# The Brothers Karamazov, The Confession of a Passionate Heart- "Heels Up"

Братья Карамазовы · Fyodor Dostoevsky · Book III — The Sensualists

Source: https://1732studios.com/books/karamazov/b3-c5. Data: https://1732studios.com/books/karamazov/b3-c5.json.


— Теперь, — сказал Алеша, — я первую половину этого дела знаю.  
"So now," said Alyosha, "I know the first half of this affair."
> Object fronted for emphasis: The accusative object «первую половину этого дела» is placed before the verb «знаю» rather than after it; Russian's free word order lets Alyosha lead with the topic — the half he now grasps — and keep the verb as the stressed comment at the end.
> «дело» — affair, matter, business: «дело» (here genitive «дела») ranges from 'deed' to 'matter, affair, case'. Our English 'this affair' catches the sense of an entangled personal episode rather than mere 'business'.

— Первую половину ты понимаешь: это драма, и произошла она там.  
"The first half you understand: it is a drama, and it played out over there."
> Zero copula: «это драма»: There is no verb for 'is' in the present tense; «это драма» simply juxtaposes pronoun and predicate noun, both nominative. Russian dispenses with a present-tense copula entirely.
> Perfective past «произошла»: «произошла» (perfective, feminine to agree with «драма») presents the drama's playing-out as one completed event, sealed in the past — against the imperfective «понимаешь» just before, which is an ongoing state of understanding.

Вторая же половина есть трагедия, и произойдет она здесь.  
"But the second half is a tragedy, and it will play out here."
> Contrastive particle «же»: «же» here is not the word 'same' but the modal particle that marks contrast with what came before: 'the second half, by contrast'. It leans on «вторая» and pivots the two clauses against each other.
> Perfective future «произойдёт»: A perfective verb conjugated with present-tense endings yields a simple future: «произойдёт» = 'it will play out', a single completed event still to come — mirroring the past «произошла» of the first half.

— Изо второй половины я до сих пор ничего не понимаю, — сказал Алеша.  
"Of the second half I have so far understood nothing," said Alyosha.
> Negative concord and genitive «ничего»: The ни-word «ничего» co-occurs obligatorily with the verbal negator «не» — two negatives, one meaning. «ничего» is also the genitive of «ничто», the genitive of negation that a negated object naturally takes.
> «изо» — euphonic variant of «из»: «изо» is the form «из» ('out of, of') takes before certain consonant clusters for ease of pronunciation, as before «второй». It governs the genitive «второй половины».

— А я-то? Я-то разве понимаю?  
"And what about me? Do I understand it, then?"
> Emphatic clitic «-то»: The hyphenated «-то» pins emphasis on a known topic — «я-то» = 'I, for one', 'me, of all people'. Dmitri turns Alyosha's bafflement back on himself: as if HE understands it any better. Distinct from indefinite «-то» in «кто-то».
> Rhetorical «разве»: «разве» frames an incredulous rhetorical question expecting the answer 'no' — 'do I really understand it?' (implying: of course not). It colours the whole utterance with self-mocking doubt.

— Постой, Дмитрий, тут есть одно главное слово.  
"Wait, Dmitri, there is one crucial word here."
> Perfective imperative «постой»: «постой» ('wait!', 'hold on') is the singular imperative of perfective «постоять», built on the future stem with stressed «-и». The perfective gives it the punctual sense of a single 'stop right there'.
> Direct address (vocative function): «Дмитрий» stands outside the clause's grammar as a name in direct address. Modern Russian uses the nominative for this, the old vocative case having faded except in church forms like «Боже», «отче».

Скажи мне: ведь ты жених, жених и теперь?  
"Tell me: you are her betrothed — her betrothed even now, are you not?"
> Appealing particle «ведь»: «ведь» appeals to shared, already-known knowledge — 'after all', 'you know', 'aren't you'. Our 'are you not?' captures how Alyosha presses Dmitri to confirm what both understand.
> «жених» — betrothed / suitor / bridegroom: «жених» means a man who is engaged or courting — 'fiancé, betrothed' — and at the wedding 'bridegroom'. Its pair is «невеста» (bride-to-be). The repeated «жених, жених» insists on the still-binding engagement.

— Женихом я стал не сейчас, а всего три месяца лишь спустя после тогдашнего-то.  
"I did not become her betrothed at once, but only some three months after what happened back then."
> Instrumental predicate after «стать»: After «стать» ('to become') the predicate noun goes in the instrumental: «женихом», not nominative «жених». The case frames the role as one assumed at a point in time — and it is fronted for emphasis.
> Adjectival noun «тогдашнее» + «-то»: «тогдашнего» is the genitive of «тогдашнее», an adjective ('of that time, then-current') used substantively for 'what happened back then'. The clitic «-то» marks it as the loaded, understood event both men have in mind.
> Layered limiting words «всего… лишь»: «всего» ('only, in all'), «лишь» ('only, merely'), and «спустя» ('after, later') pile up to stress how short the interval was. «спустя» follows its noun: «три месяца спустя» = 'three months later'.

На другой же день, как это тогда случилось, я сказал себе, что случай исчерпан и кончен, продолжения не будет.  
"The very next day, after it had happened then, I told myself that the matter was exhausted and finished, that there would be no sequel."
> Insistent «же» on a time phrase: «же» here intensifies the immediacy: «на другой же день» = 'the very next day'. Attached to a time expression, the particle sharpens 'next' into 'the very next', no delay at all.
> Reflexive pronoun «себе»: «себе» (dative of «себя») points back to the subject — 'I said to myself'. The full reflexive pronoun, distinct from the verbal clitic «-ся», has no nominative and serves for any person.
> Genitive of negation with «не будет»: The absent subject of a negated existential stands in the genitive: «продолжения не будет» = 'there will be no continuation'. With «нет / не было / не будет» the genitive is obligatory.

Прийти с предложением руки казалось мне низостью.  
"To go and offer her my hand seemed to me a baseness."
> Dative experiencer + instrumental predicate: Twin case-points: «мне» is the dative experiencer ('to me it seemed'), while «низостью» takes the instrumental as the predicate complement of «казаться» — to seem to be something is framed in the instrumental, like «быть» and «стать».
> «предложение руки» — offer of marriage: «предложить руку (и сердце)» — 'to offer one's hand (and heart)' — is the set idiom for a marriage proposal. «низость» ('baseness, a low act') marks Dmitri's sense that proposing then would have been mercenary.

С своей стороны и она все шесть недель потом как у нас в городе прожила — ни словечком о себе знать не дала.  
"And for her part, all those six weeks she went on living in our town afterward, she gave no sign of herself, not by a single little word."
> Negative concord with instrumental «ни словечком»: «ни… не» is double negation: 'not by even a single little word'. «словечком» is instrumental (means: gave no sign BY a word), and the whole frame «знать не дала» = 'gave no sign, let nothing be known'.
> Diminutive «словечко» — a little word: «словечко» is the affectionate-emphatic diminutive of «слово» ('word'). Here it sharpens the negation: not so much as one tiny word. The suffix carries feeling, not literal smallness.
> Reflexive possessive «свой»: «своей» refers back to the clause's own subject (she) — 'for her own part'. The set phrase «со своей стороны» means 'for one's part, on one's side'. Note the older «С своей» without the modern euphonic «Со».

Кроме одного, вправду, случая: на другой день после ее посещения прошмыгнула ко мне их горничная и, ни слова не говоря, пакет передала.  
"Except for one instance, truly: the day after her visit their maid slipped in to me and, without a word, handed over a packet."
> Gerund «говоря» with negation: «говоря» is the imperfective present gerund («деепричастие») of «говорить», naming the simultaneous manner of «прошмыгнула… передала» — 'saying not a word, she…'. It shares the maid's subject and condenses an adverbial clause.
> «прошмыгнуть» — to slip / dart in: An expressive, semi-colloquial verb for a quick, furtive movement — to slip, scurry, or dart through unnoticed. The «про-» prefix adds the sense of passing right in, and the «-ну-» a single swift action.

На пакете адрес: такому-то.  
"On the packet was the address: to so-and-so."
> Indefinite «такой-то» — so-and-so: «такому-то» (dative) is «такой» + indefinite «-то», meaning 'such-and-such, so-and-so' — a placeholder for a name Dmitri does not spell out. The dative marks the addressee on the packet ('to so-and-so').
> Zero copula, locative-first: A verbless existential: 'On the packet [there was] an address'. The prepositional phrase «на пакете» fronts the location, and «адрес» follows as the new information — no verb 'to be' needed in the present-narrated frame.

Вскрываю — сдача с билета в пять тысяч.  
"I tear it open — it was the change from the five-thousand note."
> Historical present «вскрываю»: The imperfective present «вскрываю» ('I tear open') is used for vivid narration of a past event — the 'historical present' that pulls the listener into the moment. Russian leans on it to dramatize storytelling.
> «сдача» — change; «билет» — banknote: «сдача» is the change returned from a payment; «билет» here is not a 'ticket' but a banknote / treasury note (cf. «кредитный билет»). So 'the change from the five-thousand note'.

Надо было всего четыре тысячи пятьсот, да на продаже пятитысячного билета потеря рублей в двести с лишком произошла.  
"Only four thousand five hundred had been needed, but in cashing the five-thousand note a loss of some two hundred-odd roubles had occurred."
> Impersonal «надо было»: «надо было» ('it was necessary, was needed') is an impersonal predicate with no nominative subject — the quintessential subjectless construction. Here it governs the sum that 'had to be' covered.
> Approximative inversion «рублей в двести»: Putting the noun before the numeral — «рублей в двести» instead of «в двести рублей» — signals an approximate amount: 'a loss of some two hundred-odd roubles'. «с лишком» ('and a bit over') reinforces the rounding.

Прислала мне всего двести шестьдесят, кажется, рубликов, не помню хорошенько, и только одни деньги — ни записки, ни словечка, ни объяснения.  
"She sent me, I think, only two hundred sixty roubles in all — I do not quite remember — and only the money: no note, not a little word, no explanation."
> Triple «ни… ни… ни» in the genitive: A rhetorical chain of «ни» negations, each noun in the genitive of negation ('not a note, not a little word, not an explanation'). The repeated «ни» heaps up the absence into an accusing silence.
> Diminutive «рублик» — a poor little rouble: «рублик» is the diminutive of «рубль». Coupled with «двести шестьдесят… кажется» the tender suffix gives a rueful, throwaway tone — the small, bare sum she sent, and nothing else.
> «хорошенько» — well, properly: An adverb from the diminutive of «хороший», «хорошенько» means 'thoroughly, properly, well' — here in «не помню хорошенько» = 'I don't quite/properly remember'. The diminutive softens it into casual speech.

Я в пакете искал знака какого-нибудь карандашом — н-ничего!  
"I searched the packet for some mark in pencil — n-nothing!"
> Indefinite «какой-нибудь» — any at all: «какой-нибудь» marks a non-specific 'some… or other, any at all': he searched for any mark whatever. Contrast «-то» (a specific but unknown one). The noun «знака» is genitive after the negated search and as a non-specific object.
> Stammered «н-ничего»: The repeated initial «н-» renders Dmitri's emotional stammer in print — 'n-nothing!' Dostoevsky often spells out the broken, agitated delivery of speech, a hallmark of his characters' inner turmoil.

Что ж, я закутил пока на мои остальные рубли, так что и новый майор мне выговор наконец принужден был сделать.  
"Well, I went on a spree for a while on my remaining roubles, so that even the new major was at last obliged to give me a reprimand."
> Short passive participle «принуждён»: «принуждён» is the short-form past passive participle of «принудить» ('to compel'), joined to «был» to form a passive predicate: 'was obliged/compelled to'. The short form agrees in gender and number and predicates a state.
> «закутить» — to go on a binge: «закутить» (perfective, «за-» inceptive: 'to fall to carousing') is to launch into a spree of drinking and dissipation — «кутить» being the verb of riotous revelry. It paints Dmitri's reckless, self-spiting reaction.

Ну, а подполковник казенную сумму сдал — благополучно и всем на удивленье, потому что никто уже у него денег в целости не предполагал.  
"Well, and the lieutenant-colonel handed over the government sum — safely and to everyone's amazement, for no one had supposed the money was still intact with him."
> Negative concord + genitive object «денег»: «никто… не предполагал» is the obligatory ни-word/«не» pairing ('no one supposed'), and the object «денег» stands in the genitive under negation. The whole reads: 'no one supposed the money to be still intact with him'.

Сдал, да и захворал, слег, лежал недели три, затем вдруг размягчение в мозгу произошло, и в пять дней скончался.  
"He handed it over and then fell ill, took to his bed, lay there some three weeks; then suddenly a softening of the brain set in, and within five days he was dead."
> Perfective chain with one imperfective: A rapid sequence of perfectives — «захворал, слёг, … скончался» — drives the narrative event by event toward death, while the lone imperfective «лежал недели три» pauses on the duration of his lying ill. Aspect choreographs the pacing.
> «скончаться» — to pass away: «скончаться» is the dignified, elevated verb for dying ('to pass away, decease'), set against blunter «умереть». Its solemn register fits the formal note of a soldier's death and burial that follows.

Похоронили с воинскими почестями, еще не успел отставку получить.  
"They buried him with military honors, for he had not yet managed to obtain his discharge."
> Subjectless «они»-plural «похоронили»: A bare 3rd-person plural perfective with no stated subject — 'they buried [him]' — is Russian's regular way of saying 'he was buried', leaving the agents indefinite. The result is an impersonal-passive feel.
> «успеть» + infinitive; «отставка» — discharge: «успеть» means 'to manage (to do something) in time'; «не успел получить отставку» = 'hadn't managed to get his discharge'. «отставка» is retirement/discharge from service — so he died still on the army's rolls, hence the military honors.

