian measure of distance, about 1.067 km (roughly two-thirds of a mile). «Верста с небольшим» means 'a versta and a bit' — we keep the original unit ('a verst') rather than converting it to miles, so the period flavor of the measurement survives.
> Genitive after a quantity word: After «более» ('more than') the thing measured stands in the genitive — «версты», not nominative «верста». Russian routinely puts what is counted or measured into the genitive after such quantifiers, the same impulse that governs case after numerals.

Алеша спешно пошел по пустынной в этот час дороге.  
Alyosha set off briskly along the road, deserted at this hour.
> Unidirectional motion plus a prefix: «Пошёл» is the perfective of «идти» with the prefix по-, marking the single inceptive act of setting off on one trajectory — Alyosha 'started walking' down the road. The preposition «по» here governs the dative «дороге» ('along the road').
> A modifier wedged inside the noun phrase: The adjective «пустынной» and its noun «дороге» frame the inserted phrase «в этот час» ('at this hour'), a bookish word order that suspends the noun until its modifier is fully qualified. The adjective agrees with «дороге» in feminine dative singular.

Почти уже стала ночь, в тридцати шагах трудно уже было различать предметы.  
Night had almost fallen; at thirty paces it was already hard to make out objects.
> Impersonal predicate of difficulty: «Трудно было различать» is a subjectless impersonal construction: a neuter predicate word «трудно» ('[it was] hard') plus the imperfective infinitive «различать», with no nominative subject. Russian frames such states impersonally where English supplies a dummy 'it'.
> Predicate noun after «стать»: Here «стала» ('became') takes a nominative «ночь» — 'night fell' — rather than the instrumental that usually follows «стать» with a role-noun. With a setting-in of a natural state Russian keeps the nominative, and the inverted verb-first order («стала ночь») throws weight onto the onset of night.

На половине дороги приходился перекресток.  
Halfway along, the road came to a crossroads.
> Reflexive verb with verb-first order: «Приходился» is the reflexive «приходиться» ('to fall, to be located') with -ся, here imperfective and meaning a crossroads 'happened to be' at the road's midpoint. The verb-before-subject order («приходился перекрёсток») presents the crossroads as new information.

На перекрестке, под уединенною ракитой, завиделась какая-то фигура.  
At the crossroads, beneath a solitary willow, some figure became visible.
> Inceptive за- plus indefinite «-то»: «Завиделась» couples the inceptive prefix за- with reflexive -ся: a figure 'came into view'. «Какая-то» ('some, a certain') uses the clitic -то to mark a real but unidentified figure — present yet unknown to Alyosha.
> A particular willow: «Ракита» is the brittle or basket willow, a slender riverside tree — earthier and more specific than the generic «ива». The «уединённою ракитой» ('solitary willow') sets a lonely, faintly ominous scene for Mitya's ambush; the instrumental «-ою» ending is the older bookish variant of «-ой».

Только что Алеша вступил на перекресток, как фигура сорвалась с места, бросилась на него и неистовым голосом прокричала:  
No sooner had Alyosha stepped onto the crossroads than the figure tore itself from its place, flung itself at him, and shouted in a frenzied voice:
> The «только... как» 'no sooner... than' frame: «Только что Алёша вступил..., как фигура сорвалась» is the classic correlative for two events crowding on each other: 'no sooner had Alyosha stepped on... than the figure tore loose'. The perfectives «вступил, сорвалась, бросилась, прокричала» chain the sudden actions one after another.
> Reflexive verbs of violent motion: «Сорвалась» (tore itself loose) and «бросилась» (flung itself) are -ся verbs whose reflexive marks a self-propelled, abrupt movement of the whole body — a favorite Dostoevskian register for impulsive action.

— Кошелек или жизнь!  
"Your money or your life!"

— Так это ты, Митя! — удивился сильно вздрогнувший, однако, Алеша.  
"So it's you, Mitya!" said Alyosha, who had nonetheless given a violent start.
> The intimate form of Dmitri: «Митя» is the affectionate diminutive of «Дмитрий», the name brothers and intimates use. Watch how the chapter alternates between «Митя» / «Алёшка» in close talk and the formal «Дмитрий Фёдорович» in narration — each choice is a measure of distance.
> Past active participle as a modifier: «Вздрогнувший» is the past active participle of «вздрогнуть» ('to give a start'), agreeing with «Алёша» — literally 'Alyosha, who had nonetheless given a violent start'. Packing a whole clause into one pre-posed participle is a hallmark of literary narration; the inserted «однако» ('nonetheless') concedes the start despite his calm reply.

— Ха-ха-ха! Ты не ожидал?  
"Ha-ha-ha! You didn't expect it?
> Negated imperfective for an expectation: «Не ожидал» pairs «не» with the imperfective past of «ожидать» ('to expect') — 'you weren't expecting [this]'. The imperfective views the expecting as a standing state rather than a single event, and the negation sits directly before the verb.

Я думаю: где тебя подождать?  
I was thinking: where am I to wait for you?
> Bare infinitive as deliberative question: «Где тебя подождать?» — literally 'where to wait for you?' — uses a bare infinitive to ask what one should do, a deliberative question with no explicit subject. The perfective «подождать» ('to wait a while') frames the waiting as a bounded act.

У ее дома?  
By her house?
> «у» + genitive for location: «У её дома» means 'by/at her house' — the preposition «у» governs the genitive «дома» and locates one beside a thing. «Её» is the invariable third-person possessive ('her'), pointing to Katerina Ivanovna without naming her.

Оттуда три дороги, и я могу тебя прозевать.  
From there three roads run off, and I might miss you.
> Modal «мочь» plus perfective infinitive: «Могу прозевать» — 'I might miss [you]' — joins the conjugated «мочь» to a perfective infinitive naming the single feared outcome. The colloquial «прозевать» literally 'to yawn through', i.e. let someone slip past unnoticed.
> 'To miss by inattention': «Прозевать» comes from «зевать» ('to yawn') with the prefix про-: to let something slip by while one's attention wanders, to 'miss' it. It carries a colloquial, self-reproachful tinge well suited to Mitya's restless watching.

Надумал наконец дождаться здесь, потому что здесь-то он пройдет непременно, другого пути в монастырь не имеется.  
At last I decided to wait for you here, because here he is sure to pass — there's no other way to the monastery.
> Subjectless colloquial past: «Надумал» ('I finally decided/took it into my head') drops the pronoun «я» — the gendered -л ending and context carry the first person. The prefix на- on «думать» gives the sense of arriving at a decision after deliberation.
> Emphatic «-то» and the perfective future: The clitic «-то» on «здесь-то» stresses the known topic — 'here, of all places'. «Пройдёт» is the perfective future of «пройти»: a perfective conjugated like a present yields future meaning, so 'he is sure to pass [by]'.
> Genitive of negation in an existential: «Другого пути не имеется» — 'no other way exists' — puts the absent subject «пути» in the genitive under negation, the obligatory pattern with a negated existential. «Имеется» is a slightly formal reflexive for 'there is'.

Ну, объявляй правду, дави меня, как таракана…  
Well, out with the truth, crush me like a cockroach…
> Imperfective imperatives of urgency: «Объявляй» and «дави» are imperfective imperatives ('out with it, crush me'). The imperfective command pushes the hearer to get on with the action at once, more peremptory and emotionally charged than the neutral perfective — Mitya demanding the verdict on himself.
> 'Crush me like a cockroach': The «таракан» (cockroach) is a recurring image of self-abasement in Dostoevsky; here Mitya casts himself as vermin to be squashed. The simile «как таракана» keeps the noun in the accusative as object of an implied 'crush'.

Да что с тобой?  
But what's the matter with you?"
> «что с тобой?» — instrumental of state: «Что с тобой?» ('what's the matter with you?') uses «с» + instrumental «тобой» in an idiom of condition or trouble. The opening «да» is not 'yes' but an emphatic discourse particle, here roughly 'but'.

— Ничего, брат… я так с испугу.  
"Nothing, brother… it's only the fright.
> Causal «с» + genitive: «С испугу» means 'out of fright' — «с» here takes the genitive «испугу» to give the cause of a sudden reaction (a colloquial -у genitive). The little word «так» softens it to 'it's just...', deflecting Mitya's question.

Ах, Дмитрий!  
Ah, Dmitri!
> The full name in a cry of grief: Alyosha shifts from the intimate «Митя» to the full «Дмитрий» — and then to «Дмитрий Фёдорович» in narration — as grief makes him solemn. The naming register itself marks the emotional turn from teasing to lament.

Давеча эта кровь отца… — Алеша заплакал, ему давно хотелось заплакать, а теперь у него вдруг как бы что-то порвалось в душе. — Ты чуть не убил его… проклял его… и вот теперь… сейчас… ты шутишь шутки… «кошелек или жизнь»!  
That blood of Father's just now—" Alyosha burst into tears; he had long wanted to weep, and now suddenly something seemed to snap in his soul. "You all but killed him… you cursed him… and now, here, this very moment, you crack your jokes — 'your money or your life'!"
> 'A short while ago': «Давеча» is a colloquial, now archaic adverb meaning 'a little while ago, earlier today' — the kind of folksy word that colors the brothers' speech. It points back to the violent scene with their father just past.
> Dative-subject of impersonal longing: «Ему хотелось заплакать» is the quintessential dative-experiencer construction: the person feeling stands in the dative «ему», the verb «хотелось» is impersonal reflexive ('there came over him a wish'), and the perfective «заплакать» names the wished-for act of bursting into tears. This subjectless framing of inner states is central to Dostoevsky's psychology.
> «как бы» softening and reflexive «порвалось»: «Как бы что-то порвалось» — 'something seemed to snap' — uses «как бы» ('as if, as it were') to hedge the metaphor, while the reflexive «порвалось» renders the tearing as a spontaneous, intransitive event with no agent. The indefinite «что-то» leaves the thing that broke deliberately vague.
> «чуть не» + perfective for a near miss: «Чуть не убил» means 'all but killed, nearly killed' — «чуть не» plus a perfective past names an action that almost reached completion but did not. The «не» here is part of the idiom, not a true negation of the killing.

— А, да что ж? Неприлично, что ли?  
"Why, what of it? Improper, is it?
> Tag particle «что ли»: «Что ли?» is a colloquial tag tacked onto a question to invite confirmation, roughly 'or what? is it?'. Built on the interrogative «ли», it gives Mitya's retort a careless, challenging air over the short adjective «неприлично» ('improper').

Не идет к положению?  
Doesn't suit the situation?"
> Idiomatic «идти к» + dative: «Идти к» plus the dative «положению» here means 'to suit, to befit' — 'doesn't it suit my situation?'. The motion verb «идти» is bleached of literal movement in this fixed idiom of fittingness.

— Да нет… я так…  
"No, no… it's only that…"
> «да нет» and evasive «так»: «Да нет» combines the particle «да» with «нет» into a soft, almost reluctant 'no, no'. The trailing «так» ('it's just...') is the same evasive filler as in segment 16, Alyosha deflecting rather than explaining.

— Стой.  
"Wait.
> Imperative of «стоять»: «Стой» is the singular imperative of «стоять» — literally 'stand!', used as 'wait, hold on'. The present stem ends in the glide -й (стоj-у, a vowel-final stem), so the imperative simply takes -й — not -и reduced to -й; the stem does not end in a consonant.

Посмотри на ночь: видишь, какая мрачная ночь, облака-то, ветер какой поднялся!  
Look at the night: see what a gloomy night it is, the clouds, the wind that has sprung up!
> Topic «-то» and exclamatory «какой»: «Облака-то» uses the clitic «-то» to point insistently at the clouds as a known, vivid topic. «Ветер какой поднялся!» inverts «какой» to an exclamation — 'what a wind has sprung up!' — its emphatic post-posed position heightening the wonder.
> Perfective imperative «посмотри»: «Посмотри» is the perfective imperative of «посмотреть» — a single, pointed 'look!'. The perfective command directs one bounded glance, against the open-ended urging an imperfective would give.

Спрятался я здесь, под ракитой, тебя жду, и вдруг подумал (вот тебе бог!): да чего же больше маяться, чего ждать?  
I hid myself here, under the willow, waiting for you, and suddenly I thought (God's my witness!): why go on tormenting myself, what is there to wait for?
> 'God's my witness!': «Вот тебе бог!» is an oath of sincerity — literally 'here's God for you', i.e. 'I swear, God is my witness'. Such half-religious folk asseverations run through Mitya's speech, mixing piety and bravado.
> Genitive objects with «же» and a deliberative infinitive: The rhetorical questions use bare infinitives «маяться» / «ждать» for 'why go on suffering, what to wait for?'. «Чего» is the genitive of «что» (object of «ждать»), and the particle «же» after «чего» lends exasperated insistence — 'what on earth'.
> 'To toil, to suffer wearily': «Маяться» is an expressive, folk-flavored reflexive verb for wearing oneself out in prolonged torment or aimless waiting. Its imperfective, durative force suits Mitya's sense of endless self-tormenting under the willow.

Вот ракита, платок есть, рубашка есть, веревку сейчас можно свить, помочи в придачу и — не бременить уж более землю, не бесчестить низким своим присутствием!  
Here's the willow, I have a handkerchief, I have a shirt, a rope can be twisted in a moment, suspenders into the bargain — and no longer to burden the earth, no longer to dishonor it with my low presence!
> «можно» + perfective infinitive: «Можно свить» is the impersonal «можно» ('it's possible / one can') plus the perfective «свить» ('to twist together') — a rope 'can be twisted in a moment'. The subjectless «можно» construction states possibility with no nominative actor.
> 'Suspenders / braces': «Помочи» (plural) are suspenders or braces for holding up trousers — an everyday word here turned grim, since Mitya counts them among the means at hand for hanging himself. «В придачу» means 'into the bargain, thrown in besides'.
> 'No longer to burden the earth': «Бременить» ('to burden, weigh down', from «бремя», burden) is an elevated, bookish verb that lifts Mitya's suicidal thought into self-dramatizing pathos. The bare negated infinitives «не бременить... не бесчестить» voice a resolve as if reading a sentence on himself.

И вот слышу, ты идешь, — господи, точно слетело что на меня вдруг: да ведь есть же, стало быть, человек, которого и я люблю, ведь вот он, вот тот человечек, братишка мой милый, кого я всех больше на свете люблю и кого я единственно люблю!  
And then I hear you coming — Lord, it was as though something flew down upon me all at once: so there is, after all, a man whom even I love; here he is, here is that dear little fellow, my darling little brother, whom I love more than anyone in the world and whom alone I love!
> A pile-up of speech particles: This clause stacks Russian's modal particles: «да» (emphatic opener), «ведь» (appealing to shared realization, 'after all'), and «же» (insisting). Together they dramatize Mitya's sudden discovery — 'so there really is, then, a man...' — and «стало быть» adds the folksy 'so it turns out'. These tiny words are the very texture of his excited voice.
> Relative «которого» in the genitive-accusative: «Человек, которого я люблю» — 'a man whom I love'. The relative «который» agrees with «человек» in masculine singular but takes the accusative its own clause demands; for an animate masculine that accusative copies the genitive («которого»). The particle «и» before «я» means 'even I [love]'.
> A cascade of affectionate diminutives: «Человечек» (dear little fellow) and «братишка» (little brother) heap expressive diminutive suffixes onto Alyosha, drenching Mitya's outburst in tenderness. «Братишка» especially is warm, fraternal, slightly childlike — the emotional opposite of the formal «брат» elsewhere.

И так я тебя полюбил, так в эту минуту любил, что подумал: брошусь сейчас к нему на шею!  
And I loved you so, I loved you so in that minute, that I thought: I'll throw myself on his neck this instant!
> Inceptive «полюбить» — 'came to love': «Полюбил» is the perfective of «любить» with по-, which marks the onset of a feeling: 'I came to love / grew so fond of you'. Paired with the imperfective «любил» ('I was loving') just after, it captures both the sudden flaring-up and the sustained rush of the moment.
> Perfective future of resolve: «Брошусь» is the perfective future of reflexive «броситься» ('I'll throw myself'), a single decisive impulse — 'I'll fall on his neck this instant'. After the preposition «к», the third-person pronoun gains the н-: «к нему».

Да глупая мысль пришла: «Повеселю его, испугаю».  
But a foolish notion came to me: 'Let me amuse him, give him a scare.'
> Perfective futures of mischief: «Повеселю» and «испугаю» are perfective futures ('I'll amuse him, I'll give him a scare'), each naming one completed effect Mitya means to produce. Both drop the pronoun «я» — the endings already mark the first person.

Я и закричал как дурак: «Кошелек!»  
And so I yelled like a fool: 'Your money!'
> Connective «и» meaning 'and so': Here «и» is not a conjunction joining nouns but an adverbial 'and so, and then' tying the action to what precedes — 'and so I yelled'. «Закричал», perfective with за-, marks the sudden bursting-out of the shout.

Прости дурачеству — это только вздор, а на душе у меня… тоже прилично…  
Forgive the foolery — it's only nonsense, but in my soul there's… something decent too…
> Imperative «прости» with dative of the thing forgiven: «Прости» (perfective imperative, 'forgive') here takes the dative «дурачеству» — 'forgive [me] the foolery', the dative naming what is pardoned. The construction has a faintly old, formulaic ring.
> 'Nonsense, rubbish': «Вздор» is a bookish-colloquial word for empty nonsense or trifling foolishness. Mitya brushes off his prank as «только вздор» — 'just rot' — even as he insists something «прилично», decent, lies underneath.

Ну да черт, говори, однако, что там?  
Well, the devil take it, but tell me, what happened there?
> 'Well, the devil take it': «Да чёрт» is an impatient oath, the devil invoked to wave the matter aside before getting to the point. Such casual diabolism peppers Mitya's speech and stands in pointed counterpoint to Alyosha's monastery world.
> Imperfective imperative «говори»: «Говори» is the imperfective imperative ('speak, go on, tell me'), urging Alyosha to get on with it. The inserted «однако» ('however, but still') marks an abrupt turn from cursing to demanding the news.

Что она сказала?  
What did she say?

Дави меня, рази меня, не щади!  
Crush me, strike me, don't spare me!
> A triplet of imperatives, including a negated one: Three imperfective imperatives drumbeat Mitya's masochistic plea: «дави» (crush), «рази» (smite), and the negated «не щади!» (don't spare). The negative imperative «не» + imperfective is the normal way to forbid an action in Russian.
> 'Strike, smite' — an elevated verb: «Разить» ('to strike, smite') is a high, somewhat archaic verb, more biblical or poetic than the everyday «бить». It lifts Mitya's self-flagellation into a near-liturgical key, fitting his theatrical penitence.

В исступление пришла?  
Did she fly into a fury?"
> 'Did she fly into a fury?': «Исступление» is frenzy, a transport of rage or ecstasy — a key Dostoevskian word for the soul beside itself. «Прийти в исступление» ('to come into a frenzy') is the set idiom; the verb-final ellipsis of «она» keeps the question breathless.

— Нет, не то… Там было совсем не то, Митя.  
"No, not that… It was something altogether different there, Mitya.
> «то» as the neuter 'that/it': «Не то» uses the neuter demonstrative «то» as a stand-in for 'that thing, that': 'not that... something altogether different'. «Совсем не то» negates with «не» before the demonstrative, leaving the real matter hauntingly unnamed.

Там.. Я там сейчас их обеих застал.  
There… Just now I found the two of them together there."
> Genitive-accusative of «обе» (the two of them): «Обеих» is the feminine numeral «обе» ('both') in the accusative — for animates it copies the genitive — object of «застал» ('I found, caught'). The perfective «застать» means to come upon someone in a situation, here the two women together.

— Каких обеих?  
"Which two?"
> «какой» agreeing in the genitive plural: «Каких обеих?» ('which two?') shows «какой» fully agreeing with «обеих» in the genitive-accusative plural. The interrogative declines like an adjective, picking up the case the verb «застал» imposed in the prior line.

— Грушеньку у Катерины Ивановны.  
"Grushenka at Katerina Ivanovna's."
> Accusative object and «у» + genitive location: Verb-less but clear: «Грушеньку» is the accusative object of the understood «застал» ('[I found] Grushenka'), while «у Катерины Ивановны» — «у» plus genitive — locates the scene 'at Katerina Ivanovna's place'.
> The diminutive of Agrafena: «Грушенька» is the caressing diminutive of «Аграфена» (Grushenka). The very softness of the suffix —«-енька»— against the fierce woman it names is part of the novel's irony; everyone calls her by this tender form.

Дмитрий Федорович остолбенел.  
Dmitri Fyodorovich was thunderstruck.
> 'Was struck dumb, turned to stone': «Остолбенеть», from «столб» ('post, pillar'), means to be rooted to the spot, dumbstruck — literally 'to turn into a post'. The perfective with о- marks the instant onset of stupefaction at Alyosha's news.

— Невозможно! — вскричал он, — ты бредишь!  
"Impossible!" he cried, "you're raving!
> Present tense of «бредить»: «Бредишь» is the second-conjugation present of «бредить» ('to rave, be delirious') — only imperfective verbs have a present, and here it accuses Alyosha of talking nonsense as if feverish.

Грушенька у ней?  
Grushenka at her place?"
> Colloquial «у ней» for «у неё»: «У ней» is the older, colloquial variant of «у неё» ('at her place') — the dative-shaped «ней» used where standard modern Russian prefers «неё». Dostoevsky's speech is full of such period forms; the н- is the usual prefix after a preposition.

Алеша рассказал всё, что случилось с ним с самой той минуты, как вошел к Катерине Ивановне.  
Alyosha told him everything that had happened to him from the very moment he had entered Katerina Ivanovna's.
> Correlative «всё, что» with reflexive «случилось»: «Всё, что случилось» pairs the neuter «всё» ('everything') with the relative «что» — 'everything that happened'. «Случилось» is the perfective reflexive «случиться» ('to happen'), and «с ним» ('to him') uses «с» + instrumental in the idiom of things befalling a person.
> Prefixed motion «войти» + «к» + dative: «Вошёл» is the perfective of «войти» ('to enter'), the directional prefix в- turning the motion pair into an ordinary perfective. «К Катерине Ивановне» — «к» plus dative — means 'in to Katerina Ivanovna('s)', the dative naming the person entered upon.

Он рассказывал минут десять, нельзя сказать, чтобы плавно и складно, но, кажется, передал ясно, схватывая самые главные слова, самые главные движения и ярко передавая, часто одною чертой, собственные чувства.  
He spoke for some ten minutes — not, one must admit, smoothly or neatly, but, it seems, clearly, seizing on the most important words, the most important gestures, and conveying vividly, often with a single stroke, his own feelings.
> Present gerunds of attendant manner: «Схватывая» and «передавая» are imperfective present gerunds (деепричастия) describing how Alyosha spoke — 'seizing on... conveying...' — simultaneous with the main verb «рассказывал» and sharing its subject. Stacking such gerunds is a signature of literary narration.
> «нельзя сказать, чтобы» + irrealis: «Нельзя сказать, чтобы...» ('one cannot say that...') governs «чтобы», whose hidden бы forces the irrealis past form — here elided down to the adverbs «плавно и складно». The frame politely concedes the speech was not smooth.
> Imperfective for duration; inverted numeral for approximation: «Рассказывал» is imperfective, viewing the telling as a stretched-out process. Reversing numeral and noun — «минут десять» instead of «десять минут» — is the standard way Russian signals approximation: 'some ten minutes, about ten minutes'.

Брат Дмитрий слушал молча, глядел в упор со страшною неподвижностью, но Алеше ясно было, что он уже всё понял, осмыслил весь факт.  
His brother Dmitri listened in silence, staring point-blank with terrible immobility, but it was plain to Alyosha that he had already grasped it all, taken in the whole fact.
> Imperfective verbs and the frozen gerund «молча»: «Слушал, глядел» are imperfective pasts painting a sustained, motionless attention. «Молча» ('silently') is historically the gerund of «молчать» but now functions as a plain adverb — a fossilized деепричастие.
> Dative-subject «Алёше ясно было»: «Алёше ясно было» is an impersonal construction: the experiencer «Алёше» in the dative, the neuter predicate «ясно» ('[it was] clear'), no nominative subject — 'it was plain to Alyosha'. The «что»-clause then reports what was clear.

Но лицо его, чем дальше подвигался рассказ, становилось не то что мрачным, а как бы грозным.  
Yet his face, the further the story went, grew not so much gloomy as, somehow, menacing.
> «чем... тем» correlative of degree: «Чем дальше... [тем]...» is the proportional 'the further... the more...' correlative, here with the «тем» implied — 'the further the story went, the more menacing his face grew'. «Подвигался» is the reflexive «подвигаться» ('to advance').
> Instrumental predicate after «становиться»: After «становилось» ('was becoming') the predicate adjectives go in the instrumental — «мрачным... грозным» — the case the linking verb «становиться» demands. The frame «не то что..., а...» ('not so much... as...') refines the comparison; «как бы» hedges it.

Он нахмурил брови, стиснул зубы, неподвижный взгляд его стал как бы еще неподвижнее, упорнее, ужаснее… Тем неожиданнее было, когда вдруг с непостижимою быстротой изменилось разом всё лицо его, доселе гневное и свирепое, сжатые губы раздвинулись и Дмитрий Федорович залился вдруг самым неудержимым, самым неподдельным смехом.  
He knitted his brows, clenched his teeth, his fixed stare grew as though still more fixed, more stubborn, more dreadful… The more unexpected it was, then, when all at once, with incomprehensible swiftness, his whole face, until then wrathful and ferocious, changed in an instant, his pressed lips parted, and Dmitri Fyodorovich suddenly broke into the most irrepressible, the most genuine laughter.
> A climbing chain of comparatives: Three predicative comparatives in -ее («неподвижнее, упорнее, ужаснее») mount in intensity — 'still more fixed, more stubborn, more dreadful' — with «ещё» pushing each higher. These short -ее forms are invariable and purely predicative.
> Comparative «тем» of consequence: «Тем неожиданнее» ('the more unexpected') uses «тем» with a comparative to make the surprise proportional to the foregoing grimness — 'so much the more startling, then, when...'. It picks up the «чем... тем» logic of the previous sentence.
> «доселе» — archaic 'until now': «Доселе» ('hitherto, until then') is a bookish, archaic adverb that elevates the narration, here qualifying his 'until-then wrathful and ferocious' face. It belongs to the elevated literary register Dostoevsky reaches for at heightened moments.
> Instrumental of manner with «залиться»: «Залиться смехом» — 'to dissolve in / burst into laughter' — takes the instrumental «смехом» to name what one is flooded with. The reflexive perfective «залиться» (lit. 'to pour oneself over') vividly renders being overwhelmed by laughter.

Он буквально залился смехом, он долгое время даже не мог говорить от смеха.  
He literally dissolved in laughter; for a long while he could not even speak for laughing.
> Causal «от» + genitive: «От смеха» ('for / from laughter') uses «от» + genitive to give the cause that prevented speech — 'he could not speak for laughing'. The imperfective «говорить» under «не мог» frames the inability as ongoing.

— Так и не поцеловала ручку! Так и не поцеловала, так и убежала! — выкрикивал он в болезненном каком-то восторге — в наглом восторге можно бы тоже сказать, если бы восторг этот не был столь безыскусствен. — Так та кричала, что это тигр!  
"So she didn't kiss the hand! She didn't kiss it, she just ran off!" he cried out in a kind of sick rapture — one might even call it an insolent rapture, were the rapture not so utterly artless. "So the other one screamed that she was a tiger!
> Emphatic «так и» with a negated perfective: «Так и не поцеловала» — 'she just did not kiss [it] after all' — uses the set «так и» to stress that an expected act flatly failed to occur. «Не поцеловала» is the negated perfective past; «ручку» is the diminutive of «рука».
> Counterfactual «если бы» with a short adjective: «Если бы... не был» is a counterfactual conditional — past-form verb plus «бы» — 'were the rapture not so artless'. «Безыскусствен» is the bookish short-form adjective ('artless, ingenuous'), predicative and faintly archaic; «столь» is the elevated 'so'.
> The loaded diminutive 'little hand': «Ручка» (the diminutive of «рука», hand) recurs as a leitmotif of this scene — the hand Grushenka refused to kiss. The tender suffix makes the slighted gesture intimate and almost caressing, sharpening the insult Mitya savors.

Тигр и есть!  
And a tiger she is!
> Affirming «и есть»: «Тигр и есть!» is an emphatic colloquial idiom confirming a label — 'a tiger she is, and no mistake'. The bare «есть» ('is') with reinforcing «и» asserts the identity flatly, with the zero copula filled in for stress.

Так ее на эшафот надо?  
So she ought to be sent to the scaffold?
> Impersonal «надо» with an accusative object: «Её... надо» is an impersonal necessity construction: the invariable predicate «надо» ('one must, it's necessary') with no nominative subject, and «её» the accusative object of the implied 'send'. «На эшафот» — «на» + accusative — gives the goal 'to the scaffold'.