Катерина Ивановна, сестра и тетка, только что похоронив отца, дней через десять двинулись в Москву.  
"Katerina Ivanovna, her sister, and the aunt, having only just buried the father, set off for Moscow some ten days later."
> Perfective past gerund «похоронив»: «похоронив» is the perfective past gerund («деепричастие») of «похоронить» — 'having (just) buried' — naming a completed action prior to «двинулись». It shares the subject (Katerina, sister, aunt) of the main verb.
> Approximative «дней через десять»: Inverting noun and numeral — «дней через десять» rather than «через десять дней» — signals approximation: 'some ten days later'. The same trick that gives «рублей в двести» its 'about two hundred'.

И вот пред отъездом только, в самый тот день, когда уехали (я их не видал и не провожал), получаю крошечный пакетик, синенький, кружевная бумажка, а на ней одна только строчка карандашом: «Я вам напишу, ждите. К.»  
"And then, just before their departure, on the very day they left (I did not see them and did not see them off), I received a tiny little packet, a pale-blue one, of lace-edged paper, and on it a single line in pencil: 'I will write to you, wait. K.'"
> Emphatic «самый» + relative «когда»: «самый» intensifies the demonstrative — «в самый тот день» = 'on the very day' — and «когда уехали» is the relative clause pinning it down. «самый» also forms superlatives, but here it means 'the very, precise'.
> Diminutive cluster: «пакетик, синенький, бумажка, строчка»: A tender pile-up of diminutives — «пакетик» (little packet), «синенький» (pale-blue, dear-little-blue), «бумажка» (slip of paper), «строчка» (a little line) — wraps the note in fragile affection, contrasting its weight in Dmitri's life.
> Historical present amid past narration: Again the imperfective present «получаю» ('I receive') breaks into the past-tense story for immediacy — 'and then I receive…' — a vivid narrative device very characteristic of spoken Russian storytelling.

Вот и всё.  
"And that was all."
> Summative «вот и всё»: The deictic particle «вот» ('here, there') with «и всё» rounds off a narration: 'and that's all, that's the whole of it'. A compact, verbless closing formula common in speech.

Поясню тебе теперь в двух словах.  
"Let me explain the rest to you now in a couple of words."
> Perfective future «поясню» + dative «тебе»: «поясню» (perfective future, 'I'll explain') promises one complete act of explanation; «тебе» is the dative of the person addressed. The idiom «в двух словах» = 'in a couple of words, briefly'.

В Москве у них дела обернулись с быстротою молнии и с неожиданностью арабских сказок.  
"In Moscow their affairs took a turn with the speed of lightning and the unexpectedness of an Arabian tale."
> Instrumental of manner after «с»: Twin «с» + instrumental phrases describe the manner: «с быстротою молнии» (with the speed of lightning), «с неожиданностью…» (with the unexpectedness of…). The preposition «с» governs the instrumental for accompaniment and manner.

Эта генеральша, ее главная родственница, вдруг разом лишается своих двух ближайших наследниц, своих двух ближайших племянниц — обе на одной и той же неделе помирают от оспы.  
"This general's widow, her chief relation, suddenly and all at once lost her two nearest heiresses, her two nearest nieces — both died of smallpox in one and the same week."
> Reflexive «-ся» verb + genitive of loss: «лишаться» (with «-ся») governs the genitive of what is lost: «лишается… наследниц» = 'is deprived of / loses her heiresses'. The «-ся» here makes the verb a middle 'come to lose', and «лишиться» always takes the genitive.
> «один и тот же» — one and the same: The set correlative «один и тот же» ('one and the same') stresses identity; in the prepositional «на… неделе» it locates both deaths in a single week. The pairing «один… тот же» is fixed and inseparable.

Потрясенная старуха Кате обрадовалась, как родной дочери, как звезде спасения, накинулась на нее, переделала тотчас завещание в ее пользу, но это в будущем, а пока теперь, прямо в руки, — восемьдесят тысяч, вот тебе, мол, приданое, делай с ним что хочешь.  
"The shaken old woman took to Katya as to a daughter of her own, as to a star of salvation, threw herself upon her, at once rewrote her will in the girl's favor — but that was for the future, while for the present, here and now, straight into her hands, eighty thousand: here is your dowry, do with it what you like."
> Perfective string of sudden actions: A burst of perfectives — «обрадовалась» (took to / was overjoyed), «накинулась» (threw herself upon), «переделала» (rewrote at once) — renders the old woman's impulsive, headlong reaction as a chain of completed acts.
> Dative of comparison after «как»: «обрадоваться» takes a dative of the one rejoiced in, and the «как»-similes keep that case: «как родной дочери», «как звезде спасения» — 'as to a daughter of her own, as to a star of salvation'. Agreement in the dative ties the comparison to «Кате».
> Reportative particle «мол»: «мол» flags reported or imagined speech — 'as if to say, says she'. It lets Dmitri voice the old woman's words («вот тебе приданое») while marking them as quoted, not his own. A vivid colloquial device.

Истерическая женщина, я ее в Москве потом наблюдал.  
"A hysterical woman — I observed her later in Moscow."
> Verbless nominative characterization: A bare nominative noun phrase as a whole 'sentence' — 'A hysterical woman' — with no verb. Russian readily drops the copula to pin a sharp, summary label on someone before adding commentary.
> Imperfective «наблюдал» of repeated observation: «наблюдал» (imperfective past) reports ongoing, repeated observation — 'I kept observing / observed her [over time]' — not a single glance. The imperfective suits a habit of watching her in Moscow.

Ну вот вдруг я тогда и получаю по почте четыре тысячи пятьсот рублей; разумеется, недоумеваю и удивлен как бессловесный.  
"Well, and then suddenly I receive by post four thousand five hundred roubles; naturally I am bewildered and astonished, dumb as a post."
> Particle pile-up «ну вот… и»: Spoken Russian stacks discourse particles: «ну» (well), «вот» (so, here), «вдруг» (suddenly), and the connective «и» before the verb ('and so I receive'). Together they stage the surprise and resume the thread of the tale.
> Short adjective «удивлён»: «удивлён» is the short (predicative) form of «удивлённый» ('astonished'), used after the implied 'I am'. Short forms predicate a state and carry a bookish, momentary flavor — 'I am astonished'. «бессловесный» ('speechless, dumb') extends the simile.

Три дня спустя приходит и обещанное письмо.  
"Three days later the promised letter arrives as well."
> Historical present + short passive participle attribute: «приходит» is again the vivid historical present ('arrives'). «обещанное» is the past passive participle of «обещать» ('promised') used attributively — 'the promised letter' — agreeing with «письмо» like an adjective.

Оно и теперь у меня, оно всегда со мной, и умру я с ним — хочешь, покажу?  
"I have it even now, it is always with me, and I shall die with it — do you want me to show it to you?"
> Perfective future «умру»: «умру» is the simple (perfective) future of «умереть» — 'I shall die' — its present-form ending carrying future meaning. The vow 'I shall die with it' frames death as a single completed certainty.
> Asyndeton: «хочешь, покажу?»: Two clauses with no conjunction — 'want [me to], I'll show?' — a colloquial conditional where «хочешь» stands in for 'if you like'. «покажу» is the perfective future offering one act of showing.

Непременно прочти: предлагается в невесты, сама себя предлагает, «люблю, дескать, безумно, пусть вы меня не любите — всё равно, будьте только моим мужем. Не пугайтесь — ни в чем вас стеснять не буду, буду ваша мебель, буду тот ковер, по которому вы ходите… Хочу любить вас вечно, хочу спасти вас от самого себя…»  
"You must read it: she offers herself as my bride, offers her own self, 'I love you,' she says, 'madly; even if you do not love me — it makes no difference, only be my husband. Do not be afraid — I shall constrain you in nothing, I shall be your furniture, I shall be the carpet you walk upon… I want to love you forever, I want to save you from your own self…'"
> Perfective imperative «прочти»: «прочти» is the perfective imperative of «прочитать» ('read [it through]!'), urging one complete reading. «непременно» ('without fail, you absolutely must') heightens the command.
> Negative imperative + compound future: «Не пугайтесь» is a negated imperative (politely plural «-те», reflexive «-сь») — 'don't be afraid'. «стеснять не буду» is the imperfective compound future («буду» + infinitive): 'I shall not constrain'. The imperfective fits an ongoing promise of restraint.
> Reportative particle «дескать»: «дескать» (like «мол») marks the words as reported speech — 'she says, quoth she'. It lets Dmitri quote Katerina Ivanovna's letter while keeping a slight ironic distance, here woven into 'I love you, she says, madly'.
> Relative «который» governed by «по»: «который» agrees with «ковёр» in gender/number but takes the case its own clause demands — here dative after «по»: «по которому вы ходите» = 'which you walk upon'. A clear instance of the relative's case being set by its role.
> Reflexive «себя» in «от самого себя»: «от самого себя» = 'from your very own self'. «себя» refers back to the addressee (you), intensified by «самого». The phrase distills the novel's theme of being saved from one's own ruinous nature.

Алеша, я недостоин даже пересказывать эти строки моими подлыми словами и моим подлым тоном, всегдашним моим подлым тоном, от которого я никогда не мог исправиться!  
"Alyosha, I am not even worthy to repeat those lines in my vile words and in my vile tone — that perpetual vile tone of mine, which I have never been able to cure myself of!"
> Short adjective «недостоин» + infinitive: «недостоин» is the short predicative form of «недостойный» ('unworthy'), governing the infinitive «пересказывать»: 'I am not worthy to retell'. Short forms supply this bookish 'I am X to do Y' frame.
> Relative «который» after «от» + negation: «от которого» (genitive after «от») heads a relative clause whose verb carries «никогда… не» negative concord — 'from which I could never cure myself'. «исправиться» («-ся») is the reflexive 'to correct/cure oneself'.
> «подлый» — vile, base, abject: «подлый» means 'vile, base, mean-spirited'. Repeated three times («подлыми… подлым… подлым»), it hammers Dmitri's self-loathing — the 'vile tone' he cannot shed is central to his confession of a 'passionate heart'.

Пронзило это письмо меня до сегодня, и разве мне теперь легко, разве мне сегодня легко?  
"That letter has pierced me through to this very day — and is it easy for me now, is it easy for me even today?"
> Object-first inversion + perfective «пронзило»: The verb «пронзило» ('pierced', perfective, neuter to agree with «письмо») opens the sentence, with subject «письмо» and object «меня» following — a marked inversion that throws rhetorical weight onto the act of piercing.
> Rhetorical «разве» + dative experiencer: «разве… легко» is an incredulous rhetorical question, and «мне легко» is the dative-experiencer construction ('is it easy FOR me') with no nominative subject. Together: 'and is it really easy for me now?' — expecting 'no'.

Тогда я тотчас же написал ответ (я никак не мог сам приехать в Москву).  
"At the time I wrote back a reply at once (I could in no way come to Moscow myself)."
> Negative «никак не» + intensifier «сам»: «никак не мог» = 'in no way could', the «никак… не» concord intensifying the impossibility. «сам» ('myself, in person') stresses that he personally could not come to Moscow — by contrast he sends a letter, then Ivan.
> Perfective «написал» — a completed reply: «написал» (perfective of «писать») views the writing as one finished act with a result — the letter sent. «тотчас же» ('at once') underlines the single, decisive moment of doing it.

Слезами писал его; одного стыжусь вечно: упомянул, что она теперь богатая и с приданым, а я только нищий бурбон — про деньги упомянул!  
"I wrote it with tears; of one thing I am eternally ashamed: I mentioned that she was now rich and with a dowry, while I was only a beggarly clod — I mentioned money!"
> Instrumental of means «слезами»: «слезами» (instrumental plural of «слеза') is the instrument with which he wrote — 'I wrote it WITH tears'. Fronted for pathos, the bare instrumental needs no preposition to express the means.
> Reflexive «стыдиться» + genitive: «стыдиться» (reflexive «-ся», 'to be ashamed') governs the genitive of what shames one: «одного стыжусь» = 'of one thing I am ashamed'. The genitive object is built into the verb's government.
> «бурбон» — a coarse, ignorant officer: «бурбон» (from the Bourbon name) was 19th-century slang for a boorish, uneducated army officer risen from the ranks — a 'clod, lout in uniform'. Dmitri brands himself a «нищий бурбон», a beggarly boor beside the now-wealthy Katya.

Я бы должен был это перенести, да с пера сорвалось.  
"I ought to have borne that in silence, but it slipped from my pen."
> Conditional «бы» — 'I ought to have': The particle «бы» with past-form «должен был» makes an irrealis 'I ought to / should have borne this' — a wished-for, unrealized obligation. «бы» leans on «я», the first stressed word, as it often does.
> Idiom «с пера сорвалось»: Literally 'it tore loose from the pen' — an idiom for words that slip out involuntarily in writing, like English 'it slipped out'. «сорвалось» («-ся», perfective) captures the sudden, unwilled escape of the offending remark about money.

Тогда же, тотчас написал в Москву Ивану и всё ему объяснил в письме по возможности, в шесть листов письмо было, и послал Ивана к ней.  
"And then at once I wrote to Ivan in Moscow and explained the whole thing to him as best I could in a letter — it ran to six sheets — and sent Ivan to her."
> Perfective «объяснил» + dative «ему»: «объяснил» (perfective, 'explained [it all]') is a single completed act of explaining; «ему» is the dative recipient (to Ivan). «по возможности» = 'as far as possible, as best I could'.
> Accusative of measure + inversion: «в шесть листов» measures the letter's extent ('running to six sheets'), and the inverted order «в шесть листов письмо было» throws the striking length to the front. «послал Ивана» uses the genitive-like animate accusative «Ивана».

Что ты смотришь, что ты глядишь на меня?  
"Why are you looking at me like that, why do you stare so?"
> Imperfective present of ongoing gaze: Both «смотришь» and «глядишь» are imperfective presents naming Alyosha's continuing look — 'why are you looking… why do you stare'. The near-synonymous repetition, agitated, is pure Dostoevskian dialogue rhythm.