Да, да, надо бы, надо, я сам того мнения, что надо, давно надо!  
Yes, yes, she ought to, she ought, I'm of that opinion myself, that she ought, and long ago at that!
> Softening «бы» on «надо»: «Надо бы» adds the irrealis «бы» to the necessity word, softening 'she must' to 'she ought to / it would be fitting' — a hypothetical, half-retracted obligation. Mitya then drops «бы» («надо, надо») to harden it back to flat necessity, the wavering itself characterizing him.
> Genitive predicate «того мнения»: «Быть того мнения» ('to be of that opinion') puts the demonstrative-plus-noun in the genitive — «того мнения» — a fixed bookish idiom. The intensifier «сам» ('myself') stresses that Mitya personally shares the view.

Видишь ли, брат, пусть эшафот, но надо еще сперва выздороветь.  
You see, brother, let it be the scaffold, but first one has to get well again.
> Concessive «пусть» plus impersonal «надо»: «Пусть эшафот» uses the particle «пусть» ('let it be') to concede the point — 'granted, the scaffold' — before «но надо... выздороветь» states the real necessity with impersonal «надо» plus a perfective infinitive ('one must first get well').

Понимаю царицу наглости, вся она тут, вся она в этой ручке высказалась, инфернальница!  
I understand the queen of insolence — there she is, the whole of her, the whole of her spoke out in that little hand, the infernal woman!
> Dostoevsky's coinage for Grushenka: «Инфернальница» is a feminine noun Dostoevsky builds from the Latinate adjective «инфернальный» (infernal, hellish). It paints Grushenka as a bewitching, devilish woman; we render it 'the infernal woman' to keep the bookish, foreign ring Mitya gives it. The word became a hallmark of his overheated, theatrical speech in the novel.
> Reflexive «высказаться» — 'expressed herself fully': «Высказалась» is the perfective reflexive «высказаться» ('to speak out, express oneself completely'). With «вся она» ('the whole of her') it means her entire nature 'spoke itself out' in that one gesture of the hand — the -ся giving the verb its self-directed, expressive force.

Это царица всех инфернальниц, каких можно только вообразить на свете! В своем роде восторг!  
She's the queen of all the infernal women one could possibly imagine in the world! In her own way, a marvel!
> Genitive plural after «всех» and a relative «каких»: «Всех инфернальниц» is the genitive plural ('of all the infernal women'), governed by the superlative idea 'queen of'. The relative «каких» ('such as / that') agrees and takes the accusative-genitive its own clause needs as object of «вообразить».

Так она домой побежала?  
So she ran off home?
> Adverb «домой» and inceptive «побежала»: «Домой» is the directional adverb 'homeward, [to] home' (as against «дома», 'at home'). «Побежала», the perfective of «бежать» with по-, marks the single act of setting off at a run.

Сейчас я… ах… Побегу-ка я к ней!  
I'll go now… ah… I'll run to her!
> Future of resolve with softening «-ка»: «Побегу» is the perfective future ('I'll run off'), and the clitic «-ка» softens the self-exhortation to a casual 'I think I'll just run to her'. «К ней» shows the н- prefix after the preposition «к» plus dative.

Алешка, не вини меня, я ведь согласен, что ее придушить мало…  
Alyoshka, don't blame me, I admit myself that strangling her would be too little for her…"
> The rougher diminutive «-шка»: «Алёшка» adds the suffix «-шка» to Alyosha's name — a familiar, slightly rough or hearty diminutive, warmer and coarser than the tender «Алёша». Mitya uses it in the rush of brotherly pleading, the form itself an embrace.
> Impersonal «мало» with an infinitive: «Придушить её мало» is impersonal — 'strangling her would be too little', with «мало» ('not enough') as the predicate and the perfective infinitive «придушить» as the logical subject. «Её» is the accusative object of that infinitive; «ведь» appeals to shared agreement.

— А Катерина Ивановна! — печально воскликнул Алеша.  
"But Katerina Ivanovna!" Alyosha exclaimed sorrowfully.
> Adverb–verb–subject inversion in a speech tag: «Печально воскликнул Алёша» runs adverb, then verb, then subject — the standard inverted order of Russian narrative speech tags ('Alyosha exclaimed sorrowfully'). The perfective «воскликнуть» names the single outcry.

— И ту вижу, всю насквозь и ту вижу, и так вижу, как никогда!  
"Her too, I see her through and through, I see her too, and I see her as never before!
> Demonstrative «та» as 'the other one': «Ту» is the accusative of «та» ('that one'), here meaning 'her too, the other woman [Katerina]', set against Grushenka. «Всю насквозь» ('right through, through and through') uses «вся» in the accusative to mean he sees the whole of her.
> Comparison «так..., как никогда»: «Так..., как никогда» means 'I see [her] as never [before]'. The «как никогда» comparison rides on Russian's negative concord — «никогда» ('never') is an ни-word that would take «не» with a verb, here standing in an elliptical 'as I never [did]'.

Тут целое открытие всех четырех стран света, пяти то есть!  
Here is a whole discovery of all four quarters of the globe — five of them, that is!
> Genitive after a numeral inside a genitive phrase: «Всех четырёх стран света» nests case within case: «открытие» governs the genitive 'of [the parts]', and «четырёх» ('four') itself forces its noun «стран» into the genitive plural. The whole numeral phrase re-declines under the higher genitive.

Этакий шаг!  
What a stroke!
> «этакий» — colloquial 'what a / such a': «Этакий» is the expressive, conversational cousin of «такой» ('such'), here an exclamatory 'what a…!'. The whole sentence «Этакий шаг!» is a verbless exclamation typical of Mitya's breathless speech.

Это именно та самая Катенька, институточка, которая к нелепому грубому офицеру не побоялась из великодушной идеи спасти отца прибежать, рискуя страшно быть оскорбленною!  
This is the very same Katenka, that little institute girl, who out of a noble notion was not afraid to come running to a ridiculous, coarse officer to save her father, risking the dreadful chance of being insulted!
> «который» relative clause, far behind its antecedent: «которая» ('who') agrees with feminine «Катенька» but takes nominative as the subject of its own long clause. Note how far the verb «не побоялась … прибежать» stands from the relative pronoun, a sprawling subordinate structure typical of Dostoevsky's excited periods.
> Gerund «рискуя» + bookish instrumental short participle: «рискуя» is an imperfective деепричастие ('risking'), an adverbial verb sharing the subject of «не побоялась». The passive participle «оскорбленною» carries the archaic feminine instrumental ending «-ою» (modern «-ой»), a solemn 19th-century flavour after «быть».
> «из великодушной идеи» — 'out of a noble notion': «великодушный» literally 'great-souled' = magnanimous, noble. The preposition «из» + genitive gives motive ('out of, from'), a common way of naming the impulse behind an act.

Но гордость наша, но потребность риска, но вызов судьбе, вызов в беспредельность!  
But our pride, our craving for risk, our defiance of fate, defiance flung into the boundless!
> Anaphoric «но» piling up nominatives: Three verbless exclamations strung on the repeated «но» ('but'), each a bare nominative noun phrase. The rhetorical anaphora — «но… но… но…» — is pure Mitya, and «вызов судьбе» takes the dative «судьбе» ('a challenge to fate').
> «беспредельность» — the boundless: An abstract noun from «беспредельный» ('limitless', literally 'without a limit/«предел»'). The flung phrase «вызов в беспредельность» ('defiance into the boundless') is high romantic diction, half-mocking the heroine's grandeur.

Ты говоришь, ее эта тетка останавливала?  
You say that aunt of hers tried to stop her?
> Imperfective «останавливала» — attempted, not achieved: The imperfective past «останавливала» ('was trying to stop') reads as a conative, ongoing effort, not a completed result — she kept trying to hold her back. The fronted object «ее» ('her') before the subject «эта тетка» is the free, topic-first word order Russian allows.

Эта тетка, знаешь, сама самовластная, это ведь родная сестра московской той генеральши, она поднимала еще больше той нос, да муж был уличен в казнокрадстве, лишился всего, и имения, и всего, и гордая супруга вдруг понизила тон, да с тех пор и не поднялась.  
That aunt, you know, is herself a domineering thing — she's the own sister of that Moscow general's wife, and she used to carry her nose even higher than the other, but her husband was caught embezzling state funds, lost everything, the estate and all, and the proud spouse suddenly toned down, and from then on never picked herself up again.
> «самовластная» — domineering, autocratic: Literally 'self-powered' (сам + власть), used of a person who rules others imperiously. Here a feminine adjective standing on its own as a predicate of the aunt — 'a domineering thing'.
> Particle «ведь» — 'after all, you know': «ведь» appeals to shared knowledge, nudging the listener: 'she is, you know, the own sister of…'. It is one of the small modal particles that give Dostoevsky's dialogue its conversational texture.
> Idiom: «поднимать нос» — to turn up one's nose: «поднимать нос» = to give oneself airs, be haughty. Dostoevsky then literalises the metaphor a clause later — «понизила тон, … и не поднялась» ('toned down and never picked herself up') — playing the idiom against the fall.
> Periphrastic passive: «был уличен»: «был уличен» = «быть» + the short past passive participle of «уличить» ('to catch out, convict'): 'was caught/exposed'. The thing of which he is convicted stands in «в» + prepositional («в казнокрадстве»).

Так она удерживала Катю, а та не послушалась.  
So she tried to hold Katya back, and Katya wouldn't listen.
> Contrastive «а» and the pronoun «та»: «а» here is the mild contrastive 'and/but', pivoting from the aunt's effort to Katya's refusal. «та» ('that one') points to the other party — the aunt held back, but that one (Katya) did not obey — a neat use of «тот/та» to track who is who.
> Reflexive perfective «послушаться»: «послушаться» (perfective, reflexive in «-ся») means 'to obey, heed', governing the genitive of the person obeyed. The perfective + negation reports a single decisive non-event: she did not, in that moment, obey.

«Всё, дескать, могу победить, всё мне подвластно; захочу, и Грушеньку околдую», — и сама ведь себе верила, сама над собой форсила, кто ж виноват?  
'I can conquer everything,' she fancies, 'everything's in my power; if I please, I'll bewitch Grushenka too' — and she believed her own words, she swaggered before her own self; whose fault is it?
> Dative «мне» with «подвластно» — 'subject to me': «подвластно» ('under one's power, subject to') takes a dative of the one who holds the power: «всё мне подвластно» = 'everything is in my power'. The dative-experiencer frame quietly puts the speaker in command of all things.
> Perfective futures: «захочу… околдую»: Both verbs are perfective forms conjugated like a present, so they read as future: 'if I should want to, I'll bewitch'. With no «если», the bare «захочу, и…» works as a conditional — 'I have only to wish, and…'.
> «дескать» — reportative 'as if to say': «дескать» (and its twin «мол») flags reported or imagined speech with a tinge of irony or distancing — 'she says, as it were'. Mitya uses it to ventriloquise Katya's inner boast.
> «форсить» — to show off, swagger: A colloquial verb (from French 'force') meaning to put on airs, swank. «сама над собой форсила» — 'she swaggered before her own self' — captures self-deceiving vanity; the imperfective marks it as a habit of mind.
> Particle «ж» (же) sharpening the question: «ж» is the reduced form of the emphatic particle «же», jabbed in after «кто»: 'whose fault is it, then?'. The short adjective «виноват» ('to blame, guilty') is the idiomatic predicate form here.

Ты думаешь, она нарочно эту ручку первая поцеловала у Грушеньки, с расчетом хитрым?  
Do you suppose she kissed Grushenka's hand first on purpose, out of some cunning calculation?
> Possessor in the genitive: «у Грушеньки»: Russian often expresses 'whose' body part with «у» + genitive of the person rather than a possessive: «поцеловала … ручку … у Грушеньки» = 'kissed Grushenka's hand'. «первая» is a predicative adjective agreeing with the subject — 'she, the first one, kissed'.
> Diminutive «ручка» — the little hand: «ручка» is the affectionate diminutive of «рука» ('hand'). In this hyper-charged scene of one woman kissing another's hand, the tender suffix colours the gesture with intimacy and pathos.

Нет, она взаправду, она взаправду влюбилась в Грушеньку, то есть не в Грушеньку, а в свою же мечту, в свой бред, — потому-де что это моя мечта, мой бред!  
No, she truly, she truly fell in love with Grushenka — that is, not with Grushenka, but with her own dream, her own delirium — because, you see, it's my dream, my delirium!
> «взаправду» — truly, for real: A colloquial adverb ('in truth, genuinely'), doubled here for emphasis — «она взаправду, она взаправду влюбилась». The repetition mimics Mitya's insistence that the love was no calculation.
> «влюбиться в» + accusative; reflexive «свою»: «влюбиться в кого/что» takes «в» + accusative for the object of love. «в свою же мечту» — the reflexive possessive «свою» ('her own') points back to the subject Katya, and «же» insists: 'her very own dream'.
> Reportative clitic «-де» inside «потому что»: «-де» is an enclitic marking reported speech (like «дескать»), wedged into «потому что» to flag that Mitya is mimicking Katya's own self-justification: 'because, you see, …'.
> «бред» — delirium, raving: «бред» is feverish, delirious raving, here a near-synonym of «мечта» ('dream, fancy') but darker — a self-spun fantasy. Paired as «мечта … бред», it traces the slide from reverie to derangement.

Голубчик Алеша, да как ты от них, от этаких, спасся?  
My dear Alyosha, however did you escape from them, from such women?
> «голубчик» — 'my dear little dove': A tender form of address from «голубь» ('dove') with the diminutive «-чик»: 'my dear, my darling'. Mitya's warmth toward Alyosha softens the cynical tirade he has just delivered.
> Reflexive perfective «спастись» + «от» genitive: «спастись» ('to save oneself, escape') is reflexive in «-ся» and takes «от» + genitive for what one escapes — «от них, от этаких» ('from them, from such women'). The restating «от них, от этаких» is emphatic apposition.

Убежал, что ли, подобрав подрясник?  
Did you take to your heels, hitching up your cassock?
> Past gerund «подобрав» — 'having hitched up': «подобрав» is a perfective деепричастие ('having gathered/hitched up'), naming a prior action that frames the running away: he hitched up his cassock and then fled. Such gerunds compress two acts into one vivid clause.
> «что ли» — tentative 'or what?': The colloquial tag «что ли» softens a question into a guess or a teasing supposition: 'did you take to your heels, or what?'. It is a hallmark of relaxed, spoken Russian.

Ха-ха-ха!  
Ha-ha-ha!"