Ну да, Иван влюбился в нее, влюблен и теперь, я это знаю, я глупость сделал, по-вашему, по-светскому, но, может быть, вот эта-то глупость одна теперь и спасет нас всех!  
"Well, yes, Ivan fell in love with her, he is in love with her even now, I know it; I did a foolish thing, by your lights, by the lights of society — but perhaps this very folly alone may now save us all!"
> Perfective «влюбился» vs short form «влюблён»: «влюбился» (perfective, «-ся») is the completed event 'fell in love'; «влюблён» is the resulting short-form state 'is in love (now)'. Russian splits the inceptive act from the lingering condition — fell, and remains, in love.
> Demonstrative + emphatic «-то»: «вот эта-то глупость» piles the deictic «вот», demonstrative «эта», and emphatic clitic «-то» onto «глупость» — 'this very folly here'. The stacking spotlights the one foolish act Dmitri now half-hopes will redeem them all.
> Adverbs «по-вашему», «по-светскому»: The «по-…-ому» pattern forms manner adverbs: «по-вашему» ('in your view, by your lights'), «по-светскому' ('by society's standards, in worldly terms'). Dmitri concedes the verdict of conventional, fashionable opinion before defying it.

Ух!  
"Ugh!"
> Interjection «Ух!»: «Ух!» is an exclamation of strong feeling — exertion, exasperation, or a heaving release of emotion. Here it vents Dmitri's churning agitation, a wordless burst between his rushing confessions.

Разве ты не видишь, как она его почитает, как она его уважает?  
"Don't you see how she reveres him, how she esteems him?"
> Rhetorical «разве… не»: «разве… не видишь» is a rhetorical question pressing for agreement — 'don't you see?' — expecting 'of course I do'. The «разве» frames it as appeal rather than genuine inquiry.
> «почитать» vs «уважать» — to revere / esteem: «почитать» carries a tone of reverence, near-veneration (cf. «почтение», honor), stronger than «уважать» ('to respect, esteem'). Pairing them stresses how highly Katerina Ivanovna holds Ivan — esteem shading into worship.

Разве она может, сравнив нас обоих, любить такого, как я, да еще после всего того, что здесь произошло?  
"Can she possibly, having compared the two of us, love a man like me — and that after everything that has happened here?"
> Perfective past gerund «сравнив»: «сравнив» is the perfective past gerund («деепричастие») of «сравнить» — 'having compared' — a completed action prior to the main verb «может… любить», sharing her subject. It compresses 'after she has compared us both'.
> Rhetorical «разве» + «такой, как»: Another incredulous «разве» ('can she possibly…?'). «такого, как я» = 'a man like me', the correlative «такой… как» framing the type. The case «такого» is the animate accusative object of «любить».

— А я уверен, что она любит такого, как ты, а не такого, как он.  
"But I am certain that she loves a man like you, and not a man like him."
> Contrastive «а не» with «такой… как»: Alyosha answers Dmitri's «такой, как я» by setting two types against each other with «а не» ('and not'): «такого, как ты» versus «такого, как он». The mild contrastive «а» pivots the comparison, insisting on the opposite of what Dmitri fears.

— Она свою добродетель любит, а не меня, — невольно, но почти злобно вырвалось вдруг у Дмитрия Федоровича.  
"It is her own virtue she loves, not me," burst suddenly and almost spitefully, though involuntarily, from Dmitri Fyodorovich.
> Reflexive «свою» + contrastive «а не»: «свою добродетель» = 'her own virtue', the reflexive possessive pointing back to the subject (she). The object «добродетель» is fronted before «любит» for focus, and «а не меня» ('and not me') sets up the bitter contrast.
> Reflexive «вырваться» — burst out involuntarily: «вырвалось» («-ся», perfective, neuter) means the words 'tore out, burst out' of their own accord — an impersonal, unwilled escape. «у Дмитрия Фёдоровича» ('from Dmitri F.') uses «у» + genitive for the source.
> «добродетель» — virtue: «добродетель» ('virtue, moral goodness') is an abstract, slightly elevated noun. Dmitri's charge — that Katerina Ivanovna loves her own virtue rather than him — strikes at the novel's distinction between self-regarding and self-giving love.

Он засмеялся, но через секунду глаза его сверкнули, он весь покраснел и с силой ударил кулаком по столу.  
He laughed, but a second later his eyes flashed, he flushed crimson all over and struck the table hard with his fist.
> Perfective chain of sudden actions: A volley of perfectives — «засмеялся, сверкнули, покраснел, ударил» — moves the moment forward in sharp, completed strokes. The inceptive «за-» in «засмеялся» ('burst out laughing') and «сверкнули» ('flashed') catch the abruptness.
> Instrumental of means «кулаком»: «кулаком» (instrumental) is the instrument of the blow — 'struck WITH his fist'; «с силой» ('with force') is a manner phrase, and «по столу» (dative after «по») the surface struck. Three nuances of how he hit the table.

— Клянусь, Алеша, — воскликнул он со страшным и искренним гневом на себя, — верь не верь, но вот как бог свят, и что Христос есть господь, клянусь, что я хоть и усмехнулся сейчас ее высшим чувствам, но знаю, что я в миллион раз ничтожнее душой, чем она, и что эти лучшие чувства ее — искренни, как у небесного ангела!  
"I swear, Alyosha," he cried with a terrible and genuine wrath at himself, "believe me or not, but as God is holy and as Christ is the Lord, I swear that, though I just now sneered at her loftiest feelings, I know that I am a million times more contemptible in soul than she is, and that these finest feelings of hers are sincere, as in an angel of heaven!"
> Concessive imperative «верь не верь»: Two imperatives juxtaposed without conjunction — «верь не верь» = 'believe [me] or not' — form a concessive idiom 'whether you believe it or not'. The bare imperative pair is a vivid colloquial concession.
> Comparative «ничтожнее» + instrumental «душой»: «ничтожнее» is the predicative comparative ('more contemptible/worthless'), with «в миллион раз» ('a million times') measuring the degree and «чем она» the standard. «душой» (instrumental) specifies the respect — 'in soul'.

В том и трагедия, что я знаю это наверно.  
"Therein lies the tragedy, that I know this for certain."
> Correlative «в том… что»: «в том… что» is the correlative frame 'the [thing] lies in this: that…'. «в том» (prepositional of «то») points forward to the «что»-clause naming the content — a bookish 'therein lies the tragedy, that I know it'.

Что в том, что человек капельку декламирует?  
"What of it if a person declaims a touch?"
> Idiom «что в том, что…»: «что в том, что…» = 'what of it that…, what does it matter if…' — a dismissive rhetorical frame using «в том» (prepositional) pointing to the «что»-clause. Dmitri shrugs off a little theatrical posturing.
> «капельку» and «декламировать»: «капельку» (diminutive accusative of «капля», 'a wee drop') is an adverb 'a tiny bit'. «декламировать» ('to declaim, recite theatrically') here means to strike high-flown, performative poses — Dmitri's word for emotional grandstanding, his own included.

Разве я не декламирую?  
"Do I not declaim too?"
> Self-implicating rhetorical «разве… не»: «разве я не декламирую?» turns the rhetorical question on himself — 'do I not declaim too?' — expecting the admission 'I do'. The «разве… не» pattern presses for a confessional 'yes'.

А ведь искренен же я, искренен.  
"And yet I am sincere, I am sincere."
> Particle cluster «а ведь… же»: «а» (mild contrastive), «ведь» (appeal to shared truth), and «же» (insistence) crowd together — 'and yet I AM sincere, you know'. «искренен» is the short predicative form of «искренний», repeated for emphasis.

Что же касается Ивана, то ведь я же понимаю, с каким проклятием должен он смотреть теперь на природу, да еще при его-то уме!  
"As for Ivan, I do understand with what a curse he must now be looking upon nature — and that with a mind like his!"
> Idiom «что касается… то» + insistent «же»: «что (же) касается… то» ('as for…, then…') is a fixed topic-shifting frame; «касаться» («-ся») governs the genitive «Ивана». The «то» resumes the main clause, and «я же понимаю» uses «же» to insist 'I do understand'.
> «при» + prepositional, with emphatic «-то»: «при его… уме» (prepositional after «при') means 'given / with his mind, possessing such a mind'. The emphatic clitic «-то» on «его-то» spotlights the irony — 'and with a mind like HIS, of all people'.

Кому, чему отдано предпочтение?  
"To whom, to what, has the preference been given?"
> Interrogatives «кому, чему» + short passive «отдано»: «кому» and «чему» are the datives of «кто/что» ('to whom, to what'), required by «отдать предпочтение кому-чему» ('give preference to'). «отдано» is the short past passive participle ('has been given') predicating the result.

Отдано извергу, который и здесь, уже женихом будучи и когда на него все глядели, удержать свои дебоширства не мог, — и это при невесте-то, при невесте-то!  
"It has been given to a monster who, even here, already being her betrothed and with all eyes upon him, could not rein in his debaucheries — and this in front of his bride, in front of his bride!"
> Gerund «будучи» + instrumental predicate: «будучи» is the (suppletive) present gerund of «быть» — 'being' — naming an attendant circumstance, with its predicate noun «женихом» in the instrumental, as «быть» requires. Together: 'already being her betrothed'.
> Emphatic repetition with «-то»: «при невесте» (prepositional after «при') = 'in the presence of his bride'; the clitic «-то» and the doubled phrase pound home the outrage — 'and this in front of his bride, his BRIDE!' Repetition plus «-то» is Dmitri's indignant emphasis.
> «изверг» — a monster; «дебоширство» — debauchery: «изверг» is a strong word for a monstrous, depraved person ('fiend, monster'); «дебоширство» (from «дебоширить', to make a drunken scene) is rowdy debauchery. Dmitri brands himself with both, the «изверг» who could not «удержать» (rein in) his excesses.

И вот такой, как я, предпочтен, а он отвергается.  
"And so a man like me is preferred, while he is cast aside."
> Short passive «предпочтён» vs reflexive passive «отвергается»: Two passives in contrast: «предпочтён» is the short past passive participle ('is preferred', a settled result), while «отвергается» is the imperfective «-ся» passive ('is being cast aside', ongoing). The «а» pivots the preferred against the rejected.

Но для чего же?  
"But what for?"
> «для чего» + insistent «же»: «для чего» (для + genitive «чего») = 'for what, what for, to what end'. The particle «же» sharpens the demand into 'but what on earth for?' — the insistent «же» of an exasperated question.

А для того, что девица из благодарности жизнь и судьбу свою изнасиловать хочет!  
"For this: that the girl, out of gratitude, wants to do violence to her own life and fate!"
> Correlative answer «для того, что»: «для того, что…» answers the preceding «для чего же?» — 'for this, namely that…'. «для того» (genitive «того») points forward to the «что»-clause that supplies the reason. The «а» opens it as a retort.
> Reflexive «свою» + verb-final order: «свою» ('her own') refers back to the girl as subject. The two objects «жизнь и судьбу» are fronted before the infinitive «изнасиловать», with «хочет» last — heavy end-weight building to the violent verb 'wants to do violence to her own life and fate'.

Нелепость!  
"An absurdity!"
> «нелепость» — an absurdity: «нелепость» means 'absurdity, nonsense, a preposterous thing'. As a one-word exclamation it slams the door on the idea Dmitri has just described — her self-sacrifice as sheer folly.

Я Ивану в этом смысле ничего и никогда не говорил, Иван, разумеется, мне тоже об этом никогда ни полслова, ни малейшего намека; но судьба свершится, и достойный станет на место, а недостойный скроется в переулок навеки — в грязный свой переулок, в возлюбленный и свойственный ему переулок, и там, в грязи и вони, погибнет добровольно и с наслаждением.  
"I have never said a word to Ivan in this sense, and Ivan, of course, has never said half a word about it to me, not the slightest hint; but fate will be accomplished, and the worthy man will take his place, while the unworthy one will vanish into his back-alley forever — into his filthy back-alley, his beloved and fitting back-alley, and there, in the filth and the stench, he will perish of his own free will and with delight."
> Stacked negative concord: A dense web of negation: «ничего… никогда не говорил» and «ни полслова, ни малейшего намёка» — all the ни-words bound to a single «не», the objects in the genitive of negation ('not half a word, not the slightest hint'). The piling-up is rhetorical insistence.
> Perfective futures «свершится», «станет», «скроется»: A run of perfective futures — «свершится» («-ся», 'will be accomplished'), «станет» ('will take'), «скроется» ('will vanish'), «погибнет» ('will perish') — projects an inevitable sequence of completed events. «свершится» is the elevated, almost liturgical 'shall be fulfilled'.
> Substantivized adjectives «достойный / недостойный»: «достойный» ('the worthy [man]') and «недостойный» ('the unworthy [one]') are adjectives used as nouns, the «а» setting them in moral opposition. Dmitri casts himself as the «недостойный» who will vanish — the self-condemnation at his confession's heart.
> «переулок» as moral symbol: «переулок» ('back-alley, side-lane'), repeated and modified — «грязный, возлюбленный, свойственный» — becomes the symbol of Dmitri's chosen degradation. «погибнуть добровольно и с наслаждением» ('perish willingly and with delight') captures the Karamazov relish for self-ruin.

Заврался я что-то, слова у меня все износились, точно наобум ставлю, но так, как я определил, так тому и быть.  
"I've run on into nonsense, my words are all worn out, I set them down as if at random — but as I have decreed it, so let it be."
> «завраться» — to talk oneself into nonsense: From «врать» (to lie, to talk rot) with the prefix «за-» and reflexive «-ся», «завраться» means to get carried away in one's own babble, to lose the thread by over-talking. Mitya is confessing that his torrent of speech has run away with him.
> «наобум» — at random: An adverb meaning 'haphazardly, on the off chance, without aim.' «Точно наобум ставлю» — 'as if I'm setting the words down at random.' It belongs to colloquial, slightly self-deprecating speech, exactly Mitya's register here.
> «так тому и быть» — so be it: A fixed formula: 'let it be so.' «Тому» is a dative («то» → «тому»), the dative-subject construction in which the predicate is the bare infinitive «быть» — literally 'to that, be it.' The dative names what the decree falls upon.

Потону в переулке, а она выйдет за Ивана.  
"I shall drown in my back-alley, and she will marry Ivan."
> «потонуть» — to drown / sink away: Perfective «потонуть» (to drown, to sink) used figuratively: Mitya will 'go under' in the «переулок» — the squalid back-alley of his ruin. «Переулок» recurs as his private shorthand for self-destruction and the Grushenka affair.
> «выйти за» — to marry (of a woman): «Выйти замуж за кого» (literally 'to go out behind someone') is the idiom for a woman marrying. «За Ивана» is accusative after «за», marking the man married into. «Выйдет» is a perfective present-form verb with future meaning — 'she will marry.'

— Брат, постой, — с чрезвычайным беспокойством опять прервал Алеша, — ведь тут все-таки одно дело ты мне до сих пор не разъяснил: ведь ты жених, ведь ты все-таки жених?  
"Brother, wait," Alyosha interrupted again, in extreme distress, "there is still one thing you have not yet made clear to me: you are her betrothed — you are still her betrothed, after all?"
> «ведь» — appealing to shared knowledge: The modal particle «ведь» means roughly 'after all, you know, surely' — it appeals to something both speakers already grasp. Repeated three times in this anxious question, it presses Mitya to confirm a fact Alyosha thinks is obvious.
> Perfective past «прервал»: «Прервать» (to interrupt) is perfective: it presents the interruption as a single completed act that cuts into Mitya's speech. Paired with «опять» ('again'), it marks one more discrete break in the long monologue.
> «с чрезвычайным беспокойством» — in extreme distress: «Беспокойство» is anxiety, agitation; «чрезвычайный» means extraordinary, extreme. The instrumental «с… беспокойством» is the standard 'with [such emotion]' adverbial of manner that colours how Alyosha breaks in.

Как же ты хочешь порвать, если она, невеста, не хочет?  
"How can you mean to break it off, if she, your bride, does not wish it?"
> Conditional «если» clause: «Если» ('if') opens a real (not hypothetical) conditional subordinate clause, set off by a comma: 'how can you mean to break it off, if she does not wish it.' No «бы» here, so the condition is presented as actual fact, not contrary-to-fact.
> «порвать» — to break off: Literally 'to tear,' «порвать» is the idiom for severing a relationship or engagement — to break it off. Its violence ('tear apart') suits the rupture Mitya is contemplating with his betrothed.

— Я жених, формальный и благословленный, произошло всё в Москве, по моем приезде, с парадом, с образами, и в лучшем виде.  
"I am her betrothed, formally and with a blessing; it all took place in Moscow, on my arrival, with ceremony, with the holy icons, in the finest style."
> «благословлённый» — blessed, with a blessing: Past passive participle of «благословить» (to bless). A betrothal «благословлённый» is one solemnised by a parental or guardian's blessing — a real religious-social act, not a metaphor. Mitya stresses that his engagement was fully sanctioned.
> Archaic «по» + prepositional = 'after': «По моём приезде» means 'upon / after my arrival.' This «по» + prepositional case to mean 'after' is a bookish, somewhat archaic construction (modern speech prefers «после моего приезда»), lending Mitya's account a formal, ceremonial ring.
> «в лучшем виде» — in the finest style: An idiom meaning 'in the best possible way, properly, all done right.' Here Mitya means the betrothal came off with full ceremony and polish — a touch of swagger in his self-narration.

Генеральша благословила и — веришь ли, поздравила даже Катю: ты выбрала, говорит, хорошо, я вижу его насквозь.  
"The general's widow gave her blessing and — would you believe it — even congratulated Katya: 'You have chosen well,' she says, 'I see right through him.'"
> Interrogative particle «ли»: «Веришь ли» ('would you believe it?') uses the enclitic «ли» to form a yes/no question, fronting the verb «веришь» with «ли» right after it. It is more literary and emphatic than question intonation alone, and recurs as Mitya's astonished refrain.
> «насквозь» — right through: «Видеть кого насквозь» ('to see right through someone') uses the adverb «насквозь» (through and through). «Его» is the animate accusative direct object. The general's widow boasts she reads Mitya completely — an irony, given how he is about to behave.

И веришь ли, Ивана она невзлюбила и не поздравила.  
"And would you believe it, Ivan she took a dislike to and did not congratulate."
> Fronting the object: «Ивана» first: Object «Ивана» (animate accusative) is moved to the front for emphasis — 'Ivan she took a dislike to.' Russian's case endings keep the meaning clear no matter the order, so this fronting marks Ivan as the contrastive topic, set against Mitya whom she approved.
> «невзлюбить» — to take a dislike to: A perfective verb meaning to conceive a dislike for someone (from «не» + «взлюбить»). It names the onset of aversion as a single completed event — she came to dislike Ivan, once and for good.

В Москве же я много и с Катей переговорил, я ей всего себя расписал, благородно, в точности, в искренности.  
"In Moscow I also talked a great deal with Katya; I laid my whole self out before her, nobly, exactly, in all sincerity."
> «расписать себя» — to lay oneself out: «Расписать» literally means to paint out in detail, to depict fully. «Я ей всего себя расписал» — 'I painted my whole self out before her,' i.e. confessed himself in every particular. «Всего себя» (all of myself, accusative) intensifies the total self-exposure.
> Stacked adverbial phrases: Mitya piles up manner adverbials — «благородно» (nobly) plus «в точности» (with exactness) and «в искренности» (in sincerity), prepositional phrases used adverbially. The asyndetic list mimics his rushing, self-justifying confession.

Всё выслушала:  
"She heard it all out:"
> Perfective «выслушать» + dropped subject: «Выслушать» (to hear out fully) is perfective — the prefix «вы-» marks the listening as carried through to the end. The subject 'she' is dropped, recoverable from the feminine «-ла» ending and context; «всё» ('all of it') is the neuter accusative object.

Было милое смущенье, Были нежные слова...  
"There was sweet confusion, / There were tender words…"
> «смущенье» — confusion, abashment: «Смущение» (here in the poetic short spelling «смущенье») is the flutter of embarrassed, bashful confusion. «Милое смущенье» — 'sweet abashment' — names the tender awkwardness of a romantic scene. The «-нье» for «-ние» is a poetic, metrically lighter variant.

Ну, слова-то были и гордые.  
"Well, and there were proud words too."
> Emphatic clitic «-то»: The hyphenated «-то» on «слова-то» highlights an already-known topic — 'the words, mind you, were proud ones.' This is the topic-emphasising «-то» (distinct from indefinite «кто-то»), pointing back to the 'tender words' just quoted and now qualifying them.

Она вынудила у меня тогда великое обещание исправиться.  
"She wrung from me then a solemn promise to reform."
> «вынудить» — to wring / extort: «Вынудить у кого что» means to force, wrest, or extort something from someone. «Она вынудила у меня… обещание» — 'she wrung a promise out of me.' The «у меня» (genitive after «у») marks the source from whom it was drawn.
> «исправиться» — to reform oneself: «Исправиться» (reflexive «-ся») means to mend one's ways, to reform. The «-ся» here is the change-of-state reflexive — to make oneself right. «Великое обещание исправиться»: a 'great/solemn promise to reform,' the vow that now haunts Mitya.

Я дал обещание.  
"I gave the promise."
> Perfective «дать» — a single act: «Дал» (perfective «дать», to give) frames the giving of the promise as one completed, irrevocable act, set off as a stark three-word sentence. The terseness underscores the finality: the vow was given, full stop.

И вот…  
"And now…"
> «и вот» — and so / and now: «И вот» is a narrative hinge meaning 'and so it is that…, and now here we are.' Trailing off into an ellipsis, it pivots dramatically from the past vow to the present catastrophe Mitya is about to disclose.

— Что же?  
"And now what?"
> Insistent particle «же»: «Что же?» — 'Well, what then?' The particle «же» adds urgency and insistence, pressing Mitya to finish the thought he just broke off. It is one of Russian's tiny modal particles that English can only render through stress or 'then / well.'

— И вот я тебя кликнул и перетащил сюда сегодня, сегодняшнего числа, — запомни! — с тем чтобы послать тебя, и опять-таки сегодня же, к Катерине Ивановне, и…  
"And now I have called you out and dragged you here today, on this present day — mark it! — in order to send you, and again this very day, to Katerina Ivanovna, and…"
> «кликнуть», «перетащить» — called and dragged: «Кликнуть» is a folksy, vigorous 'to call out, summon' (compare neutral «позвать»); «перетащить» means to drag/haul across. The pair is physical and rough — Mitya didn't politely invite Alyosha, he 'called him out and hauled him over.'
> «сего числа» — on this date: «Числа» here means 'date / day of the month'; «сегодняшнего числа» — 'on today's date.' The phrasing is faintly officialese ('on this present day'), which Mitya uses theatrically, then breaks off to command «запомни!» ('mark it, remember it!').
> Purpose clause «с тем чтобы»: «С тем, чтобы» + infinitive means 'with the aim of / in order to.' «Чтобы» is the purpose conjunction; here, taking an infinitive («послать»), it names Mitya's intent in summoning Alyosha — to dispatch him to Katerina Ivanovna.
> Stacked particles «-таки» and «же»: «Опять-таки» ('again, what's more') and emphatic «же» on «сегодня же» ('this very day') layer insistence on the urgency. These small particles, untranslatable one-for-one, are the texture of Mitya's pressured, headlong speech.

— Что?  
"And what?"

— Сказать ей, что я больше к ней не приду никогда, приказал, дескать, кланяться.  
"To tell her that I shall never come to her again — to give her, as it were, my respects."
> «приказал кланяться» — sends his respects: A polite formula of farewell by proxy: «приказал кланяться» literally 'ordered [me] to bow [to her],' i.e. 'he sends his compliments / respects.' Said of a man breaking off forever, the courteous formula turns coldly ironic.
> «дескать» — reportative particle: «Дескать» (and «мол», «де») flags reported, second-hand speech — 'as it were, so he says, supposedly.' It lets Mitya hand Alyosha the very words to relay while distancing himself from them, a hallmark of Russian's reportative shading.
> Negative concord: «не… никогда»: 'I shall never come again' stacks «не» on the verb with «никогда» ('never') and «больше» ('any more') — Russian requires the verb to keep «не» even when a «ни»-word is present. The piled negators reinforce one meaning, not cancel it.

— Да разве это возможно?  
"But is that even possible?"
> «разве» — incredulous question: «Разве» introduces an astonished, almost rhetorical question — 'is it really possible? surely not?' Combined with opening «да» (here an emphatic 'but'), it conveys Alyosha's disbelief that such a message could even be delivered.

— Да я потому-то тебя и посылаю вместо себя, что это невозможно, а то как же я сам-то ей это скажу?  
"It is precisely because it is impossible that I am sending you in my place, for how else could I tell her this myself?"
> Correlative «потому-то… что» — 'precisely because': «Потому-то… и…» pairs an emphatic «потому-то» ('for that very reason') with «и» before the verb and a «что»-clause giving the cause: 'it is precisely because it is impossible that I am sending you.' The «-то» sharpens the causal focus.
> «сам-то» — intensifier plus clitic: «Сам» ('myself, in person') intensified by «-то» and «же»: 'how on earth could I tell her this myself?' The cluster of particles dramatises Mitya's recoil from doing the deed in person — hence he sends Alyosha in his place.

— Да куда же ты пойдешь?  
"But where will you go, then?"
> «куда» — 'where to' (motion): «Куда» asks direction of motion ('where to'), as against «где» ('where, at rest'). «Пойдёшь» is the perfective future of the motion verb «пойти'. Russian carefully splits 'where' by whether motion is involved — here, Alyosha asks where Mitya is heading.

— В переулок.  
"Into the back-alley."
> «в» + accusative for motion-toward: «В переулок» (accusative) answers «куда?» — motion into the back-alley. The same «в» with the prepositional («в переулке») would mean location at rest. The accusative here makes the alley a destination: Mitya's headlong plunge toward ruin.

— Так это к Грушеньке! — горестно воскликнул Алеша, всплеснув руками. — Да неужто же Ракитин в самом деле правду сказал?  
"So it's to Grushenka!" Alyosha cried out mournfully, throwing up his hands. "Then can Rakitin really have spoken the truth?"
> Gerund «всплеснув руками»: «Всплеснув» is a perfective past gerund («деепричастие») from «всплеснуть»: 'having thrown up [his hands].' Sharing Alyosha's subject, it names the gesture accompanying his cry — 'throwing up his hands.' «Руками» is instrumental, the means of the gesture.
> «неужто» — can it really be?: «Неужто» (a folk variant of «неужели») marks an incredulous question — 'can it really be that…?' Reinforced by «да» and «же», it voices Alyosha's dismayed hope that Rakitin's gossip about Grushenka was false.

А я думал, что ты только так к ней походил и кончил.  
"And I had thought you only went to her like that, in passing, and had done with it."
> «так» — 'just like that, idly': «Только так» means 'just casually, for no serious reason, idly.' «Походил» (perfective «походить», to go about for a while) plus «кончил» ('and was done with it') frames Alyosha's mistaken assumption that Mitya's visits were a passing whim.

— Это жениху-то ходить?  
"For a betrothed man to go visiting like that?"
> Dative + «-то» in an indignant question: «Жениху» is dative ('for a betrothed man'), the logical subject of the infinitive «ходить» — 'for a betrothed man to go visiting like that?' The «-то» adds incredulous emphasis. This dative-plus-infinitive frames an indignant rhetorical question.

Да разве это возможно, да еще при такой невесте и на глазах у людей?  
"Is such a thing possible — and that with such a bride and before everyone's eyes?"
> «при» + prepositional — 'with, in the presence of': «При» governs the prepositional and here means 'given / in the presence of' — «при такой невесте» 'with such a bride [in the picture].' The same «при» colours 'before everyone's eyes,' framing the social impropriety as something done in full view.
> «на глазах у людей» — before everyone's eyes: An idiom: 'in plain sight, openly, in front of people.' «У людей» is genitive after «у». For Mitya the disgrace is doubled by being public — done «на глазах у людей», before the eyes of the whole town.