— Брат, а ты, кажется, и не обратил внимания, как ты обидел Катерину Ивановну тем, что рассказал Грушеньке о том дне, а та сейчас ей бросила в глаза, что вы сами «к кавалерам красу тайком продавать ходили!»  
"Brother, it seems you didn't even notice how you wounded Katerina Ivanovna by telling Grushenka about that day, and how she at once flung it in her face — that she herself 'used to go peddling her charms to gentlemen on the sly'!
> Instrumental «тем, что» — 'by the fact that': «тем, что рассказал» uses the instrumental demonstrative «тем» pointing forward to a «что»-clause: 'by [the fact] that you told' — the instrumental of means naming how he wounded her. A compact, bookish way to say 'by doing X'.
> Idiom: «бросить в глаза» — to fling in someone's face: Literally 'to throw into the eyes', the idiom «бросить кому-то в глаза» means to hurl an accusation at someone openly and cuttingly — exactly the public insult Grushenka deals Katya.
> «кавалеры», «краса», «тайком» — the cruel taunt: «кавалеры» = gentlemen-suitors, beaux; «краса» is the elevated, poetic word for «красота» ('beauty, charms'); «тайком» = 'on the sly, secretly'. Grushenka's jeer that Katya 'went peddling her charms to gentlemen on the sly' weaponises lofty diction for a sordid charge.

Брат, что же больше этой обиды? — Алешу всего более мучила мысль, что брат точно рад унижению Катерины Ивановны, хотя, конечно, того быть не могло.  
Brother, what greater insult could there be than that?" What tormented Alyosha most was the thought that his brother seemed positively glad of Katerina Ivanovna's humiliation — though of course that could not be.
> Comparative + genitive of comparison: «больше этой обиды» ('greater than this insult') puts the standard of comparison in the genitive — the characteristic Russian alternative to «чем». With «же» the rhetorical question bites: 'what then is greater than this offence?'.
> Accusative experiencer with «мучить»: «мучить» ('to torment') takes its experiencer in the accusative — «Алешу … мучила мысль» = 'the thought tormented Alyosha'. The grammatical subject is «мысль» ('the thought'); the object-first order foregrounds who suffers.
> Genitive of negation: «того быть не могло»: Under negation the subject of «быть» shifts to the genitive: «того … не могло (быть)» = 'that could not be'. The neuter «того» ('of that') is the absent, negated thing — a textbook genitive-of-negation existential.

— Ба! — страшно вдруг нахмурился Дмитрий Федорович и ударил себя ладонью по лбу.  
"Bah!" Dmitri Fyodorovich suddenly frowned terribly and struck himself on the forehead with his palm.
> Interjection «Ба!» — sudden recognition: «Ба!» is an exclamation of abrupt realisation or surprise — roughly 'Bah!' or 'Why!' — as a forgotten fact dawns. Here it marks the instant Mitya finally grasps the full insult.
> Reflexive perfective «нахмуриться»: «нахмуриться» ('to frown, knit one's brows') is a perfective change-of-state verb in «-ся», marking the single sudden onset of the frown. «страшно» here is an intensifying adverb ('terribly'), not 'fearfully'.

Он только что теперь обратил внимание, хотя Алеша рассказал всё давеча зараз, и обиду и крик Катерины Ивановны: «Ваш брат подлец!» — Да, в самом деле, может быть, я и рассказал Грушеньке о том «роковом дне», как говорит Катя.  
Only now did he take it in, although Alyosha had told him all at once a moment before, both the insult and Katerina Ivanovna's cry: 'Your brother is a scoundrel!' "Yes, in fact, perhaps I did tell Grushenka about that 'fatal day,' as Katya puts it.
> «давеча» and «зараз» — folksy time-words: «давеча» = 'a little while ago, earlier today' (a homely, slightly archaic adverb Dostoevsky loves); «зараз» = 'all at once, in one go'. Together: Alyosha had told it all 'a moment before, in a single rush'.
> Perfective «обратил внимание» — a single completed grasp: The perfective «обратил (внимание)» reports one decisive act of attention now completed — 'only now did he take it in'. It contrasts pointedly with the lingering «рассказал … давеча» (Alyosha had told it long before).
> «подлец» — scoundrel, base wretch: «подлец» is a strong, contemptuous word for a morally base man — a 'scoundrel, cad'. Katya's cry «Ваш брат подлец!» and Mitya's later self-naming hinge on this term, a key word of the chapter.

Да, это так, рассказал, припоминаю!  
Yes, that's so, I told her, I remember now!
> Imperfective «припоминать» — recollection in progress: «припоминаю» (imperfective present) renders memory as a process surfacing now — 'I'm beginning to recall'. Its perfective partner «припомнить» would mark the moment it fully comes back; the imperfective keeps the act unfolding.

Это было тогда же, в Мокром, я был пьян, цыганки пели… Но ведь я рыдал, рыдал тогда сам, я стоял на коленках, я молился на образ Кати, и Грушенька это понимала.  
It was back then, at Mokroye, I was drunk, the gypsy girls were singing… But I was sobbing then, sobbing myself, I was down on my knees, I was praying before Katya's image, and Grushenka understood it.
> Imperfective pasts setting the scene: «стоял», «молился», «рыдал» are all imperfective pasts painting a sustained tableau — the kneeling, the praying, the sobbing all going on together. Imperfective aspect is the natural mode for such held, background scene-painting.

Она тогда всё поняла, я припоминаю, она сама плакала… А, черт!  
She understood everything then, I remember, she wept herself… Ah, the devil!
> «Чёрт!» — 'the devil!': «чёрт» is the devil/imp of Russian folk and curse speech; «А, чёрт!» is an outburst of vexation — 'Ah, the devil!'. In a novel so steeped in the demonic, even Mitya's casual oath carries an undertone.
> Intensifier «сама» — 'she herself': «сама» (the emphatic 'self', feminine) stresses that it was Grushenka herself who wept — unprompted, of her own accord. Distinct from the reflexive «себя», «сам/сама» intensifies the subject rather than serving as an object.

Да могло ли иначе быть теперь?  
And could it have turned out otherwise now?
> Interrogative particle «ли» in a rhetorical question: «ли» fronts the focused «могло» and turns the clause into a (here rhetorical) yes/no question: 'could it have been otherwise?'. The opening «Да» is the insistent discourse 'and, well' — not 'yes'.

Тогда плакала, а теперь… Теперь «кинжал в сердце»!  
Then she wept, but now… Now it's a 'dagger in the heart'!
> Subjectless verb + contrastive «а»: «Тогда плакала» drops the subject (Grushenka, clear from context and the feminine «-ла»), the verb ending alone carrying it. «а теперь…» pivots with the contrastive «а» from past tears to present blade — a stark then/now antithesis.

Так у баб.  
That's how it is with women.
> «бабы» — women (earthy, dismissive): «баба» is the blunt, peasant word for a woman — here generalising and faintly contemptuous: 'that's how it is with women'. The «у» + genitive idiom («у баб») names the domain in which something holds true.

Он потупился и задумался.  
He cast down his eyes and grew thoughtful.
> Two reflexive perfectives in sequence: «потупился» ('cast down his eyes') and «задумался» ('grew thoughtful, fell to musing') are both perfective «-ся» verbs marking the single onset of a new state. The «за-» of «задумался» signals entry into the action — 'began to brood'.

— Да, я подлец! Несомненный подлец, — произнес он вдруг мрачным голосом. — Всё равно, плакал или нет, всё равно подлец!  
"Yes, I am a scoundrel! An undoubted scoundrel," he pronounced suddenly in a gloomy voice. "All the same, whether I wept or not, all the same a scoundrel!
> «несомненный» — undoubted, beyond doubt: From «сомнение» ('doubt') with the negating «не-»: 'admitting no doubt'. «Несомненный подлец» — 'an undoubted scoundrel' — Mitya pronounces his own verdict as a settled fact.
> «всё равно» — 'all the same, no matter': The fixed phrase «всё равно» means 'it makes no difference, all the same'. Repeated here — «Всё равно, плакал или нет, всё равно подлец!» — it hammers home that no tears can change the verdict.

Передай там, что принимаю наименование, если это может утешить.  
Tell them there that I accept the name, if it can be any comfort.
> Imperative «передай» + reported «что»-clause: «передай» is the singular imperative of «передать» ('convey, pass on'). The «что»-clause reports plain fact ('that I accept the name'); «принимаю» drops its subject «я», the ending carrying it.
> Conditional «если» clause: A real (indicative) conditional with «если» ('if'): 'if it can comfort [them]'. No «бы» appears, so this is a factual condition, not a hypothetical — Mitya genuinely offers the consolation.

Ну и довольно, прощай, что болтать-то!  
Well, that's enough, farewell, what's the use of chattering!
> Emphatic clitic «-то» on the infinitive: The hyphenated «-то» here is the topic-emphasising clitic, leaning on «болтать» to give a weary, dismissive ring: 'what's the use of chattering, after all!'. «что … !» frames it as a rhetorical 'what for'.
> «болтать» — to chatter, prattle: «болтать» is to talk idly, gabble, run on — dismissive of one's own speech. Mitya cuts himself off: enough idle talk, farewell.

Веселого нет.  
There's nothing cheerful in it.
> Genitive of negation with «нет»: «нет» ('there is none') governs the genitive: «веселого нет» = 'there is nothing cheerful' (in it). The substantivised adjective «веселого» ('of the cheerful') stands as the absent subject — a compact negative existential.

Ты своею дорогой, а я своею.  
You go your way, and I'll go mine.
> Instrumental of route + elided verb: «своею дорогой» is the instrumental of path ('by one's own road'), with the verb of motion gapped out — 'you [go] your way, and I [go] mine'. «своею» shows the archaic instrumental «-ею» (modern «-ей»), and «свой» reflexively binds each road to its own subject.

Да и видеться больше не хочу, до какой-нибудь самой последней минуты.  
And I don't want to see you again, until some very last minute.
> Reciprocal «видеться» — 'to see each other': «видеться» (reflexive «-ся») has reciprocal force: 'to meet, see one another'. «больше … не хочу» ('I no longer want to') frames the wish negatively — he wants their meetings to cease.
> «какой-нибудь» — 'some… or other': «какой-нибудь» marks a non-specific, undetermined 'some last minute or other' — he names no time, only a vague future extremity. «до» + genitive sets the limit: 'until some very last minute'.

Прощай, Алексей! — Он крепко сжал руку Алеши и, всё еще потупившись и не поднимая головы, точно сорвавшись, быстро зашагал к городу.  
Farewell, Alexei!" He pressed Alyosha's hand hard and, still with his eyes cast down and without raising his head, as if tearing himself away, strode off rapidly toward the town.
> A chain of gerunds: «потупившись… не поднимая… сорвавшись»: Three деепричастия cluster around the main verb «зашагал»: perfective «потупившись» and «сорвавшись» (having cast down his eyes, having torn himself away) frame a prior/completed circumstance, while imperfective «не поднимая» names a simultaneous one (not raising his head). Such gerund-chains are a signature of literary narration.
> Prefix «за-» of inception + «к» dative: «зашагал» (perfective, «за-» + «шагать») marks the sudden start of striding — 'set off striding'. «к городу» uses «к» + dative for direction toward the town.

Алеша смотрел ему вслед, не веря, чтоб он так совсем вдруг ушел.  
Alyosha watched him go, unable to believe that he had walked off so utterly and all at once.
> Dative «ему» with «вслед»: «вслед» ('after, in the wake of') governs the dative: «смотрел ему вслед» = 'watched after him', gazed at his retreating back. The imperfective «смотрел» holds the gaze as a lingering process.
> Gerund «не веря» + «чтоб» of unreality: «не веря» is an imperfective gerund ('not believing') shared with Alyosha. After a negated verb of believing, «чтоб» (reduced «чтобы») + past «ушёл» frames the content as something doubted/unreal — 'unable to believe that he had walked off'.

— Стой, Алексей, еще одно признание, тебе одному! — вдруг воротился Дмитрий Федорович назад. — Смотри на меня, пристально смотри: видишь, вот тут, вот тут — готовится страшное бесчестие.  
"Stop, Alexei, one more confession, for you alone!" Dmitri Fyodorovich suddenly turned back. "Look at me, look hard: you see, here, right here — a dreadful disgrace is being prepared."
> Imperatives «стой», «смотри»: «стой» ('stop! halt!') and «смотри» ('look!') are singular imperatives. The doubled «Смотри … пристально смотри» ('look, look hard') with the adverb «пристально» ('intently') drives Mitya's command home.
> Middle «-ся»: «готовится» — 'is being prepared': «готовится» is the «-ся» middle/passive of «готовить»: the disgrace 'is preparing itself / is being made ready', with no named agent. The imperfective renders it as an ongoing, unfinished process — present and gathering.
> «бесчестие» — dishonour, disgrace: A bookish noun («без» 'without' + «честь» 'honour'): 'dishonour, infamy'. The «-ие» ending gives it abstract, elevated weight. It is the chapter's gathering keyword for the deed Mitya feels approaching.

(Говоря «вот тут», Дмитрий Федорович ударял себя кулаком по груди и с таким странным видом, как будто бесчестие лежало и сохранялось именно тут на груди его, в каком-то месте, в кармане может быть, или на шее висело зашитое).  
(As he said "right here," Dmitri Fyodorovich struck himself on the chest with his fist, and with such a strange air, as though the disgrace lay and was kept precisely there on his chest, in some spot, in a pocket perhaps, or hung sewn up about his neck.)
> Imperfective gerund «говоря» — simultaneous action: «говоря» (imperfective present gerund, 'while saying') sets the accompanying circumstance for the main «ударял»: as he said it, he struck. The imperfective «ударял» suggests a repeated or drawn-out striking, not a single blow.
> «как будто» + past forms for unreal comparison: «как будто» ('as though') introduces an unreal comparison, its verbs in the past («лежало», «сохранялось», «висело»). The passive participle «зашитое» ('sewn up') agrees with neuter «бесчестие» — the disgrace imagined as a thing stitched into his clothing.

Ты уже знаешь меня: подлец, подлец признанный!  
You already know me: a scoundrel, an acknowledged scoundrel!
> Past passive participle «признанный» as epithet: «признанный» ('acknowledged, recognised') is the long past passive participle of «признать», placed after its noun for emphasis — 'a scoundrel, an acknowledged one'. Post-positioning the participle gives it rhetorical stress.

Но знай, что бы я ни сделал прежде, теперь или впереди, — ничто, ничто не может сравниться в подлости с тем бесчестием, которое именно теперь, именно в эту минуту ношу вот здесь на груди моей, вот тут, тут, которое действует и совершается и которое я полный хозяин остановить, могу остановить или совершить, заметь это себе!  
But know this: whatever I may have done before, now or in the future — nothing, nothing can compare in baseness with the disgrace that, precisely now, precisely at this very minute, I carry here on my breast, right here, here, which is at work and being accomplished, and which I am full master to stop — I can stop it or carry it out, mark that well!
> Concessive «что бы … ни» — 'whatever I may have done': The frame «что бы … ни» (interrogative + «бы» + «ни») builds a universal concession: 'whatever I may have done'. «бы» supplies the hypothetical and «ни» the sweeping 'no matter what' — a classic irrealis-concessive construction.
> Negative concord: «ничто … не может»: «ничто» ('nothing') still requires the verbal negator «не» — «ничто … не может» literally 'nothing cannot', meaning 'nothing can'. Russian's obligatory double negation is on full display, doubled again by the repetition for force.
> Middle «-ся»: «совершается» — 'is being accomplished': Within the long «которое»-relative, «совершается» is the «-ся» middle of «совершать» ('to accomplish'): the disgrace 'is being carried out', an agentless ongoing process paired with «действует» ('is at work'). The imperfectives keep the deed live and unfinished.
> «хозяин» — 'I am full master to stop it': «хозяин» ('master, owner') used predicatively with an infinitive — «я полный хозяин остановить» = 'I am wholly master [free] to stop it'. The metaphor casts Mitya as sovereign over his own act, able to halt or complete it at will.