Ведь честь-то у меня есть небось.  
"After all, I do have some honor, I should think."
> «небось» — 'I should think, surely': «Небось» is a colloquial particle of confident supposition — 'I dare say, surely, no doubt.' With emphatic «-то» on «честь» ('honour'), Mitya half-defiantly asserts: 'I do have some honour, surely.' «У меня есть» is the standard 'I have' (possession via «у» + genitive).

Только что я стал ходить к Грушеньке, так тотчас же и перестал быть женихом и честным человеком, ведь я это понимаю же.  
"The moment I began going to Grushenka, that very moment I ceased to be a betrothed man and an honest one — I do understand that."
> «только… так тотчас же и…» — 'the moment… that very moment': A correlative time-construction: «только что» ('the moment, as soon as') answered by «так тотчас же и» ('that very instant'). It binds cause to instant consequence — the moment he began visiting Grushenka, he ceased to be an honourable betrothed.
> Phasal verbs + imperfective infinitive: «Стать» (to begin) and «перестать» (to cease) are phasal verbs that demand an imperfective infinitive — «стал ходить», «перестал быть». The imperfective is required because one begins or stops a process, not a single completed act.

Что ты смотришь?  
"Why do you keep staring?"
> Imperfective «смотришь» — ongoing staring: «Смотришь» is the imperfective present — 'why are you staring / keep staring?' The imperfective views the looking as a continuing state, which is why English adds 'keep.' «Что» here functions as 'why, what for.'

Я, видишь ли, сперва всего пошел ее бить.  
"You see, in the first place I went to give her a beating."
> «видишь ли» — 'you see': A conversational filler — 'you see, you understand' — softening into an explanation. Built with the particle «ли» on «видишь», it is the spoken equivalent of leaning in to make a point, and recurs through Mitya's confession.
> Motion verb + infinitive of purpose: «Пошёл… бить» — 'I set off to beat her' — uses the perfective motion verb «пойти» plus a bare imperfective infinitive of purpose. The construction 'go [to] do something' is idiomatic; «её» is the animate accusative object of «бить».
> «сперва всего» — first of all: «Сперва» is a colloquial 'at first, first' (more formal «сначала»); «сперва всего» — 'first of all, to begin with.' It belongs to Mitya's plain, oral register as he lays out the sequence of events.

Я узнал и знаю теперь достоверно, что Грушеньке этой был этим штабс-капитаном, отцовским поверенным, вексель на меня передан, чтобы взыскала, чтоб я унялся и кончил.  
"I had learned, and now know for certain, that this Grushenka had been handed a promissory note on me by that staff-captain, my father's agent, so that she might collect on it and make me settle down and have done."
> «чтобы» + past form = purpose: Purpose clauses with «чтобы»/«чтоб» take the past-tense form as their irrealis verb: «чтобы взыскала» 'so that she might collect,' «чтоб я унялся» 'so that I would settle down.' The past form here is willed/hypothetical, not literally past — the «бы» inside «чтобы» at work.
> «уняться» — to settle down, desist: Reflexive «уняться» means to calm down, quiet oneself, leave off (an unruly or excessive behaviour). The «-ся» is the change-of-state reflexive. The aim was for Mitya to 'rein himself in and have done' with his ruinous conduct.

Испугать хотели.  
"They meant to frighten me."
> Subjectless 3rd-plural 'they': «Хотели» ('they wanted') has no stated subject — Russian's indefinite-personal use of the bare third-person plural, like English 'they meant to.' «Испугать» (perfective, to frighten) is the infinitive complement: 'they meant to frighten [me].'

Я Грушеньку и двинулся бить.  
"And so I set off to beat Grushenka."
> Emphatic «и» before the verb: Here «и» is not 'and' but an emphatic particle attached to the verb phrase — 'and so I actually set off to beat Grushenka.' The object «Грушеньку» is fronted; «двинулся… бить» ('moved/set off to beat') resumes the thread of s90.

Видал я ее и прежде мельком.  
"I had glimpsed her before, too, in passing."
> Iterative «видал»: «Видал» is a colloquial iterative-imperfective of «видеть» (alongside «видел»), suggesting glimpsing on occasion, more than once. With «прежде» ('formerly') and «мельком» ('in passing, fleetingly'), it conveys repeated casual sightings rather than one act.

Она не поражает.  
"She does not strike one at first."
> Generic imperfective present: «Поражать» (to strike, astonish) in the imperfective present states a general truth, not a moment: 'she does not strike one [at first sight].' The object is left unexpressed ('one, you'), an impersonal generalisation about her looks.

Про старика купца знал, который теперь вдобавок и болен, расслаблен лежит, но ей куш все-таки оставит знатный.  
"I knew about the old merchant, who is now ill into the bargain, lies there enfeebled, but will leave her a handsome sum all the same."
> Short-form participle «расслаблен»: «Расслаблен» is the short (predicative) form of the past passive participle «расслабленный» (enfeebled, paralysed). Joined to «лежит», it states a resulting condition: 'lies there enfeebled.' Short forms predicate a state and are characteristically bookish.
> «куш» — a handsome sum: «Куш» is a sizeable haul of money, a windfall or jackpot (slightly slangy). «Знатный» here is colloquial 'fine, considerable, hefty' rather than its older sense 'noble.' Together: the merchant will leave Grushenka 'a handsome sum.'

Знал тоже, что деньгу нажить любит, наживает, на злые проценты дает, пройдоха, шельма, без жалости.  
"I knew too that she loves to turn a profit, and does so, lends at cruel interest — a sly rogue, a swindler, without mercy."
> «деньга» — money (folk singular): «Деньга» is an old/folk singular of «деньги» (money), once also a small coin. «Деньгу нажить» — 'to make money, turn a profit.' The archaic singular gives the phrase a proverbial, earthy ring suited to describing Grushenka's moneylending.
> «пройдоха», «шельма» — rogue, swindler: Two expressive terms of (here half-admiring) abuse: «пройдоха» is a sly, cunning operator who slips through every crack; «шельма» (from German Schelm) is a rascal, knave, swindler. Applied to Grushenka, they carry as much fascination as condemnation.
> «злые проценты» — cruel interest: «Давать на проценты» is to lend at interest; «злые проценты» — 'wicked/cruel interest,' i.e. usurious rates. «Злой» literally 'evil, harsh' here qualifies the rapacity of the lending, painting Grushenka as a hard-hearted usurer.

Пошел я бить ее, да у ней и остался.  
"I went to beat her, and ended by staying with her."
> Adversative «да» — 'and yet': «Да» here is the folksy adversative 'and/but': 'I went to beat her — and ended up staying.' «У ней» (a colloquial variant of «у неё») means 'at her place'; «остался» (perfective) marks the unexpected outcome. The whole reversal hinges on this small «да… и».

Грянула гроза, ударила чума, заразился и заражен доселе, и знаю, что уж всё кончено, что ничего другого и никогда не будет.  
"The thunderstorm broke, the plague struck, I caught it and am infected to this day, and I know that all is now finished, that there will never be anything else."
> Fronted perfective verbs — sudden onset: Two perfective verbs lead their clauses: «грянула» ('crashed/broke', of a storm) and «ударила» ('struck', of a plague). Verb-first order plus perfective aspect dramatise abrupt, single-stroke onset — the cataclysm of his passion, in two thunderclap metaphors.
> Reflexive «-ся» vs short participle: «Заразился» (reflexive perfective, 'I caught the infection') pairs with «заражён» (short passive participle, 'am infected'): the act and its lingering result. The pairing — became infected, and remain so — captures a state Mitya cannot shake.
> «доселе» — to this day (archaic): «Доселе» ('hitherto, up to now, to this day') is a bookish-archaic adverb, more elevated than «до сих пор». It lifts Mitya's confession into a higher, almost liturgical key, fitting the apocalyptic imagery of plague and finality.

Цикл времен совершен.  
"The cycle of the ages is complete."
> «цикл времён совершён» — the cycle of the ages is complete: A deliberately grand, near-Biblical pronouncement. «Времён» is the genitive plural of «время» (time/age); «совершён» is the short past passive participle of «совершить» (to accomplish, complete) — 'is brought to completion.' Mitya casts his ruin in cosmic, fated terms.

Вот мое дело.  
"That is my whole affair."
> Presentative «вот»: «Вот» ('here is / there you have it') presents and sums up: 'that is my whole affair.' With no copula in the present, «вот моё дело» is a bare, emphatic nominative statement closing off the confession.

А тогда вдруг как нарочно у меня в кармане, у нищего, очутились три тысячи.  
"And just then, as if on purpose, there in my pocket — a beggar's pocket — three thousand turned up."
> Reflexive «очутиться» + appositive «у нищего»: «Очутиться» (to find oneself somewhere, turn up) is a reflexive-only verb of sudden appearance. «У нищего» ('a beggar's') is an appositive to «у меня», driving home the irony — three thousand 'turned up' in the pocket of a pauper. «Очутились» agrees with plural «три тысячи».
> «как нарочно» — as if on purpose: An idiom: 'as if deliberately, as ill (or aptly) luck would have it.' «Нарочно» means 'on purpose.' Mitya marvels that the money appeared 'as if by design' at the fatal moment — fate, not coincidence, in his telling.

Мы отсюда с ней в Мокрое, это двадцать пять отсюда верст, цыган туда добыл, цыганок, шампанского, всех мужиков там шампанским перепоил, всех баб и девок, двинул тысячами.  
"From here she and I went off to Mokroye — it's twenty-five versts from here — I got gypsies out there, gypsy girls, champagne, drowned all the peasants there in champagne, all the women and girls, and flung money about by the thousand."
> «мужики, бабы, девки» — peasant men, women, girls: The earthy peasant trio: «мужик» (peasant man), «баба» (peasant woman, often coarse), «девка» (peasant girl/wench). All slightly low-register, they paint the whole village swept into the drunken spree — Mitya drowning everyone in champagne.
> «перепоить», «двинуть тысячами» — to drink dry, to fling thousands: «Перепоить» (prefix «пере-», 'to excess') means to get a whole crowd drunk; «двинул тысячами» is slangy 'I flung money about by the thousand.' The instrumental «тысячами» ('in thousands') measures the scale of the squandering.

Через три дня гол, но сокол.  
"Three days later, stripped bare — but a free bird."
> «гол как сокол» — stripped bare yet free: A play on the proverb «гол как сокол» ('poor as a church mouse' — literally 'bare as a falcon'). «Гол» is the short adjective 'naked, stripped, penniless'; «сокол» ('falcon') here also conjures the free, soaring bird Mitya fancies himself. He is broke but unbowed.

Ты думал, достиг чего сокол-то?  
"Did you think the bird had attained anything?"
> Genitive object «чего» after «достичь»: «Достичь / достигнуть» ('to attain') governs the genitive, so its object is «чего» ('anything', genitive of «что'), not accusative. «Сокол-то» repeats the falcon-image with topic-marking «-то»: 'did the falcon attain anything?' — bitterly self-mocking.

Даже издали не показала.  
"She would not so much as show herself, even from a distance."
> «даже… не» — 'not even': «Даже» ('even') intensifies the negation «не показала» ('did not show [herself]') — 'she would not so much as show herself.' «Издали» ('from a distance') sharpens it further. The subject 'she' is dropped, clear from the feminine «-ла».

Я говорю тебе: изгиб.  
"I tell you: it's that curve."
> «изгиб» — a curve, a bend: «Изгиб» is a bend, curve, or inflection (of a line, a body, even a character). Mitya seizes on it as the one word for Grushenka's irresistible physical 'curve' — and, by extension, the sinuous quality of her whole nature. It becomes a near-obsessive keyword.

У Грушеньки, шельмы, есть такой один изгиб тела, он и на ножке у ней отразился, даже в пальчике-мизинчике на левой ножке отозвался.  
"Grushenka, the swindler, has one such curve to her body, and it carried down even into her little foot, even echoed in the little toe of her left little foot."
> Affectionate diminutives: Russian forms diminutives with suffixes like «-ка» and «-чик»: «нога» (foot/leg) → «ножка», and «мизинец» (little finger/toe) → the doubly tender «пальчик-мизинчик». They convey caressing fondness, not literal smallness; English has no neat equivalent, so we render 'little foot' and 'little toe.'
> Emphatic «и» + verbs of echoing: The 'curve' «отразился» ('was reflected') and «отозвался» ('echoed, resounded'), both reflexive perfectives, trace it cascading down to her toe. The emphatic «и» ('even') and climactic «даже» build a rapt, rhetorical crescendo of fixation.
> «шельма» — rogue, as an endearment: Repeated from s97, «шельма» ('rascal, swindler') is here almost a caress — «у Грушеньки, шельмы». Russian readily turns terms of abuse into terms of helpless affection; Mitya scolds and adores her in the same breath.

Видел и целовал, но и только — клянусь!  
"I saw it and kissed it, but that was all — I swear!"
> «но и только» — 'but that was all': «Но и только» is a set phrase capping a confession — 'but that, and nothing more.' «Клянусь» is the reflexive «клясться» (to swear an oath), 1st-person present: 'I swear!' The «-ся» here belongs to a verb that exists only in the reflexive form.

Говорит: «Хочешь, выйду замуж, ведь ты нищий. Скажи, что бить не будешь и позволишь всё мне делать, что я захочу, тогда, может, и выйду», — смеется.  
"She says: 'Do you want me to marry you? After all, you're a beggar. Say that you won't beat me and that you'll let me do anything I please, and then perhaps I will marry you' — and she laughs."
> «хочешь» framing a conditional offer: «Хочешь, выйду замуж» — literally 'do you want [it], I'll marry [you]' — is a colloquial conditional offer ('if you like, I'll marry you'). «Выйду замуж» is perfective future. The bare juxtaposition, without «если», is idiomatic spoken Russian.
> Compound future «не будешь бить»: Grushenka's terms mix futures: imperfective compound «не будешь бить» ('you won't [keep] beating me', ongoing) with «быть» + infinitive, against perfective «позволишь» ('you'll allow'). The choice marks habitual non-beating versus a single act of permission.
> «что я захочу» — relative clause with perfective future: «Что я захочу» ('whatever I shall want') is a free relative clause; «захочу» is perfective future ('come to want'). Grushenka demands licence to do 'anything I please' — the perfective future giving each future whim its own completed force.

И теперь смеется!  
"And she is laughing still!"
> Imperfective present «смеётся»: «Смеётся» (reflexive-only «смеяться», to laugh) in the imperfective present states an ongoing, continuing action — 'she is laughing still.' With «и теперь» ('even now'), it stretches Grushenka's mockery into the present moment of telling.

Дмитрий Федорович почти с какою-то яростью поднялся с места, он вдруг стал как пьяный.  
Dmitri Fyodorovich rose from his place almost in a kind of frenzy; he had suddenly become as though drunk.
> Indefinite «какой-то» + archaic ending: «Какой-то» ('some kind of') with the «-то» of unspecified identity — 'in a kind of frenzy.' The form «какою-то» is the older instrumental feminine ending «-ою» (for modern «-ой»), a literary-period flavour pervasive in Dostoevsky.
> «стать» + comparison: «Стал как пьяный» — 'became as though drunk.' «Стать» (to become) here takes a «как»-comparison rather than an instrumental predicate. The perfective marks a sudden change of state: Mitya's agitation tips him into a drunk-like frenzy.

Глаза его вдруг налились кровью.  
His eyes had suddenly filled with blood.
> Instrumental of means: «кровью»: «Налиться чем» ('to fill / become suffused with') governs the instrumental: «налились кровью» — 'filled with blood.' «Кровью» (instrumental of «кровь») names what the eyes became suffused with. «Налились» is reflexive perfective, marking the sudden completed change.

— И ты в самом деле хочешь на ней жениться?  
"And do you really mean to marry her?"
> «жениться на» + prepositional: «Жениться на ком» ('to marry someone', of a man) governs the prepositional with «на» — «на ней» ('to her'). Contrast «выйти замуж за» for a woman (s62). The two genders use entirely different idioms for 'to marry.'

— Коль захочет, так тотчас же, а не захочет, и так останусь; у нее на дворе буду дворником.  
"If she wishes it, then at once; and if she does not, I shall stay on all the same — I'll be the yard-keeper in her courtyard."
> «коль» — archaic 'if': «Коль» (and «коли») is a folk-archaic variant of «если» ('if'). «Коль захочет… а не захочет» sets up a balanced either/or — 'if she wishes… and if she does not.' «Захочет» is perfective future; the «а» pivots between the two outcomes.
> Instrumental of the predicate: After future «буду» the predicate noun goes in the instrumental: «буду дворником» ('I'll be a yard-keeper'), not nominative. Russian frames a future or assumed role with «быть» + instrumental, casting it as a part one takes on.

Ты… ты, Алеша…  — остановился он вдруг пред ним и, схватив его за плечи, стал вдруг с силою трясти его, — да знаешь ли ты, невинный ты мальчик, что всё это бред, немыслимый бред, ибо тут трагедия!  
"You… you, Alyosha…" he stopped suddenly before him and, seizing him by the shoulders, began all at once to shake him hard, "do you even know, you innocent boy, that all this is delirium, an unthinkable delirium, for here lies a tragedy!"
> Gerund «схватив» + «за» + accusative: «Схватив» is a perfective past gerund ('having seized'), naming the action just prior to the shaking. «Схватить за плечи» ('to seize by the shoulders') uses «за» + accusative for the body-part gripped — the standard construction for taking hold of someone.
> «знаешь ли ты» — emphatic appeal: «Да знаешь ли ты…?» ('do you even know…?') fronts «знаешь» with the particle «ли» for an urgent rhetorical appeal, opening a «что»-clause of reported content. The piled «да… ли» dramatise Mitya's shaking insistence that Alyosha grasp the tragedy.
> Pronoun inside a vocative phrase: «Невинный ты мальчик» ('you innocent boy') wedges the pronoun «ты» between adjective and noun — a colloquial, emotionally charged address pattern. The whole phrase is a vocative aside, set off from the clause as Mitya seizes and shakes him.
> «ибо» — 'for, because' (bookish): «Ибо» is an elevated, archaic-literary conjunction for 'for, because' (everyday speech uses «потому что»). Its solemn ring lifts Mitya's declaration into the register of Scripture and high tragedy — fitting his cry that 'here lies a tragedy.'

Узнай же, Алексей, что я могу быть низким человеком, со страстями низкими и погибшими, но вором, карманным вором, воришкой по передним, Дмитрий Карамазов не может быть никогда.  
"Know this, Alexei: that I can be a base man, with base and ruined passions, but a thief, a pickpocket, a petty sneak-thief of the antechambers — that Dmitri Karamazov can never be."
> Imperative «узнай» + «же»: «Узнай» is the perfective imperative of «узнать» ('learn, find out') — 'know this!' The particle «же» lends solemn insistence. Mitya addresses his brother by the full, grave «Алексей» (not «Алёша»), matching the loftiness of the confession to come.
> Instrumental predicate after «быть»: After infinitive «быть», both the predicate noun «человеком» and its modifier «низким» take the instrumental — «быть низким человеком» ('to be a base man'). The trailing «со страстями низкими и погибшими» ('with base and ruined passions') keeps the bookish post-posed adjective order.
> «воришка» — pejorative diminutive, and «передние»: «Воришка» applies the belittling «-ишк-» suffix to «вор» (thief): a petty, contemptible sneak-thief. «Передняя» is the entrance-hall/antechamber of a house; «вор по передним» is one who pilfers from front halls — the lowest, most shameful kind of thief.
> Negative concord «не… никогда»: 'Dmitri Karamazov can never be [a thief]' uses negative concord: «не» on «может» together with «никогда» ('never'). Russian keeps the verbal «не» even beside the negative adverb — the two negators cooperate to one emphatic denial.

Ну так узнай же теперь, что я воришка, я вор по карманам и по передним!  
"Well, then know now that I am a sneak-thief, a thief of pockets and of antechambers!"
> The imperative repeated, reversed: Mitya echoes s117's «узнай же» but now to confess the opposite — that he IS a thief. The repetition of the perfective imperative «узнай» plus «же» forms a rhetorical hinge: the same solemn 'know this!' frames pride, then self-accusation.
> «по» distributive: 'of pockets and of antechambers': «По карманам… по передним» (dative after «по») is distributive — a thief who works 'over pockets and front halls,' across many of them. Mitya brands himself the very «карманный вор» / «вор по передним» he had just sworn he could never be.

Как раз пред тем, как я Грушеньку пошел бить, призывает меня в то самое утро Катерина Ивановна и в ужасном секрете, чтобы покамест никто не знал (для чего, не знаю, видно, так ей было нужно), просит меня съездить в губернский город и там по почте послать три тысячи Агафье Ивановне, в Москву; потому в город, чтобы здесь и не знали.  
"Just before I went to beat Grushenka, that very same morning Katerina Ivanovna summons me and, in dreadful secrecy, so that for the time being no one should know (why, I do not know — evidently it had to be so for her), asks me to ride to the provincial town and from there to send by post three thousand to Agafya Ivanovna in Moscow; to the town, so that here no one would know."
> «пред тем, как» — 'just before': «Пред тем, как» (bookish «пред» for «перед») + clause means 'just before [the moment] that…' «Как раз» ('exactly, just') sharpens the timing. The construction anchors the whole long sentence to the fateful morning before Mitya set out to beat Grushenka.
> Historic present «призывает», «просит»: Amid past narration Mitya switches to the present — «призывает» ('summons'), «просит» ('asks') — the vivid historic present that pulls a remembered scene up close. «Просит съездить» ('asks [me] to ride over') takes a perfective infinitive of a single round trip.
> Purpose «чтобы» + negative concord: «Чтобы… никто не знал» ('so that no one should know') is a «чтобы»-purpose clause taking the past form «знал» as its irrealis verb, with negative concord («никто… не»). The willed secrecy — that nobody learn of it — is rendered through this hypothetical past.

Вот с этими-то тремя тысячами в кармане я и очутился тогда у Грушеньки, на них и в Мокрое съездили.  
"And it was with those very three thousand in my pocket that I then turned up at Grushenka's, and it was on them that we rode off to Mokroye."
> Emphatic frame «вот… -то… я и…»: Mitya brackets the key fact with «вот» (presentative), «-то» on «с этими» (topic-emphasis), and «я и очутился» (the emphatic «и» before the verb): 'it was with those very three thousand that I turned up at Grushenka's.' The whole apparatus spotlights the damning money.
> Numeral + noun in the instrumental: After «с» ('with', instrumental), the whole numeral phrase re-declines: «тремя тысячами» is the instrumental of «три тысячи». The numeral «три» and «тысячами» agree in the instrumental — Russian declines numbers fully when a preposition governs them.
> «съездить» — a there-and-back trip: «Съездить» is a perfective meaning to make a round trip ('to go [there and back]'). «На них» here is idiomatic 'on them / on that money' — the funds that bankrolled the excursion. The prefix «с-…-ить» bundles the whole Mokroye jaunt into one completed there-and-back.

Потом я сделал вид, что слетал в город, но расписки почтовой ей не представил, сказал, что послал, расписку принесу, и до сих пор не несу, забыл-с.  
Then I pretended I'd dashed off to town, but I never showed her any postal receipt — I told her I'd sent it and would bring the receipt, and to this day I haven't brought it, said I forgot, sir.
> Perfective chain of completed acts: «Сделал вид» (made [the] appearance) and «слетал» (the perfective of a quick there-and-back motion) are both perfective pasts, each a single bounded event — the staged pretense and the imagined dash to town. Aspect lets Mitya narrate the swindle blow by blow.
> Genitive of negation: Under the negated verb «не представил», the object «расписку» shifts to the genitive «расписки» — the genitive of negation, marking a thing pointedly not produced. Note the bookish word order with the noun before its adjective («расписки почтовой»).
> The servile particle «-с»: The clipped «-с» tacked onto «забыл» is the old deferential particle (a worn-down «сударь», 'sir'), once added to show respect or, here, mock self-abasement. Mitya apes a cringing servant's tone: 'forgot, sir.'

Теперь, как ты думаешь, вот ты сегодня пойдешь и ей скажешь: «Приказали вам кланяться», а она тебе: «А деньги?»  
Now, what do you think — today you'll go and say to her, 'They send their regards,' and she'll come back at you with, 'And the money?'
> Perfective verbs for the imagined future: «Пойдёшь» and «скажешь» are perfective verbs conjugated like a present — which in the perfective yields the simple future ('you'll go and tell'). Mitya rehearses tomorrow's scene as a sequence of single completed acts.
> «Кланяться» — to send one's regards: Literally 'they ordered [me] to bow to you', this is the stock formula for conveying greetings — «кланяться кому-то» means to send one's compliments. The impersonal plural «приказали» politely veils the sender.

Ты еще мог бы сказать ей: «Это низкий сладострастник и с неудержимыми чувствами подлое существо. Он тогда не послал ваши деньги, а растратил, потому что удержаться не мог, как животное», — но все-таки ты мог бы прибавить: «Зато он не вор, вот ваши три тысячи, посылает обратно, пошлите сами Агафье Ивановне, а сам велел кланяться».  
You could still tell her: 'He is a base sensualist, a vile creature with ungovernable appetites. He didn't send your money that time — he squandered it, because he couldn't hold himself back, like an animal' — but all the same you could add: 'Yet he's no thief, here are your three thousand, he sends them back, hand them to Agafya Ivanovna yourself, and he told me to give you his regards.'
> Conditional with «бы»: Past-tense «мог» plus the particle «бы» builds the irrealis: 'you could (still) say'. The particle leans here on the modal verb, framing a hypothetical speech Alyosha might make.
> «Сладострастник» — voluptuary: A bookish, morally loaded noun for a man enslaved to sensual pleasure ('lust' + 'passion'). It belongs to the novel's recurring vocabulary of «сладострастие», the Karamazov 'voluptuousness' that defines the family's appetites.
> «Растратить» — to squander, embezzle: The prefix «рас-» gives a sense of scattering-away; «растратить» means to fritter or dissipate funds, and in officialese to embezzle. Set against «не послал», it confesses exactly where the money went.
> «Зато» — 'but to make up for it': «Зато» introduces a compensating contrast: 'yet, on the other hand'. It concedes the vice just named and offers an offsetting merit — he's a squanderer, but at least no thief.

А теперь вдруг она: «А где деньги?»  
But now, all of a sudden, she says: 'And where's the money?'
> Verbless dramatic clause: Russian needs no copula or even a speech-verb here: «а теперь вдруг она» ('but now suddenly she—') lets the bare pronoun stand for 'she says', the quotation supplying the rest. The ellipsis mimics the jolt of «вдруг» ('suddenly').

— Митя, ты несчастен, да!  
"Mitya, you are wretched, yes!
> Short-form adjective as predicate: «Несчастен» is the short (predicative) form of «несчастный», used after the zero copula to assert a state: 'you are wretched'. The short form lends a categorical, declarative weight suited to Alyosha's pronouncement.
> «Митя» — the diminutive of Dmitri: Dmitri Fyodorovich is «Митя» to his intimates — the affectionate short form. Alyosha's use of it here, in a moment of pity, signals brotherly tenderness rather than the formal name-and-patronymic.