Ну так знай же, что я его совершу, а не остановлю.  
Well, then know this: that I shall carry it out and not stop it.
> Perfective futures «совершу / не остановлю»: Both perfective verbs conjugate as futures: «совершу» ('I shall carry [it] out') and «не остановлю» ('and shall not stop [it]'), set against each other by «а». The perfective marks each as a single decisive deed to come.
> Imperative «знай» + insistent «же»: «знай» is the singular imperative 'know!'; «же» jabs it with insistence — 'know this, then!'. The pairing is a stock device for a solemn declaration.

Я давеча тебе всё рассказал, а этого не рассказал, потому что даже и у меня на то медного лба не хватило!  
A while ago I told you everything, but this I did not tell, because even I hadn't the brass forehead for it!
> Impersonal «не хватило» + genitive: «хватить» ('to suffice') is impersonal: «у меня … не хватило (чего?)» = 'I did not have enough (of)…', with the thing lacking in the genitive — «медного лба». Under negation the genitive is obligatory; the construction has no nominative subject.
> Idiom: «медный лоб» — a 'brass forehead': «медный лоб» (literally 'a copper/brass forehead') denotes brazen, shameless effrontery. Mitya says that 'even I hadn't the brass forehead' for this confession — even he is not shameless enough to have spoken it.

Я могу еще остановиться; остановясь, я могу завтра же целую половину потерянной чести воротить, но я не остановлюсь, я совершу подлый замысел, и будь ты вперед свидетелем, что я заранее и зазнамо говорю это!  
I can still stop myself; and if I stop, I can tomorrow win back a whole half of my lost honor, but I shall not stop, I shall carry out the base design, and you be my witness henceforth that I say this in advance and knowingly!
> Past gerund «остановясь» — conditional 'if I stop': «остановясь» is the perfective gerund of «остановиться» ('having stopped'), here read conditionally — 'and if I stop, I can…'. The archaic «-ясь» ending (modern would favour «остановившись») lends a bookish ring.
> Imperative «будь» + predicate instrumental «свидетелем»: «будь … свидетелем» = 'be my witness', the imperative of «быть» taking its predicate noun in the instrumental — «свидетелем» — as «быть» regularly does. The instrumental frames the witnessing as a role assumed.
> «зазнамо» — knowingly, deliberately (archaic): «зазнамо» (also «зазнамо/зазнаемо») is an old, dialectal adverb meaning 'wittingly, knowing full well'. Paired with «заранее» ('in advance'), it stresses that Mitya foretells his sin with open eyes.

Гибель и мрак!  
Ruin and darkness!
> «гибель» and «мрак» — ruin and darkness: «гибель» = destruction, perdition, doom; «мрак» = gloom, darkness (with overtones of spiritual night). The bare exclamatory pair, no verb, is melodramatic shorthand for Mitya's sense of approaching catastrophe.

Объяснять нечего, в свое время узнаешь.  
There's nothing to explain; in good time you'll find out.
> Negative «нечего» + infinitive: «нечего» ('there is nothing to') is a negative impersonal predicate that takes an infinitive: «объяснять нечего» = 'there is nothing to explain'. Such «не́чего/не́кого» constructions are stressed on «не» and leave no nominative subject.
> Perfective future «узнаешь»: «узнаешь» is the perfective future of «узнать» ('to find out'): 'you will [come to] learn'. The idiom «в своё время» ('in good time, in due course') sets the deferral.

Смрадный переулок и инфернальница!  
The stinking back-alley and the infernal woman!
> «смрадный» — reeking, fetid: «смрадный» (from «смрад», 'stench, foul reek') is a heavy, almost biblical word for a stinking place; «переулок» is a side-lane or back-alley. The 'stinking back-alley' names the squalid quarter where Grushenka lives.
> «инфернальница» — the infernal woman: A coinage of Mitya's from the bookish «инфернальный» ('infernal') plus the feminine «-ница»: 'she of the inferno, the hellish woman' — his theatrical epithet for Grushenka. The Latinate flourish marks his romantic-demonic posing.

Прощай.  
Farewell.

Не молись обо мне, не стою, да и не нужно совсем, совсем не нужно… не нуждаюсь вовсе!  
Don't pray for me, I'm not worth it, and it's quite unnecessary, quite unnecessary… I have no need of it at all!
> Negated imperfective imperative «не молись»: Negative commands strongly prefer the imperfective: «не молись» ('don't pray') uses the imperfective imperative of «молиться» (reflexive «-ся»), the normal aspect for a prohibition. «обо мне» shows «о» → «обо» before a consonant cluster, + prepositional.
> Reflexive «нуждаться» + «в»; emphatic «вовсе»: «нуждаться» ('to need', only ever in «-ся») governs «в» + prepositional, here elided. «вовсе» with negation = 'not at all', the strongest denial — capping the threefold «совсем … совсем … вовсе».

Прочь!..  
Away!.."
> «прочь!» — away! be gone!: «прочь» is an adverb of dismissal — 'away, off, begone' — flung out as a single-word command. It is Mitya's abrupt, theatrical exit-line.

И он вдруг удалился, на этот раз уже совсем.  
And he suddenly withdrew, this time for good.
> Reflexive perfective «удалиться»: «удалиться» ('to withdraw, move off') is a perfective «-ся» verb of departure, marking the completed act of going. «на этот раз уже совсем» ('this time for good') stresses the finality.

Алеша пошел к монастырю.  
Alyosha walked on toward the monastery.
> Perfective «пошёл» of motion + «к» dative: «пошёл» (perfective of «идти», prefix «по-») marks the single act of setting off walking. The direction is given by «к» + dative («к монастырю», 'toward the monastery').

«Как же, как же я никогда его не увижу, что он говорит? — дико представлялось ему, — да завтра же непременно увижу и разыщу его, нарочно разыщу, что он такое говорит!..»  
"How can it be, how can it be that I shall never see him again — what is he saying?" it presented itself wildly to his mind. "Why, tomorrow I'll see him without fail and seek him out, I'll seek him out on purpose — what is he talking about?.."
> Negative concord with «никогда … не»: «никогда … не увижу» pairs the negative adverb «никогда» ('never') with the obligatory «не»: 'I shall never see him'. «увижу» is the perfective future. The doubled «Как же, как же» with «же» voices Alyosha's incredulity.
> Impersonal «представлялось ему» — dative experiencer: «представлялось» (imperfective «-ся», impersonal) with dative «ему» = 'it presented itself to him / came into his mind'. The thought is the grammatical subject; Alyosha, the one it strikes, stands in the dative — Dostoevsky's favourite frame for the inner life.
> Perfective futures of resolve: «увижу», «разыщу» (perfective futures of «увидеть», «разыскать») express firm intended acts: 'I'll see him, I'll seek him out'. «непременно» ('without fail') and «нарочно» ('on purpose') underline Alyosha's determination.

Монастырь он обошел кругом и через сосновую рощу прошел прямо в скит.  
He went around the monastery and through the pine grove straight to the hermitage.
> Prefixed perfectives of motion «обошёл / прошёл»: «обошёл» ('went round', «об-») and «прошёл» ('went through/straight in', «про-») are perfective prefixed motion verbs, each a completed leg of the route. The prefixes carry the precise path: around, then through into the «скит».

Там ему отворили, хотя в этот час уже никого не впускали.  
They opened to him there, although at this hour no one was being let in.
> Subjectless 3rd-plural: 'they opened / let in': «отворили» and «впускали» have no stated subject — the bare 3rd-person plural means an indefinite 'they / one': 'they opened to him', 'no one was being let in'. This agentless plural is Russian's standard impersonal. «никого не впускали» also shows negative concord (никого + не).
> Imperfective «впускали» — the standing rule: The imperfective past «впускали» states a habitual/ongoing situation: at that hour they 'did not let anyone in' as a matter of practice. Set against the single perfective «отворили» ('opened [this once]'), the contrast highlights that an exception was made for Alyosha.

Сердце у него дрожало, когда он вошел в келью старца: «Зачем, зачем он выходил, зачем тот послал его „в мир“?  
His heart was trembling when he entered the elder's cell: "Why, why did he go out, why did the elder send him 'into the world'?
> Imperfective «выходил» vs perfective «послал»: «выходил» (imperfective) views the going-out as a circumstance/process; «послал» (perfective) marks the Elder's single completed act of sending. «тот» ('that one') points to the Elder, keeping the two men apart in Alyosha's anxious questions.

Здесь тишина, здесь святыня, а там — смущенье, там мрак, в котором сразу потеряешься и заблудишься…»  
Here is stillness, here is holiness, but out there — confusion, out there darkness, in which one is at once lost and goes astray…"
> Generalised 2nd-person perfective futures: «потеряешься» and «заблудишься» are 2nd-person singular perfective futures used impersonally — 'one is at once lost and goes astray'. The reflexive «-ся» gives both an intransitive, happen-to-oneself sense, and the 'you' is a generic everyman.
> «святыня» — holy thing, sanctity: «святыня» (from «святой», 'holy') means a sacred object or, abstractly, holiness itself — what is set apart and revered. «Здесь святыня» ('here is holiness') opposes the «мрак» ('darkness') of the world beyond the walls.

В келье находились послушник Порфирий и иеромонах отец Паисий, весь день каждый час заходивший узнать о здоровии отца Зосимы, которому, как со страхом узнал Алеша, становилось всё хуже и хуже.  
In the cell were the novice Porfiry and the hieromonk Father Paisy, who had come every hour all day to ask after the health of Father Zossima, whose condition, as Alyosha learned with dread, was growing worse and worse.
> Past active participle «заходивший»: «заходивший» is the past active participle of imperfective «заходить» ('who kept dropping in'), agreeing with «иеромонах» and replacing a «который»-clause: 'who had come every hour all day'. The imperfective stem gives the repeated, habitual sense.
> Dative experiencer «становилось … хуже»: «которому … становилось хуже» frames Zossima's worsening impersonally: the dative «которому» ('to whom') is the one it happens to, with no nominative subject — 'whose condition grew worse'. «всё хуже и хуже» is the comparative 'worse and worse'.

Даже обычной вечерней беседы с братией на сей раз не могло состояться.  
Even the customary evening talk with the brethren could not take place this time.
> Genitive of negation: «беседы … не могло состояться»: The negated existential «не могло состояться» ('could not take place') pulls its subject into the genitive — «(даже) … беседы … не могло». The neuter «не могло» agrees with nothing nominative, the hallmark of the negated-subject construction.
> «братия» — the brethren (collective): «братия» is the collective noun for a monastery's community of monks — 'the brotherhood, the brethren' as one body (note the singular form for a plural sense). It declines as a feminine «-ия» noun; here instrumental «с братией».

Обыкновенно повечеру, после службы, ежедневно, на сон грядущий, стекалась монастырская братия в келью старца, и всякий вслух исповедовал ему сегодняшние прегрешения свои, грешные мечты, мысли, соблазны, даже ссоры между собой, если таковые случались.  
Ordinarily, of an evening, after the service, daily, before retiring to sleep, the monastery brethren would gather in the elder's cell, and each would confess aloud to him his transgressions of the day, his sinful daydreams, thoughts, temptations, even quarrels among themselves, if any such had occurred.
> «на сон грядущий» — 'before sleep' (set phrase): A fixed devotional phrase, 'at/before going to sleep', from the Orthodox 'prayers before sleep' («молитвы на сон грядущий»). «грядущий» ('coming') is itself a Church-Slavonic active participle of «грясти» ('to come'), surviving only in such elevated formulas.
> Imperfective habituals: «стекалась», «исповедовал»: «Обыкновенно» ('ordinarily') + the imperfective pasts «стекалась» ('would gather'), «исповедовал» ('would confess') paint a recurring custom, not one event. The imperfective is the engine of this whole habitual, scene-setting digression.
> «прегрешения» — transgressions (bookish): «прегрешение» (with the intensive prefix «пре-») is a solemn, ecclesiastical word for 'sin, transgression', weightier than plain «грех». Heaped with «грешные мечты … соблазны» ('sinful daydreams … temptations'), it sets the confessional register.

Иные исповедовались на коленях.  
Some confessed on their knees.
> «иные» — 'some, certain ones': «иные» (plural of «иной», 'other') here means 'some, a few of them' — 'some confessed on their knees'. The reflexive «исповедовались» (imperfective) keeps the habitual frame of the surrounding passage.

Старец разрешал, мирил, наставлял, налагал покаяние, благословлял и отпускал.  
The elder absolved, reconciled, instructed, laid penance, blessed, and dismissed.
> A chain of imperfective habituals: Six imperfective past verbs in a row name the Elder's recurring offices — 'he would absolve, reconcile, instruct, lay penance, bless, and dismiss'. The imperfective gives each its iterative, customary sense; the asyndetic list has a liturgical cadence.
> «налагать покаяние» — to impose penance: «покаяние» is 'penance / repentance'; «налагать» ('to lay upon, impose') is the proper verb for assigning it. «разрешал» here also carries its ecclesiastical sense, 'absolved (from sin)', not merely 'permitted'.

Вот против этих-то братских «исповедей» и восставали противники старчества, говоря, что это профанация исповеди как таинства, почти кощунство, хотя тут было совсем иное.  
It was precisely against these brotherly 'confessions' that the opponents of the institution of elders rose up, saying it was a profanation of confession as a sacrament, almost a sacrilege, although the thing was something altogether different.
> Emphatic «-то» + «вот … и» focus frame: The clitic «-то» on «этих» topicalises 'these very confessions', and the «вот … и» frame ('it was precisely against … that …') throws the focus onto them. «против» governs the genitive «этих … исповедей».
> «старчество» — the institution of elders: «старчество» is the monastic practice and office of the «старец» — spiritual guidance through a revered elder. «противники старчества» ('opponents of starchestvo') names the church faction that resisted it, the subject of this digression.