Но всё же не столько, сколько ты думаешь, — не убивай себя отчаянием, не убивай!  
But still not so much as you think — don't kill yourself with despair, don't!"
> Correlative «столько… сколько»: The pair «не столько… сколько» ('not so much… as') sets up a calibrated comparison: not as wretched as you imagine. «Сколько» here is the relative 'as much as', binding the subordinate clause «сколько ты думаешь».
> Negated imperative + reflexive «себя»: «Не убивай» is the imperfective imperative of prohibition ('don't [keep] killing'), the form Russian prefers for warning against an action. «Себя» is the reflexive object pronoun (no nominative), pointing back to the addressee: 'don't destroy yourself'.

— А что ты думаешь, застрелюсь, как не достану трех тысяч отдать?  
"And what do you suppose — that I'll shoot myself if I can't get the three thousand to pay her back?
> Reflexive perfective future: «Застрелюсь» = «застрелю» ('I'll shoot') + reflexive «-сь»: 'I'll shoot myself', a single perfective act in the future. The clitic «-ся/-сь» turns the action back on the subject without a separate pronoun.
> «Как» = 'if/when' in colloquial conditional: Here «как» introduces a conditional-temporal clause ('if/once I can't get…') rather than 'how' — a common spoken usage. «Не достану» is again a perfective future: a single failure to obtain the sum.

В том-то и дело, что не застрелюсь.  
That's just the point — I won't shoot myself.
> The emphatic clitic «-то» and «и»: «В том-то и дело» — 'that's just the point'. The clitic «-то» highlights the demonstrative «том» as the very thing at issue, and «и» reinforces it; together they form a fixed emphatic idiom of the spoken language.

Не в силах теперь, потом, может быть, а теперь я к Грушеньке пойду… Пропадай мое сало!  
I haven't the strength for it now — later, perhaps, but right now I'll go to Grushenka… Let my fortune go to ruin!
> Verbless 'not able' construction: «Не в силах» (literally 'not in [one's] strength/powers') is a fixed predicate meaning 'unable', here with no copula and an implied 'I': 'I haven't the strength now'. The plural «силах» is prepositional after «в».
> «Пропадай моё сало!» — let it all go to ruin: A reckless folk exclamation, roughly 'let my fat/lard perish!' — i.e. damn the cost, let everything I have go to waste. «Пропадай» is a third-person imperative of abandonment; «сало» ('fat, lard') stands earthily for one's goods and prospects.

— А у ней?  
"And at her place?"
> «У» + genitive for 'at her place': «У ней» (= «у неё») uses «у» + genitive to mean 'at her [place]' — the 'have'/'chez' construction. «Ней» for «неё» is a colloquial/older variant; the prepositional «у» triggers the prefixed «н-» on the third-person pronoun.

— Буду мужем ее, в супруги удостоюсь, а коль придет любовник, выйду в другую комнату.  
"I'll be her husband, I'll have the honor of being her spouse, and if a lover comes calling, I'll step into the next room.
> Predicate instrumental after «быть»: «Буду мужем» — the compound future of «быть» plus the predicate noun «мужем» in the instrumental, the case Russian uses for a role one will assume: 'I'll be her husband'. A bare nominative would suit only the present zero-copula.
> «Удостоиться» + «в супруги» — bookish self-mockery: «Удостоюсь» ('I'll deign / have the honor', reflexive perfective) is an elevated, almost ecclesiastical verb; pairing it with the archaic 'into-spouses' construction «в супруги» lets Mitya gild his abasement with grand diction. The idiom «в + accusative-plural» names the rank one is admitted to.
> «Коль» — archaic 'if': «Коль» (short for «коли») is a folksy/archaic conditional conjunction equal to «если», 'if'. It colors Mitya's speech with peasant-bookish register; «придёт» is the perfective future, a single arrival.

У ее приятелей буду калоши грязные обчищать, самовар раздувать, на посылках бегать…  
For her friends I'll scrub the mud off their galoshes, fire up the samovar, run their errands…"
> Imperfective future for habitual servitude: «Буду… обчищать… раздувать… бегать» — the compound imperfective future strings together habitual, repeated actions: the daily round of menial chores he imagines. Imperfective infinitives under «буду» frame an ongoing way of life, not single events.
> «На посылках бегать» — to run errands: A set idiom for being an errand-boy, at everyone's beck and call ('to run on dispatches'). It completes the picture of self-chosen humiliation Mitya paints.

— Катерина Ивановна всё поймет, — торжественно проговорил вдруг Алеша, — поймет всю глубину во всем этом горе и примирится.  
"Katerina Ivanovna will understand it all," Alyosha said suddenly, with solemnity, "she'll grasp the whole depth of this grief, and she'll be reconciled.
> Inverted speech tag: The verb «проговорил» precedes its subject «Алеша», with the adverb «торжественно» fronted for weight — a typical literary inversion in dialogue attribution. The perfective «проговорил» marks the utterance as a single solemn pronouncement.
> «Примириться» — to be reconciled: «Примириться (с чем-то)» means to come to terms with, make one's peace with — a key spiritual word in Dostoevsky, weightier than mere acceptance. Its reflexive «-ся» here is the middle/intransitive 'become reconciled'.

У нее высший ум, потому что нельзя быть несчастнее тебя, она увидит сама.  
Her mind is of the highest order, for no one can be more wretched than you, and she'll see that for herself."
> Comparative + genitive of comparison: «Несчастнее тебя» — the comparative «несчастнее» ('more wretched') governs the genitive «тебя» to mean 'than you', the bare-genitive comparison Russian prefers over «чем». «Нельзя быть» is an impersonal 'it is impossible to be'.
> «Высший ум» — a mind of the highest order: «Высший» is the bookish superlative-by-form of «высокий» ('higher/highest'); «высший ум» praises Katerina Ivanovna's lofty intelligence and moral elevation. The phrase elevates her above the squalid arithmetic of the debt.

— Не помирится она со всем, — осклабился Митя.  
"She won't be reconciled to everything," Mitya grinned.
> «Осклабиться» — to bare one's teeth in a grin: «Осклабился» is a markedly unpleasant, almost animal way to say 'grinned' — to grin showing the teeth, with a sneering or mirthless edge. Dostoevsky chooses it to undercut Mitya's bravado with a flash of the wolfish.

— Тут, брат, есть нечто, с чем нельзя никакой женщине примириться.  
"There's a certain something here, brother, that no woman can ever be reconciled to.
> Relative «с чем» + dative subject + negative concord: Several threads weave here: the relative «с чем» ('with which') governed by «примириться (с)»; the dative experiencer «никакой женщине» ('to/for no woman') in an impersonal «нельзя»; and the negative concord of «нельзя… никакой» — multiple negatives, one denial.
> «Нечто» — 'a certain something': «Нечто» is the indefinite 'something (of significance)', loftier and vaguer than «что-то». It hints darkly at an unnameable thing — characteristic of Mitya's groping toward a shame he cannot quite confess.

А знаешь, что всего лучше сделать?  
And do you know what would be the best thing to do?"
> «Всего» intensifying a superlative: «Всего лучше» — literally 'best of all', where genitive «всего» ('of everything') reinforces the comparative «лучше» to form a superlative: 'the very best thing'. «Сделать» is the perfective infinitive of a single decisive act.

— Что?  
"What?"

— Три тысячи ей отдать.  
"Give her back the three thousand."
> Dative recipient + perfective infinitive: «Ей отдать» — the dative «ей» marks the recipient ('to her'), and «отдать» (perfective, 'give back / hand over completely') the single act of repayment. The bare infinitive answers 'what's best to do?' tersely.

— Где же взять-то?  
"But where are we to get it?
> Particles «же» and «-то» in a despairing question: «Же» insists and presses ('but where on earth…'), while clitic «-то» softens and colors the question with rueful resignation. Russian packs the speaker's whole attitude into these two tiny words; «взять» is an impersonal 'to get/take' with implied 'one/we'.

Слушай, у меня есть две тысячи, Иван даст тоже тысячу, вот и три, возьми и отдай.  
Listen — I have two thousand, Ivan will give a thousand as well, that makes three, take it and pay her back."
> Paired perfective imperatives: «Возьми и отдай» — two perfective imperatives ('take and give back') joined by «и», urging two crisp completed acts. The perfective imperative suits a one-time command, as against the imperfective's general or prohibitive sense.

— А когда они прибудут, твои три тысячи?  
"And when will it come, this three thousand of yours?
> Plural agreement with 'three thousand'; right-dislocation: «Прибудут» is plural (perfective future) agreeing with «они», which stands for «три тысячи» — the sum treated as a plural entity. The noun phrase «твои три тысячи» is tacked on at the end as an afterthought, a colloquial right-dislocation.

Ты еще и несовершеннолетний вдобавок, а надо непременно, непременно, чтобы ты сегодня уже ей откланялся, с деньгами или без денег, потому что я дальше тянуть не могу, дело на такой точке стало.  
On top of that you're still underage, and it absolutely must be — absolutely — that today you've already taken your leave of her, with money or without, because I can't drag this out any longer, the affair has come to such a pass.
> «Чтобы» + past-form for a willed outcome: After the impersonal «надо» ('it is necessary'), «чтобы» governs the past-tense form «откланялся» — Russian's irrealis of purpose/demand: 'that you take your leave'. «Чтобы» + past, not infinitive, expresses a willed result imposed on another subject.
> «Несовершеннолетний» — under legal age: A formal legal term, 'not of full years / a minor'. It nods to the fact that the youngest brother lacks the legal majority to act freely with money — a flick of the bureaucratic world into Mitya's frantic speech.
> «Дело стало на такой точке» — matters have come to a head: An idiom: the affair has 'stopped at such a point', i.e. reached a critical pass where it can wait no longer. «Стало» (perfective past of «стать», 'to come to a stand') conveys the sudden seizing-up of the situation.

Завтра уже поздно, поздно.  
Tomorrow will already be too late, too late.
> Impersonal predicate + urgent repetition: «Поздно» is an impersonal predicative adverb ('[it is] late'), needing no subject. The doubling — and the doubled «уже» — is pure spoken urgency, Mitya pressing the point by reiteration.

Я тебя к отцу пошлю.  
I'll send you to Father."
> Accusative object + «к» + dative goal: «Тебя» is the accusative direct object; «к отцу» uses «к» + dative for motion toward a person ('to Father'). «Пошлю» is the perfective future, 'I will send' — a single dispatch.

— К отцу?  
"To Father?"

— Да, к отцу прежде нее.  
"Yes, to Father before her.
> «Прежде» + genitive — 'before her': «Прежде» governs the genitive «нее» (= «неё») to mean 'before her [in time/order]'. The prefixed «н-» appears because the third-person pronoun follows a preposition.

У него три тысячи и спроси.  
Ask him for the three thousand."
> Possession by «у» + genitive, and «спросить у»: «У него (есть) три тысячи» — the «у» + genitive 'have' construction. The same «у него» is then reused for «спроси у него» ('ask him for it'), since «спросить» takes «у» + genitive for the person asked. «Спроси» is a perfective imperative.

— Да ведь он, Митя, не даст.  
"But he won't give it, Mitya."
> Opening «да ведь» — appeal to shared sense: «Да» here is a soft conversational opener ('but'), and «ведь» appeals to what both already know ('after all, you realize…'). Together they make Alyosha's objection gentle, almost pleading: 'but he won't give it, you know'.

— Еще бы дал, знаю, что не даст.  
"As if he'd give it — I know he won't.
> «Ещё бы» — 'as if!' / 'you bet': «Ещё бы» is an idiomatic exclamation; combined ironically with «дал» it means 'as if he'd give it!' — a sarcastic denial. The conditional «бы» here flavors the irony rather than building a literal hypothesis.

Знаешь ты, Алексей, что значит отчаяние?  
Do you know, Alexei, what despair means?"
> Embedded question with «что значит»: «Что значит отчаяние» ('what despair means') is an indirect/embedded interrogative serving as the object of «знаешь». «Значит» is third-person singular agreeing with the neuter subject «отчаяние».

— Знаю.  
"I know."

— Слушай: юридически он мне ничего не должен.  
"Listen: in law he owes me nothing.
> Dative + negative concord: «Мне» is the dative of the person owed ('to me'); «ничего не должен» pairs the negative pronoun «ничего» with «не» in obligatory negative concord — 'he owes [me] nothing at all'. «Должен» is a short-form predicate, 'is obligated'.
> «Юридически» — 'in law': A learned adverb, 'legally, juridically', set against «нравственно» ('morally') in the next breath. Mitya stages the whole question as a contest between legal title and moral debt.

Всё я у него выбрал, всё, я это знаю.  
I took everything from him, everything — I know that.
> Fronted object «всё» for emphasis: Object «всё» ('everything') is thrown to the front and repeated for force — topic-comment word order foregrounding the totality of what was taken. «Выбрал» here is the older/colloquial sense of «выбрать» as 'pick out, draw out (in full)'.

Но ведь нравственно-то должен он мне, так иль не так?  
But morally he does owe me — isn't that so, or isn't it?
> «Ведь» + «-то» + inversion: «Ведь» appeals to shared moral sense ('but surely…'), the clitic «-то» on «нравственно» pointedly contrasts the moral with the legal, and «должен он» inverts subject and predicate for stress. Three small devices pile up the insistence.
> «Так иль не так?» — 'isn't that so?': A colloquial tag question, 'so or not so?', demanding assent. «Иль» is the clipped, slightly folksy/poetic form of «или» ('or').

Ведь он с материных двадцати восьми тысяч пошел и сто тысяч нажил.  
After all, he started out with my mother's twenty-eight thousand and made himself a hundred thousand.
> Numeral phrase in the genitive after «с»: The whole quantified phrase is in the genitive because «с» ('from, starting with') governs the genitive: «двадцати восьми тысяч» — every element of '28 thousand' declined together. «Материных» is the possessive adjective from «мать», 'my mother's'.
> «Нажить» — to amass, make (a fortune): «Нажил» (perfective of «наживать») means to acquire by accumulation — to make oneself a fortune, often with a faint pejorative of grasping gain. It captures Fyodor Pavlovich's talent for turning a little capital into much.