Выставляли даже епархиальному начальству, что такие исповеди не только не достигают доброй цели, но действительно и нарочито вводят в грех и соблазн.  
They even represented to the diocesan authorities that such confessions not only failed to attain their good end, but actually and deliberately led into sin and temptation.
> Correlative «не только … но» with double «не»: The correlative «не только не … но (и)» ('not only do not… but actually…') escalates the charge. «не достигают» repeats negation inside the first arm; «нарочито» ('deliberately') sharpens the second — they don't just fail, they lead into sin.

Многие-де из братии тяготятся ходить к старцу, а приходят поневоле, потому что все идут, так чтобы не приняли их за гордых и бунтующих помыслом.  
Many of the brethren, they said, found it a burden to go to the elder, yet went against their will, because everyone went, so as not to be taken for proud and rebellious in spirit.
> Reportative «-де» + reflexive «тяготятся»: «-де» again flags reported speech (the critics' claim): 'many, they say, find it a burden'. «тяготятся» (reflexive «-ся», + infinitive «ходить») means 'are burdened by, find it irksome to' go — the «-ся» giving the verb its 'feel weighed down' sense.
> «чтобы … не» of purpose with past form: «чтобы не приняли» is a negative purpose clause — 'so that they not be taken (for…)'. After «чтобы» the verb stands in the past form «приняли» (the irrealis required by «чтобы»), here a subjectless 3rd-plural 'one'.
> «поневоле» — against one's will, perforce: «поневоле» (from «неволя», 'unfreedom') means 'unwillingly, of necessity, despite oneself'. The monks went «поневоле … потому что все идут» — perforce, because everyone went.

Рассказывали, что некоторые из братии, отправляясь на вечернюю исповедь, условливались между собою заранее: «я, дескать, скажу, что я на тебя утром озлился, а ты подтверди», — это чтобы было что сказать, чтобы только отделаться.  
It was told that some of the brethren, on their way to evening confession, would arrange it among themselves beforehand: 'I'll say, see, that I lost my temper at you this morning, and you confirm it' — this so that there would be something to say, just to be done with it.
> Imperfective gerund «отправляясь» + habitual «условливались»: «отправляясь» ('setting off, on their way to') is an imperfective gerund of simultaneous action, framing the habitual «условливались» ('would arrange among themselves', reflexive/reciprocal «-ся»). Both imperfectives keep the recurring-practice frame.
> Reportative «дескать» + imperative «подтверди»: «дескать» flags the quoted bargain; «скажу» is a perfective future ('I'll say'), and «подтверди» the perfective imperative 'confirm it!' addressed to the accomplice. The cynical little script lays bare the abuse the critics decried.
> «отделаться» — to be done with it, get it over: «отделаться» (perfective, reflexive) means 'to rid oneself of a duty, get it over with cheaply'. «чтобы только отделаться» — 'just to be done with it' — names the hollow motive of the staged confession.

Алеша знал, что это действительно иногда так и происходило.  
Alyosha knew that this was indeed how things sometimes came to pass.
> Confirming «так и»: The pairing «так и» (literally 'just so') confirms that something really did happen the way described — 'this was indeed how it came about'. The imperfective past «происходило» frames it as a recurring fact, reinforced by «иногда» ('sometimes').
> Reported fact with «что»: «знал, что…» opens a content clause with the subordinator «что» ('that'), reporting a plain fact rather than a wish — contrast the willed «чтобы» you will meet below.

Он знал тоже, что есть из братии весьма негодующие и на то, что, по обычаю, даже письма от родных, получаемые скитниками, приносились сначала к старцу, чтоб он распечатывал их прежде получателей.  
He knew, too, that there were among the brethren some who were greatly indignant even at the custom by which the very letters that the hermitage monks received from their relatives were first brought to the elder, so that he might open them before their recipients did.
> «братия» — the brotherhood: A collective, somewhat bookish noun for the whole body of monks in a monastery, 'the brethren', distinct from plain «братья» ('brothers'). Here «из братии» is partitive genitive: 'some of the brethren'.
> Passive participle «получаемые»: «получаемые» is a present passive participle ('being received'), agreeing with «письма», and its agent «скитниками» stands in the instrumental — the case Russian uses for the doer of a passive. A compact, bookish way to say 'the letters that the hermits received'.
> Purpose clause «чтоб(ы)»: «чтоб» (a clipped «чтобы») introduces purpose — 'so that he might open them' — and obligatorily takes a past/irrealis verb form; here imperfective «распечатывал» casts the opening as a customary practice rather than a single act.

Предполагалось, разумеется, что всё это должно совершаться свободно и искренно, от всей души, во имя вольного смирения и спасительного назидания, но на деле, как оказывалось, происходило иногда и весьма неискренно, а, напротив, выделанно и фальшиво.  
It was presumed, of course, that all this ought to be done freely and sincerely, from the whole heart, in the name of willing humility and saving guidance; yet in practice, as it turned out, it was at times done quite insincerely — on the contrary, in a manner contrived and false.
> Impersonal «-ся» framing: Both «предполагалось» ('it was presumed') and «происходило» run as subjectless, neuter-singular verbs — the «-ся» on «предполагалось» gives an agentless passive sense. Russian readily narrates without a named subject, letting the practice itself be the topic.
> Reflexive «совершаться»: The «-ся» turns transitive «совершать» ('to accomplish') into an intransitive middle, 'to be done / to come to pass'. Paired with neuter «должно» ('ought'), it states a norm impersonally.
> «выделанно» — studied, contrived: «выделанный» literally means 'worked-up, manufactured' (as leather is 'dressed'); used of behaviour it means artificial, put-on. Paired with «фальшиво» ('false') it sharpens the contrast with «искренно» ('sincerely') earlier in the sentence.
> Contrastive «а»: «а» is the soft contrastive conjunction — 'and yet / but rather' — pivoting from what was supposed to be to what actually was. With «напротив» ('on the contrary') it marks a turn of the topic, not flat opposition.

Но старшие и опытнейшие из братии стояли на своем, рассуждая, что «кто искренно вошел в эти стены, чтобы спастись, для тех все эти послушания и подвиги окажутся несомненно спасительными и принесут им великую пользу; кто же, напротив, тяготится и ропщет, тот всё равно как бы и не инок и напрасно только пришел в монастырь, такому место в миру.  
But the older and more experienced of the brethren held their ground, reasoning that "whoever has entered these walls sincerely, in order to be saved, for such a man all these obediences and ascetic labors will prove without doubt to be saving, and will bring him great benefit; whoever, on the contrary, chafes and grumbles, that one is no monk at all, and has come into the monastery to no purpose, and his place is out in the world.
> Bookish superlative «-ейший»: «опытнейшие» ('the most experienced') is the synthetic superlative in «-ейш-», a markedly literary alternative to «самые опытные». This suffix gives 19th-century prose its elevated ring.
> Idiom «стоять на своём»: A fixed idiom, 'to stand one's ground, hold firm to one's view'. «своём» here is the reflexive possessive «свой» in the prepositional, 'their own (position)'.
> Correlative «кто… тот/те»: The relative «кто» ('whoever') is picked up by the demonstrative «те/тот» ('those/that one') in the main clause — a correlative frame, 'whoever…, for such people…'. It structures the whole maxim into balanced halves.
> «послушание» and «подвиг»: Both are monastic terms: «послушание» is an 'obedience', a task assigned by superiors, and «подвиг» an ascetic 'feat' or spiritual struggle. The same «подвиг» means 'heroic deed' in secular Russian — here it is the inner labour of self-denial.
> «инок» — a monk: An archaic, solemn word for a monk (related to «иной», 'other', i.e. one set apart from the world), more elevated than «монах». «не инок» — 'no monk at all'.

От греха же и от диавола не только в миру, но и во храме не убережешься, а стало быть, и нечего греху потакать».  
And from sin and from the devil one cannot guard oneself even within the temple, let alone in the world; therefore there is no reason to indulge sin."
> Church-Slavonic «диавол»: The solemn ecclesiastical form of «дьявол» ('the devil'), with the full vowel sequence kept from Church Slavonic. The register suits a monk's reasoning about sin.
> Slavonic «во храме»: «храм» is the lofty word for a church/temple, and the preposition «во» (rather than «в») before it is a Slavonic euphonic survival used in elevated and liturgical phrases.
> Generic «you» in «-ся»: «не убережёшься» is 2nd-person singular perfective future used impersonally — 'one cannot guard oneself' — a common Russian way to state a general truth. The «-ся» is the true reflexive 'protect oneself'.
> Impersonal «нечего» + dative: «нечего потакать» is an impersonal construction meaning 'there is no point indulging'; the indulged party «греху» ('sin') stands in the dative as the object of «потакать». A neat dative-governing turn of phrase.

— Ослабел, сонливость напала, — шепотом сообщил Алеше отец Паисий, благословив его. — Разбудить даже трудно.  
— He has grown weak, drowsiness has overtaken him, — Father Paisy informed Alyosha in a whisper, after blessing him. — It is even hard to wake him.
> Perfective past for sudden events: Two perfective past verbs report completed changes of state — 'he has weakened', 'drowsiness has come over him'. The subjectless «Ослабел» drops the obvious 'he', as the ending and context supply it.
> Gerund «благословив»: A perfective past gerund («деепричастие»), 'having blessed him' — an indeclinable verb-adverb naming the prior act of the same subject (Father Paisy). It compresses 'after he had blessed him' into one word, a staple of literary narration.

Но и не надо будить.  
But there is no need to wake him, either.
> Impersonal «не надо» + infinitive: «не надо будить» is a subjectless modal — 'there is no need to wake (him)' — the typical Russian way to express necessity or its absence, with the predicate word «надо» and a bare infinitive.

Минут на пять просыпался, просил снести братии его благословение, а у братии просил о нем ночных молитв.  
For some five minutes he woke and asked that his blessing be carried to the brethren, and of the brethren he asked their nightly prayers for him.
> Inverted numeral = 'about': Putting the noun before the numeral — «минут на пять» instead of «на пять минут» — signals approximation, 'for about five minutes'. The genitive plural «минут» is governed by «пять».
> Imperfective for the brief waking: The imperfective past «просыпался… просил» presents the waking as a small stretch of process rather than a point-event, fitting the 'for some five minutes' frame.
> «снести» — to carry to: Here «снести» (perfective of «сносить») means 'to carry/convey (a message) to someone', with the recipient «братии» in the dative. The elder asks that his blessing be 'carried' to the monks.

Заутра намерен еще раз причаститься.  
He intends to receive communion once more in the morning.
> Archaic «заутра»: A bookish, archaic adverb for 'tomorrow morning / on the morrow', more solemn than «завтра утром». It belongs to the elevated register of the monastery's speech.

О тебе вспоминал, Алексей, спрашивал, ушел ли ты, отвечали, что в городе.  
He spoke of you, Alexei; he asked whether you had gone, and they answered that you were in the town.
> Embedded «ли» = 'whether': In an indirect question the enclitic «ли» means 'whether': «спрашивал, ушёл ли ты» — 'he asked whether you had left'. The focused word «ушёл» is fronted before «ли».

«На то я и благословил его; там его место, а пока не здесь», — вот что изрек о тебе.  
"It was for that very purpose that I blessed him; his place is there, not here for now," — that is what he uttered concerning you.
> «на то… и» — for that very purpose: «На то… и» fronts the purpose for emphasis: 'it was precisely for that that I blessed him'. The «и» here is an emphatic particle, not 'and'.
> Solemn «изрек»: «изречь» ('to utter, pronounce') is a lofty, almost biblical verb of speaking, reserved for weighty or oracular pronouncements — apt for reporting the dying elder's words. Compare ordinary «сказал».

Любовно о тебе вспоминал, с заботой, смыслишь ли ты, чего удостоился?  
He remembered you with love, with concern — do you grasp what you have been deemed worthy of?
> Folksy «смыслить»: «смыслить» ('to understand, grasp, have a sense of') is a colloquial, slightly old-fashioned verb. With the questioning «ли» it forms a pointed 'do you understand…?'
> Genitive after «удостоиться»: «удостоиться» ('to be deemed worthy of') governs the genitive — hence «чего» ('of what'). The «-ся» makes it the passive-flavoured 'to be granted/honoured with'.

Только как же это определил он тебе пока быть срок в миру?  
Only how is it that he appointed you, for a time, to live out a term in the world?
> Particle «же» in a question: The particle «же» after «как» intensifies the puzzlement — 'but how on earth did he appoint…?'. It adds the speaker's wondering attitude, with no English word to carry it but stress.
> «срок» — a fixed term: «срок» is a set period or term; «быть срок в миру» means 'to serve out a span of time in the world'. «в миру» ('in the world') is the monastic term for life outside the monastery.

Значит, предвидит нечто в судьбе твоей!  
It means he foresees something in your destiny!
> Bookish «нечто»: «нечто» ('something') is a literary, indefinite neuter pronoun, weightier than «что-то» and suggesting something undefined yet significant — 'he foresees some-thing in your fate'.
> Inverted possessive «судьбе твоей»: Placing the possessive after its noun («судьбе твоей» rather than «твоей судьбе») is a poetic, elevated inversion that throws weight onto 'your destiny'.

Пойми, Алексей, что если и возвратишься в мир, то как бы на возложенное на тя послушание старцем твоим, а не на суетное легкомыслие и не на мирское веселие…  
Understand, Alexei, that even if you do return to the world, it must be as if to an obedience laid upon you by your elder, and not for idle frivolity or worldly merriment…
> Concessive «если и»: «если и» means 'even if': the particle «и» turns a plain condition into a concession — 'even if you do return'. The perfective future «возвратишься» states the completed return.
> Church-Slavonic «тя»: «тя» is the Slavonic accusative of 'thee' (modern «тебя»), here in «на возложенное на тя послушание» — 'an obedience laid upon thee'. The sacred pronoun lifts the register to that of a monastic charge.
> Past passive participle «возложенное»: «возложенное» is a past passive participle, 'laid upon / imposed', from perfective «возложить». Substantivized with the article-like neuter, it means 'that which is laid upon you' — the obedience itself.

Отец Паисий вышел.  
Father Paisy went out.
> Prefixed motion «вышел»: «вышел» is the perfective of «выходить» ('to go out'), a prefixed verb of motion: the prefix «вы-» ('out') both gives direction and makes the verb a clean perfective of a single completed exit.

Что старец отходил, в том не было сомнения для Алеши, хотя мог прожить еще и день и два.  
That the elder was passing away, of this Alyosha had no doubt, although he might yet live another day, even two.
> «отходить» as 'to die': Beyond its literal 'to move away', «отходить» is the gentle, almost liturgical euphemism for dying — 'to pass away, to depart (this life)'. The imperfective casts it as a process underway.
> Genitive of negation with «не было»: After the negated existential «не было» the subject «сомнения» ('doubt') stands obligatorily in the genitive — 'there was no doubt of it'. A textbook genitive of negation.
> Concessive «хотя»: «хотя» ('although') opens the concessive clause; the perfective «прожить» ('to live out [a span]') with «ещё… день и два» means 'might yet live another day or two'.

Алеша твердо и горячо решил, что, несмотря на обещание, данное им, видеться с отцом, Хохлаковыми, братом и Катериной Ивановной, — завтра он не выйдет из монастыря совсем и останется при старце своем до самой кончины его.  
Alyosha resolved firmly and fervently that, in spite of the promise he had given to see his father, the Khokhlakovs, his brother, and Katerina Ivanovna, he would not leave the monastery at all the next day, but would remain beside his elder until his very end.
> Past passive participle «данное им»: «данное» ('given') is a past passive participle of «дать», modifying «обещание»; the giver «им» ('by him') is in the instrumental — 'the promise given by him'. A compact alternative to a «который»-clause.
> Concessive «несмотря на»: «несмотря на» ('in spite of') governs the accusative and concedes the obstacle — the promises Alyosha had made — that his resolve overrides.

Сердце его загорелось любовью, и он горько упрекнул себя, что мог на мгновение там, в городе, даже забыть о том, кого оставил в монастыре на одре смерти и кого чтил выше всех на свете.  
His heart kindled with love, and he reproached himself bitterly that he could, even for a moment, there in the town, so much as forget the one he had left in the monastery upon his deathbed, the one he revered above all others in the world.
> Reflexive object «себя»: «себя» is the full reflexive pronoun, object of «упрекнул» — 'reproached himself'. Unlike the bound clitic «-ся», «себя» is a standalone object and has no nominative form.
> Perfective «забыть» under modal: «мог… забыть» ('could forget') — the modal «мог» governs the infinitive; the perfective «забыть» names the single completed lapse Alyosha reproaches himself for.
> Correlative «тот, кто» with animacy: «того, кого» — the demonstrative «тот» and relative «кто», both in the genitive-accusative because the elder is animate ('the one whom he had left'). Animate masculine accusative borrows the genitive ending.
> «одр» — deathbed: «одр» is an archaic, solemn word for a bed or couch, surviving almost only in the set phrase «на одре смерти» ('on one's deathbed'). Its bookishness suits the gravity of the elder's dying.

Он прошел в спаленку старца, стал на колени и поклонился спящему до земли.  
He went into the elder's little bedroom, knelt, and bowed to the ground before the sleeping man.
> Diminutive «спаленка»: «спаленка» is an affectionate diminutive of «спальня» ('bedroom') — 'little bedroom'. The suffix conveys the modest, intimate smallness of the elder's cell.
> «поклон до земли» — bowing to the ground: «поклониться до земли» is to make a full prostration, touching the forehead to the floor — the deep «земной поклон» of Orthodox veneration. «спящему» ('to the sleeping one') is a substantivized participle in the dative.

Тот тихо, недвижимо спал, чуть дыша ровно и почти неприметно.  
The elder slept quietly, motionless, breathing faintly, evenly, and almost imperceptibly.
> Present gerund «дыша»: «дыша» is the imperfective present gerund of «дышать», 'breathing' — an adverbial of attendant manner sharing the subject of «спал»: 'he slept… [while] breathing faintly'.
> «неприметно» — imperceptibly: «неприметно» ('unnoticeably, imperceptibly') is a refined adverb; chained with «ровно» ('evenly') it paints the elder's breathing as barely there, foreshadowing death.

Лицо его было спокойно.  
His face was at peace.
> Short adjective «спокойно»: «спокойно» here is the neuter short-form adjective ('was calm/at peace'), agreeing with neuter «лицо» — the predicative short form typical of describing a state in literary Russian.

Воротясь в другую комнату, в ту самую, в которой поутру старец принимал гостей, Алеша, почти не раздеваясь и сняв лишь сапоги, улегся на кожаном, жестком и узком диванчике, на котором он и всегда спал, давно уже, каждую ночь, принося лишь подушку.  
Returning to the other room — the very one in which the elder had received his visitors that morning — Alyosha, scarcely undressing and removing only his boots, lay down on the leather divan, hard and narrow, on which he had always slept, and had done now for a long time, every night, bringing with him nothing but a pillow.
> Gerund «воротясь»: «воротясь» is the perfective past gerund of the archaic-flavoured «воротиться» ('to return'), 'having returned' — opening the sentence with a completed prior action of the same subject.
> Relative «в которой»: «в которой» is the relative «который» in the prepositional after «в», agreeing in gender/number with «комнату» but taking its own case for 'the room in which…'. The correlative «ту самую» ('that very one') sets it up.
> Two gerunds, two aspects: «раздеваясь» (imperfective present gerund, 'while undressing') and «сняв» (perfective past gerund, 'having taken off') stand side by side — the imperfective for ongoing manner, the perfective for the completed sub-act of removing his boots.
> Diminutive «диванчик»: «диванчик» is the diminutive of «диван» ('divan, couch'); set against «жёстком и узком» ('hard and narrow'), the affectionate suffix underlines the meanness of Alyosha's bed rather than any comfort.

Тюфяк же, о котором кричал давеча отец его, он уже давно забыл постилать себе.  
As for the mattress about which his father had shouted earlier that day, he had long since forgotten to spread it out for himself.
> «тюфяк» — a straw mattress: A «тюфяк» is a plain stuffed pallet or straw mattress. The word also colloquially means a sluggish, spineless person — a faint comic echo given that it is Fyodor who 'shouted' about it.
> Folksy «давеча»: «давеча» is a colloquial, slightly archaic adverb for 'earlier today / a little while ago'. It recurs through this chapter, giving the narration a homely, oral texture.
> Topic-fronted «Тюфяк же, о котором…»: The sentence fronts «тюфяк» as topic, marks it with «же», then attaches a «который»-clause before reaching the main verb — a topic–comment ordering that reads 'As for the mattress that his father shouted about…'.

Он снимал лишь свой подрясник и им накрывался вместо одеяла.  
He would take off only his cassock and cover himself with it in place of a blanket.
> «подрясник» — the cassock: A «подрясник» is the long under-cassock worn by Orthodox monks and clergy beneath the outer «ряса». That Alyosha covers himself with it stresses how thoroughly he lives the monastic life.
> Imperfective of habit: Both imperfective past verbs describe Alyosha's nightly custom — 'he would take off… and cover himself'. Russian uses the imperfective for repeated, habitual action, where English reaches for 'would'.

Но перед сном он бросился на колени и долго молился.  
But before sleep he threw himself on his knees and prayed for a long while.
> Reflexive «броситься»: «бросился» (perfective, with «-ся») is the middle/reflexive 'threw himself' — the «-ся» turns transitive «бросить» ('to throw') inward onto the subject. «на колени» takes the accusative of motion, 'onto his knees'.

В горячей молитве своей он не просил бога разъяснить ему смущение его, а лишь жаждал радостного умиления, прежнего умиления, всегда посещавшего его душу после хвалы и славы богу, в которых и состояла обыкновенно вся на сон грядущий молитва его.  
In his fervent prayer he did not ask God to explain his confusion to him, but only thirsted for that joyful tenderness, the old tenderness, which had always come to his soul after the praise and glory of God, in which his whole bedtime prayer ordinarily consisted.
> Genitive/accusative «бога» under the verb: «просил бога» — animate «бог» takes the genitive-shaped accusative ('asked God'), followed by the infinitive «разъяснить» ('to explain'). Alyosha 'did not ask God to clarify' his confusion.
> «умиление» — tender rapture: «умиление» is a key Dostoevskian word: a melting, joyful tenderness of soul, the grace-touched emotion of devotion. There is no single English equivalent; 'tender emotion' or 'rapture' only approximate it.
> Past active participle «посещавшего»: «посещавшего» is an imperfective past active participle ('which used to visit'), agreeing with «умиления» in the genitive — a participial substitute for «которое… посещало». Such chains are the texture of literary Russian.
> «на сон грядущий» — bedtime prayer: A fixed Church-Slavonic phrase, literally 'for the coming sleep', i.e. the prayer said on going to bed. «грядущий» ('coming') is itself a Slavonic active participle of the archaic «грясти'».

Эта радость, посещавшая его, вела за собой легкий и спокойный сон.  
This joy, when it visited him, brought in its train a light and untroubled sleep.
> Participle as relative «посещавшая»: Again the past active participle «посещавшая» ('that visited him'), now agreeing with feminine «радость» — Dostoevsky reuses the verb «посещать» to bind joy and «умиление» together.
> Idiom «вести за собой»: «вести за собой» ('to lead behind itself / bring in its train') — the joy 'brought after it' a peaceful sleep. «за собой» uses the reflexive «себя» in the instrumental after «за».

Молясь и теперь, он вдруг случайно нащупал в кармане тот розовый маленький пакетик, который передала ему догнавшая его на дороге служанка Катерины Ивановны.  
While praying even now, he suddenly, by chance, felt in his pocket that small pink packet which Katerina Ivanovna's maidservant had handed him after catching up with him on the road.
> Gerund «молясь»: «молясь» is the present gerund of the «-ся» verb «молиться» ('to pray'), 'while praying' — setting the simultaneous backdrop to the sudden discovery. The clitic becomes «-сь» after the vowel.
> Diminutive «пакетик»: «пакетик» is the diminutive of «пакет» ('packet'); with «розовый маленький» ('pink little') it conveys the dainty, intimate quality of Lise's love-token.
> Past active participle «догнавшая»: «догнавшая» ('who had caught up with him') is a perfective past active participle modifying «служанка» — a one-word relative clause naming the maid's completed prior act of overtaking him.

Он смутился, но докончил молитву.  
He was troubled, but he finished his prayer.
> Reflexive «смутился» vs transitive «докончил»: «смутился» ('became troubled', «-ся» change of state) contrasts with the perfective transitive «докончил» ('finished off') — two completed perfectives capturing the inner stir and the act of finishing the prayer.

Затем после некоторого колебания вскрыл пакет.  
Then, after some hesitation, he opened the packet.
> «вскрыть» — to open/break the seal: «вскрыть» (perfective) means to open something sealed — a letter, an envelope — by breaking it open. It is more pointed than plain «открыть», fitting the breaking of the little packet.
> Genitive after «после»: «после» governs the genitive: «после… колебания» ('after some hesitation'), with the adjective «некоторого» agreeing in the genitive singular.

В нем было к нему письмецо, подписанное Lise, — тою самою молоденькою дочерью госпожи Хохлаковой, которая утром так смеялась над ним при старце.  
Inside there was a little letter for him, signed Lise — by that same young daughter of Madame Khokhlakova who had laughed at him so in the morning, in the elder's presence.
> Diminutive «письмецо»: «письмецо» is the affectionate diminutive of «письмо» ('letter') — 'a little note'. The tender suffix anticipates the intimacy of its contents.
> Archaic instrumental «-ою»: «тою самою… дочерью» is the instrumental (after passive «подписанное», 'signed by'), and the feminine endings «-ою/-ою» are the older bookish variants of modern «-ой». A Dostoevsky-era flavour.
> Diminutive adjective «молоденькая»: «молоденькая» is the endearing diminutive of «молодая» ('young'), via the «-еньк-» suffix — 'so young, sweetly young'. Such adjective diminutives soften and warm the description of Lise.

«Алексей Федорович, — писала она, — пишу вам от всех секретно, и от мамаши, и знаю, как это нехорошо.  
"Alexei Fyodorovich, — she wrote, — I am writing to you in secret from everyone, even from Mama, and I know how wrong this is.
> Affectionate «мамаша»: «мамаша» is a homely, affectionate (and period-coloured) word for 'mama/mother'. Lise uses it for Madame Khokhlakova; «и от мамаши» — 'even from Mama'.

Но я не могу больше жить, если не скажу вам того, что родилось в моем сердце, а этого никто, кроме нас двоих, не должен до времени знать.  
But I can no longer go on living unless I tell you what has been born in my heart, and this no one but the two of us must know, for the time being.
> Conditional with perfective future: «если не скажу» — a real condition with the perfective future «скажу» ('I will [not] tell'). 'I cannot go on living if I do not tell you' hinges on this single completed telling.
> Negative concord «никто… не»: «никто… не должен… знать» — 'no one must know' — shows Russian's obligatory double negation: the negative pronoun «никто» still requires «не» on the predicate.

Но как я вам скажу то, что я так хочу вам сказать?  
But how am I to tell you the very thing I so want to tell you?
> Deliberative future «как… скажу»: «как я… скажу» uses the perfective future in a deliberative, almost helpless question — 'how am I [ever] to tell you?'. The future-of-the-perfective often carries this 'how can I possibly' nuance.

Бумага, говорят, не краснеет, уверяю вас, что это неправда и что краснеет она так же точно, как и я теперь вся.  
Paper, they say, does not blush; I assure you that this is untrue, and that it blushes just as surely as I am blushing all over now.
> Proverb 'paper does not blush': «Бумага не краснеет» is a Russian proverb (after Cicero's 'epistola non erubescit') — 'paper does not blush', i.e. one can write what one would blush to say. Lise wittily denies it.
> Comparative correlative «так же… как»: «так же… как и» frames an equative comparison — 'just as… as'. Lise claims the paper blushes 'exactly as much as I do now', the «и» reinforcing the parallel.

Милый Алеша, я вас люблю, люблю еще с детства, с Москвы, когда вы были совсем не такой, как теперь, и люблю на всю жизнь.  
Dear Alyosha, I love you; I have loved you ever since childhood, since Moscow, when you were not at all as you are now, and I shall love you for my whole life.
> Imperfective present for lasting love: The present «люблю» with «ещё с детства» ('ever since childhood') is the imperfective expressing an action begun in the past and still going on — Russian uses the plain present where English needs 'I have loved'.
> From «Алексей Фёдорович» to «Алёша»: Lise now drops to the intimate diminutive «Алёша» with «милый» ('dear') — a sharp shift in register from her formal opening, signalling that her guard has fallen.

Я вас избрала сердцем моим, чтобы с вами соединиться, а в старости кончить вместе нашу жизнь.  
I have chosen you with my heart, to be united with you, and in old age to end our life together.
> Instrumental of means «сердцем»: «сердцем моим» is the instrumental of means — 'I chose you with my heart'. The lofty «избрать» ('to choose, elect') and the postposed «моим» lend the line a ceremonious ring.
> Purpose «чтобы» + reflexive infinitive: «чтобы… соединиться» ('in order to be united') — purpose «чтобы» with a reflexive infinitive; «-ся» here is reciprocal/middle, 'to join together with you'.

Конечно, с тем условием, что вы выйдете из монастыря.  
On the condition, of course, that you leave the monastery.
> Conditional clause «с тем условием, что»: «с тем условием, что…» ('on the condition that…') sets up a stipulation, completed by the perfective future «выйдете» ('you will leave'). «выйдете» is a prefixed motion verb, «вы-» giving 'out of'.

Насчет же лет наших мы подождем, сколько приказано законом.  
As for our ages, we shall wait as long as the law commands.
> Genitive after «насчёт» + topic «же»: «насчёт» ('as regards') governs the genitive — «лет наших» ('our years'). The particle «же» tags this as a new sub-topic, 'And as for our ages…', with the inverted possessive «наших» for weight.
> Short passive participle «приказано»: «приказано» is the neuter short passive participle, 'as is commanded', with the agent «законом» ('by the law') in the instrumental — an impersonal 'as the law commands'.

К тому времени я непременно выздоровлю, буду ходить и танцевать.  
By that time I shall certainly be well, and shall walk and dance.
> Compound future «буду + infinitive»: «буду ходить и танцевать» is the imperfective compound future: the future of «быть» plus imperfective infinitives, naming ongoing future activity — 'I shall [be able to] walk and dance'. Poignant from the bedridden Lise.
> Multidirectional «ходить»: «ходить» is the multidirectional motion verb — 'to walk (generally, about)' — not a single trajectory like «идти». Lise means walking as a restored ability, hence the habitual member.

Об этом не может быть слова.  
Of that there can be no question.
> Genitive of negation «слова»: In «не может быть слова» the negated existential pushes the subject «слова» ('a word, talk') into the genitive — 'of this there can be no question'. A classic genitive-of-negation idiom.

Видите, как я всё обдумала, одного только не могу придумать: что подумаете вы обо мне, когда прочтете?  
You see how I have thought it all out; there is only one thing I cannot work out: what you will think of me when you read this.
> Embedded question + «обо мне»: An indirect question 'what you will think of me', with perfective future «подумаете». «обо мне» shows the prepositional «о» taking the euphonic form «обо» before «мне», the first-person pronoun.
> Genitive of negation «одного»: «одного… не могу придумать» — under negation the object «одного» ('one thing') stands in the genitive: 'there is only one thing I cannot figure out'.

Я всё смеюсь и шалю, я давеча вас рассердила, но уверяю вас, что сейчас, перед тем как взяла перо, я помолилась на образ богородицы, да и теперь молюсь и чуть не плачу.  
I am forever laughing and playing the fool, and earlier today I made you angry; but I assure you that just now, before I took up the pen, I prayed before the icon of the Mother of God, and I am praying even now, and am almost in tears.
> Imperfective of habit «смеюсь и шалю»: Present imperfectives «смеюсь и шалю» ('I laugh and play the fool') describe Lise's habitual character — «-ся» on «смеюсь» marks it as a verb existing only in reflexive form.
> Temporal «перед тем как»: «перед тем как» ('just before') is a compound temporal conjunction; here with the perfective past «взяла» ('took'), 'before I took up the pen'.

Мой секрет у вас в руках; завтра, как придете, не знаю, как и взгляну на вас.  
My secret is in your hands; when you come tomorrow, I do not know how I shall so much as glance at you.
> «как» = 'when' + perfective future: Here «как» functions as a temporal 'when' with the perfective future «придёте» ('you will come') — 'when you come'. «придёте» is the prefixed motion verb «прийти», «при-» for arrival.
> Emphatic «как и взгляну»: «не знаю, как и взгляну» — the particle «и» intensifies, 'I don't know how I shall even glance at you'. The perfective future «взгляну» names the single feared glance.

Ах, Алексей Федорович, что, если я опять не удержусь, как дура, и засмеюсь, как давеча, на вас глядя?  
Ah, Alexei Fyodorovich, what if I again fail to restrain myself, like a fool, and burst out laughing, the way I did earlier, looking at you?
> «что, если» — what if: «что, если…» opens an anxious hypothetical, 'what if I…', completed by the perfective future «не удержусь» ('I fail to restrain myself'). «-сь» is the reflexive on «удержаться».
> «дура» — fool (f.): «дура» is the blunt feminine of «дурак» ('fool'). Lise's self-mocking «как дура» ('like a fool') is colloquial and self-deprecating, in keeping with her impulsive voice.
> Gerund «глядя»: «глядя» is the present gerund of «глядеть» ('to look'), 'looking at you' — an attendant-circumstance adverbial trailing the main verb, sharing Lise as subject.

Ведь вы меня примете за скверную насмешницу и письму моему не поверите.  
Then you will take me for a wicked mocker and will not believe my letter.
> Particle «ведь»: «ведь» appeals to shared understanding — 'after all / you see, you'll take me for…'. It colours the clause with Lise's anxious certainty about how Alyosha will read her.
> Dative object «письму»: «поверить» ('to believe, trust') governs the dative — «письму моему» ('my letter'), here negated: 'will not believe my letter'. The postposed «моему» adds plaintive emphasis.

А потому умоляю вас, милый, если у вас есть сострадание ко мне, когда вы войдете завтра, то не глядите мне слишком прямо в глаза, потому что я, встретясь с вашими, может быть, непременно вдруг рассмеюсь, а к тому же вы будете в этом длинном платье… Даже теперь я вся холодею, когда об этом подумаю, а потому, как войдете, не смотрите на меня некоторое время совсем, а смотрите на маменьку или на окошко…  
And so I implore you, dear one, if you have any compassion for me, when you come in tomorrow, do not look me too straight in the eyes, because, meeting yours, I may quite certainly burst out laughing all at once — and besides, you will be in that long gown… Even now I go all cold when I think of it; and so, when you come in, do not look at me at all for a little while, but look at Mama or at the window…
> Negated imperative «не глядите»: «не глядите» is the polite/plural imperative ('do not look') with «-те»; «мне… в глаза» — 'into my eyes', with the experiencer «мне» in the dative. Negated imperatives strongly favour the imperfective, as here.
> Gerund «встретясь»: «встретясь» is a perfective past gerund of reflexive «встретиться» ('to meet'), 'having met / on meeting' — 'meeting yours [your eyes]'. «с вашими» takes the instrumental after «с».
> Lise's diminutives: The 'long gown' is Alyosha's cassock, comic to Lise; «маменька» ('mama dear') and «окошко» ('little window', dim. of «окно») cluster the affectionate diminutives that mark her girlish, intimate voice.

Вот я написала вам любовное письмо, боже мой, что я сделала!  
There, I have written you a love letter — my God, what have I done!
> Vocative «боже»: «боже» is the surviving Church-Slavonic vocative of «бог» ('God'), preserved in the exclamation «боже мой!» ('my God!'). It is set off from the clause as direct address.
> Gendered past «сделала»: «сделала» carries the feminine «-ла» ending, agreeing with Lise — 'what have I done!'. The Russian past tense agrees in gender, here marking the writer as female.

Алеша, не презирайте меня, и если я что сделала очень дурное и вас огорчила, то извините меня.  
Alyosha, do not despise me, and if I have done something very wicked and have grieved you, then forgive me.
> Negated imperative «не презирайте»: «не презирайте» — imperfective imperative ('do not despise me'), the aspect Russian normally uses for prohibitions. The plural/polite «-те» keeps the formal-to-intimate tension of the letter.
> Conditional «если… то»: «если… то» is the explicit 'if… then' frame; «что сделала» here means 'if I did some-thing', «что» as indefinite 'anything'. The apodosis is the imperative «извините» ('forgive').

Теперь тайна моей, погибшей навеки может быть, репутации в ваших руках.  
Now the secret of my reputation — ruined forever, perhaps — is in your hands.
> Past active participle «погибшая»: «погибшей» is the past active participle of «погибнуть» ('to perish'), in the genitive agreeing with «репутации» — 'of my reputation, ruined forever'. It echoes the chapter's title «погибшая репутация».
> Prepositional «в руках»: «в ваших руках» ('in your hands') uses the prepositional of location after «в»; the idiom means 'within your power'. Lise repeats it, dramatizing her surrender.

Я сегодня непременно буду плакать.  
I shall certainly cry today.
> Compound future «буду плакать»: «буду плакать» is the imperfective compound future — «быть» plus the imperfective infinitive — naming an ongoing future state: 'I shall [be] crying'. «непременно» ('certainly') underscores her resolve.

До свиданья, до ''ужасного'' свиданья. Lise.  
Until we meet, until our ''dreadful'' meeting. Lise.
> «до свиданья» — until our meeting: «до свиданья» literally means 'until (the next) seeing', «свиданье» being a 'meeting/rendezvous'. Lise's ironic «до 'ужасного' свиданья» ('until our "dreadful" meeting') plays on the word's romantic overtone.

P.S. Алеша, только вы непременно, непременно, непременно придите! Lise».  
P.S. Alyosha, only be sure, be sure, be sure to come! Lise."
> Imperative «придите»: «придите» is the polite/plural imperative of «прийти» ('come!'), a prefixed motion verb. The threefold «непременно» ('be sure to') is intensifying repetition, pure Lise.

Алеша прочел с удивлением, прочел два раза, подумал и вдруг тихо, сладко засмеялся.  
Alyosha read it with astonishment, read it twice, thought a moment, and suddenly laughed quietly, sweetly.
> Chain of perfectives: «прочёл… подумал… засмеялся» — a string of perfective pasts moving the moment forward event by event. The prefix «за-» on «засмеялся» marks the onset, 'began to laugh / broke into a laugh'.

Он было вздрогнул, смех этот показался ему греховным.  
He gave a start, for this laughter seemed sinful to him.
> The particle «было»: The particle «было» after a perfective past marks an action just begun or about to happen but then checked or reversed — 'he gave a start [but…]'. A subtle aspectual nuance with no English equivalent.
> Instrumental predicate «греховным»: After «показался» ('seemed') the predicate adjective «греховным» ('sinful') stands in the instrumental, the case for predicate complements of such linking verbs — 'this laughter seemed sinful to him', with «ему» dative.

Но мгновение спустя он опять рассмеялся так же тихо и так же счастливо.  
But a moment later he laughed again, just as quietly and just as happily.
> Equative «так же… и так же»: The repeated «так же» ('just as') ties this laugh to the earlier one — 'just as quietly and just as happily'. The parallelism mirrors the recurrence of the laughter itself.

Медленно вложил он письмо в конвертик, перекрестился и лег.  
Slowly he slipped the letter back into its little envelope, crossed himself, and lay down.
> Diminutive «конвертик»: «конвертик» is the diminutive of «конверт» ('envelope') — 'little envelope', the affectionate touch matching the «письмецо» it holds.
> Topic-fronted «Медленно вложил он»: Fronting the adverb «медленно» ('slowly') and inverting subject and verb («вложил он») throws rhythmic weight onto the deliberate slowness of the gesture — typical Russian word-order play.

Смятение души его вдруг прошло.  
The turmoil of his soul had suddenly passed.
> «смятение» — turmoil: «смятение» is inner turmoil, agitation, a troubled confusion of soul — a heightened, literary word. «Смятение души его» ('the turmoil of his soul') postposes the possessive for solemn weight.
> Perfective «прошло» — passed away: The perfective past «прошло» ('passed, went away') marks the single completed disappearance of the turmoil; «вдруг» ('suddenly') points its abruptness.

«Господи, помилуй их всех, давешних, сохрани их, несчастных и бурных, и направь.  
"Lord, have mercy on them all, on the ones from today; keep them safe, the unhappy and the stormy, and guide them.
> «Господи, помилуй» — Lord, have mercy: «Господи» is the Church-Slavonic vocative of «Господь» ('Lord'), and «помилуй» the imperative of «помиловать» ('have mercy'). Together they are the most familiar Orthodox prayer-formula (the Kyrie eleison).
> Colloquial «давешних»: «давешний» ('of earlier today, the recent ones') is the adjective formed from folksy «давеча»; «давешних» here means 'the people from earlier today' — those Alyosha met on his outing.
> Imperatives of supplication: «помилуй… сохрани… направь» chain three perfective imperatives ('have mercy… keep safe… guide') — the perfective aspect, normal in prayer, asks for each act as a single accomplished grace.

У тебя пути: ими же веси путями спаси их.  
Yours are the ways: by such paths as Thou knowest, save them.
> «веси» — Thou knowest: «веси» is the archaic 2nd-person singular of the Church-Slavonic verb «ведать» (to know), i.e. modern «знаешь». It survives almost only in this liturgical formula, lending the line the cadence of a prayer.
> Instrumental of means + relative «иже»: «путями» stands in the instrumental — the case of the means by which something is done, here the paths by which God saves. «ими же» is the old Slavonic relative «иже» ('which, by which'), agreeing in the instrumental plural with «путями»: 'by those very paths.'
> Imperative «спаси» — save Thou: «спаси» is the perfective imperative of «спасти» (to save), formed with stressed -и on a consonant stem. As a perfective command it asks for the act to be carried through to its result — the single, decisive salvation prayed for.

Ты любовь, ты всем пошлешь и радость!» — бормотал, крестясь, засыпая безмятежным сном, Алеша.  
Thou art love; Thou wilt send joy to all!" — Alyosha murmured, crossing himself, falling into a serene sleep.
> Zero copula: «Ты любовь»: Russian uses no verb 'to be' in the present, so a subject and a predicate noun simply stand side by side in the nominative: «Ты любовь» = 'Thou art love.' The bare juxtaposition gives the confession its lapidary, creed-like weight.
> Dative «всем» + perfective future «пошлёшь»: «всем» is the dative plural of «все» ('to all') — the recipients of the sending. «пошлёшь» is the perfective verb «послать» conjugated with present-tense endings, which yields a simple future: 'Thou wilt send.' The perfective frames it as one sure, completed gift of joy.
> Two present gerunds frame the action: «крестясь» (from reflexive «креститься») and «засыпая» are imperfective present gerunds («деепричастия») in -я, naming actions simultaneous with the main verb «бормотал»: he murmured while crossing himself and while drifting off. Both must share the main subject, Alyosha.
> Delayed subject; imperfective «бормотал»: The subject «Алёша» is held to the very end, after the verb and its gerund cluster — Russian's free word order lets the new, naming information land last. «бормотал» is imperfective past, painting the murmuring as an ongoing process rather than a single utterance.
> Instrumental of manner: «безмятежным сном»: «засыпать сном» takes the instrumental «(каким) сном» to specify the kind of sleep — here «безмятежным», 'serene, untroubled.' This cognate-object instrumental ('sleeping a serene sleep') is a poetic, slightly archaic turn that closes the scene on a note of peace.
> «креститься» — to cross oneself: «креститься» means to make the sign of the cross (and, separately, to be baptised). Alyosha's reflex of crossing himself as he falls asleep is the quiet bodily punctuation of an Orthodox believer's prayer.
---

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.