Пусть он мне даст только три тысячи из двадцати восьми, только три, и душу мою из ада извлечет, и зачтется это ему за многие грехи!  
Let him give me just three thousand of the twenty-eight, only three, and he'll draw my soul up out of hell, and it will be counted to him against many sins!
> Third-person imperative with «пусть»: «Пусть» + the perfective future «даст» forms a third-person command/wish: 'let him give'. It is the standard way Russian issues an imperative to someone not present.
> «Из ада извлечь» — to draw the soul out of hell: Elevated, near-liturgical imagery: «извлечь» ('to draw/extract out') the soul «из ада» ('from hell'). Mitya casts a mere loan as a rescue from damnation — the religious key in which the Karamazovs render their passions.
> «Зачтётся за грехи» — credited against one's sins: «Зачтётся» (reflexive future, 'it will be reckoned/credited') with «за многие грехи» evokes a heavenly ledger where a good deed is set against one's many sins. The accounting metaphor fuses money and salvation — the chapter's deep theme.

Я же на этих трех тысячах, вот тебе великое слово, покончу, и не услышит он ничего обо мне более вовсе.  
And I, for my part, with that three thousand — here's my solemn word to you — I'll be finished, and he'll never hear another thing about me, ever again.
> Emphatic «же» and «покончить на»: «Же» stresses the contrasting 'I, for my part'. «Покончу» (perfective future of «покончить») with «на этих трёх тысячах» means 'I'll make an end of it on/with that three thousand' — finish everything, including, ominously, himself.
> Stacked negation: «Не услышит… ничего… вовсе» heaps negators for finality — 'he'll hear nothing of me whatsoever, ever again'. «Обо мне» shows «о» taking the form «обо» before «мне», governing the prepositional.
> «Великое слово» — a solemn pledge: «Вот тебе великое слово» — 'here's my great/solemn word to you', a vow. The dative «тебе» marks the one to whom the word is given; the phrase belongs to the heightened, oath-taking register Mitya keeps slipping into.

В последний раз случай ему даю быть отцом.  
For the last time I'm giving him the chance to be a father.
> Dative recipient + predicate instrumental in the infinitive: «Ему» is the dative recipient of the chance ('to him'); «быть отцом» pairs the infinitive «быть» with the predicate instrumental «отцом» ('to be a father'). The instrumental marks the role to be assumed, even under an infinitive.

Скажи ему, что сам бог ему этот случай посылает.  
Tell him that God Himself is sending him this chance."
> Reported clause with «что»; intensifier «сам»: «Скажи» (perfective imperative) governs a reported-fact clause with «что». «Сам бог» uses the intensifier «сам» ('God Himself'), and «посылает» is the present-tense imperfective for an action conceived as unfolding now.

— Митя, он ни за что не даст.  
"Mitya, he won't give it for anything."
> «Ни за что» — 'not for anything': «Ни за что» ('not for anything, on no account') is an emphatic negative idiom that, by negative concord, still requires «не» on the verb: 'he won't give it, no matter what'. The «ни-» phrase reinforces, the «не» actually negates.

— Знаю, что не даст, в совершенстве знаю.  
"I know he won't, I know it to perfection.
> «В совершенстве» — 'to perfection': «В совершенстве» means 'perfectly, to perfection' — usually of mastering a skill, but here wrenched to 'I know it perfectly well'. The slight over-formality has a bitter, ironic ring.

А теперь особенно.  
And now especially.

Мало того, я вот что еще знаю: теперь, на днях только, всего только, может быть, вчера, он в первый раз узнал серьезно (подчеркни: серьезно), что Грушенька-то в самом деле, может быть, не шутит и за меня замуж захочет прыгнуть.  
What's more, here's something else I know: just now, only these last days — only just, perhaps yesterday — he learned for the first time, in earnest (underline it: in earnest), that Grushenka really might not be joking and might want to leap into marrying me.
> Topic clitic «-то»: The clitic «-то» on «Грушенька» flags her as the known topic now under fresh scrutiny ('Grushenka, you see…'). It is the topic-marking «-то», distinct from indefinite «кто-то», threading the long sentence's focus.
> «Выйти/прыгнуть замуж за» — to marry (of a woman): A woman marrying a man is «выйти замуж за кого» (lit. 'go out into marriage for…'), here colored by «прыгнуть» ('leap'). «За меня» uses «за» + accusative for the man married. «Захочет… прыгнуть» chains a perfective future modal with an infinitive.
> «Подчеркни» — 'underline it': A perfective imperative, 'underline [it]!', a vivid spoken aside as Mitya insists on the word «серьёзно». The metaphor of underlining a written word in the midst of speech captures his feverish emphasis.

Знает он этот характер, знает эту кошку.  
He knows that character of hers, he knows that cat.
> Verb-first emphasis; anaphoric «этот»: Fronting the verb «знает» ('he knows—') gives the line a punchy, declarative drive. The demonstrative «этот характер / эту кошку» points back to Grushenka with knowing familiarity, almost contempt.
> «Кошка» — 'that cat': Calling Grushenka «эту кошку» ('that cat') casts her as feline — willful, scratching, dangerous. The metaphor, half-admiring and half-wary, fixes the rivalrous fascination she stirs in both Karamazov men.

Ну так неужто ж он мне вдобавок и деньги даст, чтоб этакому случаю способствовать, тогда как сам он от нее без памяти?  
So is he really going to hand me money on top of everything, to help bring about such a match, when he himself is out of his mind over her?
> «Неужто» + «ж» — incredulous question: «Неужто» (a folksy variant of «неужели») asks an astonished 'surely not…?', and the clipped «ж» (= «же») presses the disbelief. Together they expect the answer 'no, of course not'.
> «Чтоб» of purpose + dative object: «Чтоб» (clipped «чтобы») here + infinitive «способствовать» expresses purpose ('in order to further'); «способствовать» governs the dative «этакому случаю» ('such a match'). «Этакий» is a colloquial, slightly disdainful 'such a'.
> «Без памяти» — out of one's mind (with love): «Без памяти от кого» (lit. 'without memory because of someone') means madly in love, beside oneself with infatuation. Said of Fyodor Pavlovich, it marks the grotesque father-son rivalry over the same woman.

Но и этого еще мало, я еще больше тебе могу привесть: я знаю, что у него уж дней пять как вынуты три тысячи рублей, разменены в сотенные кредитки и упакованы в большой пакет под пятью печатями, а сверху красною тесемочкой накрест перевязаны.  
But that's still not all — I can lay out even more for you: I know that, some five days ago now, he had three thousand rubles taken out, changed into hundred-ruble notes and packed into a large envelope under five seals, tied crosswise on top with a little red ribbon.
> Short passive participles in a result chain: «Вынуты… разменены… упакованы… перевязаны» are short-form past passive participles, each stating a completed result done to the money ('taken out, changed, packed, tied'). This periphrastic passive (with implied «были») names the state of things, the agent left unstated.
> Approximate quantity by inversion + «как»: Inverting numeral and noun — «дней пять» instead of «пять дней» — signals approximation ('some five days'). «Уж… как вынуты» ('already… since [they were] taken out') dates the result. «Дней» is genitive plural after the numeral.
> Diminutive «тесёмочка»: From «тесьма» (ribbon, tape) through «тесёмка» to the doubly affectionate «тесёмочка» — 'a dainty little ribbon'. The diminutive lends a tender, almost coy touch to the old man's love-token wrapping.

Видишь, как подробно знаю!  
You see how minutely I know it all!
> Exclamatory «как» + adverb: «Как подробно» ('how minutely') is the exclamatory «как» intensifying the adverb «подробно». The dropped subject (implied 'I') leaves the verb «знаю» to carry person and number by its ending.

На пакете же написано: «Ангелу моему Грушеньке, коли захочет прийти»; сам нацарапал, в тишине и в тайне, и никто-то не знает, что у него деньги лежат, кроме лакея Смердякова, в честность которого он верит, как в себя самого.  
And on the envelope is written: 'To my angel Grushenka, should she care to come'; he scrawled it himself, in silence and in secret, and not a soul knows the money is lying there — no one but the lackey Smerdyakov, in whose honesty he trusts as in his own.
> Topic «-то» on a negative pronoun + concord: «Никто-то» softens and laments ('not a soul, you see'), the clitic «-то» coloring even a negative pronoun, while «не знает» supplies the obligatory verbal negation. «Лежат» ('lie') is the idiomatic verb for money 'sitting' somewhere.
> Relative «которого» in the genitive: «В честность которого» — the relative «которого» is genitive ('in whose honesty'), depending on «честность», which in turn follows «верить в» + accusative. The clause neatly subordinates Smerdyakov's reliability to the noun «лакея».

Вот он уж третий аль четвертый день Грушеньку ждет, надеется, что придет за пакетом, дал он ей знать, а та знать дала, что «может-де и приду».  
And so for the third or fourth day now he's been waiting for Grushenka, hoping she'll come for the envelope — he let her know of it, and she sent back word that 'maybe I'll come, then.'
> Accusative of duration + imperfective present: «Третий… день» in the accusative names the span of time over which «ждёт» ('he's been waiting') extends — Russian uses the imperfective present for an action ongoing from the past into now. «Аль» is the folksy «или» ('or').
> Reportative particle «-де»: «-де» is the hearsay/quotative particle, marking the words as reported from another's mouth ('she said, quote, maybe I'll come'). Like «-мол» and «дескать», it lets Mitya relay Grushenka's message while keeping his distance from it.
> Idiom «дать знать» + contrastive «а» with «тот»: «Дать знать (кому)» means 'to let [someone] know' (dative «ей»). The contrastive «а» pivots to the reply, and «та» ('she, that one') is the demonstrative used anaphorically for the second party — neatly tracking the back-and-forth.

Так ведь если она придет к старику, разве я могу тогда жениться на ней?  
So you see — if she goes to the old man, how can I marry her then?
> «Разве» + «жениться на» + prepositional: «Разве» opens an incredulous rhetorical question expecting 'no' ('how can I possibly…?'). A man marrying is «жениться на ком» — «на» + prepositional «ней» ('marry her'), the mirror of the woman's «выйти замуж за».
> «Старик» — 'the old man': Mitya calls his father «старик» ('the old man'), a blunt, faintly contemptuous tag for Fyodor Pavlovich. The word marks the gulf of feeling between the rival father and son.

Понимаешь теперь, зачем, значит, я здесь на секрете сижу и что именно сторожу?  
Do you understand now why I'm sitting here in hiding, and exactly what it is I'm standing guard over?"
> Embedded questions «зачем» and «что»: Two indirect questions hang from «понимаешь»: «зачем… сижу» ('why I sit') and «что… сторожу' ('what I'm guarding'). Both verbs are imperfective presents of ongoing activity, with «именно» ('exactly') sharpening the second.
> «Сидеть на секрете» — to lie in wait: An informal turn, roughly 'I'm sitting on secret watch / in hiding'. «Сторожу» ('I stand guard, watch') reinforces the image of Mitya as a sentry jealously posted over Grushenka.

— Ее?  
"Over her?"
> One-word accusative question: Alyosha's whole question is the accusative pronoun «её» ('[guarding] her?'), the case carried over from «сторожить кого» in the previous line. Russian's case-marking lets a single word stand as a complete, grammatically anchored reply.

— Ее.  
"Over her.

У этих шлюх, здешних хозяек, нанимает каморку Фома.  
From these sluts, the women who keep the house here, a man named Foma rents a little room.
> «У» + genitive 'from whom' + end-placed subject: «У этих шлюх» here means 'from these women' (renting from them) — «у» + genitive of the source. The subject «Фома» is held to the very end, the new-information slot, so the sentence builds to who the renter is.
> Diminutive «каморка»: «Каморка» is a cramped little room or closet — a diminutive of the old «камора». It conjures the mean, cubby-hole quarters from which Foma (and Mitya) keep their watch.

Фома из наших мест, наш бывший солдат.  
Foma is from our parts, an old soldier of ours.
> Zero-copula identifying sentences: Both clauses lack any verb 'to be': «Фома из наших мест» ('Foma [is] from our parts') and «наш бывший солдат» ('an old soldier of ours') — the present-tense copula is simply absent in Russian, the nominatives standing in apposition.

Он у них прислуживает, ночью сторожит, а днем тетеревей ходит стрелять, да тем и живет.  
He waits on them, stands watch at night, and by day he goes out shooting grouse — and that's how he lives.
> Imperfective present for habit; «ходить» multidirectional: The string of imperfective presents describes Foma's habitual round of life. «Ходит стрелять» uses the multidirectional motion verb «ходить» — repeated, to-and-fro trips ('he goes out [regularly] to shoot') — plus the infinitive of purpose.
> «Тетерев» — black grouse: «Тетеревей» is the genitive/accusative plural of «тетерев», the black grouse hunted in Russian forests. «Да тем и живёт» — 'and that's just how he gets by' — with «да» as a folksy 'and' and instrumental «тем» ('by that').

Я у него тут и засел; ни ему, ни хозяйкам секрет не известен, то есть что я здесь сторожу.  
I've holed up here at his place; neither he nor the landladies know the secret — that is, that I'm keeping watch here.
> «Ни… ни» + dative + negative concord: «Ни ему, ни хозяйкам» pairs two datives ('neither to him nor to the landladies') governed by the short-form predicate «известен» ('[is] known'), with «не» completing the negative concord. The dative marks those to whom the secret is (not) known.
> «Засесть» — to hole up: «Засел» (perfective of «засесть») means to settle in stubbornly, to hole up or lie low somewhere. The prefix «за-» gives the sense of digging in; it paints Mitya as entrenched in his hideout.

— Один Смердяков знает?  
"Smerdyakov alone knows?"
> «Один» as 'only / alone': «Один» here is not the numeral 'one' but the quantifier 'only, alone': 'Does Smerdyakov alone know?'. Agreeing with the noun like an adjective, it isolates Smerdyakov as the sole knower.

— Он один.  
"He alone.
> Verbless answer with «один»: «Он один» ('he alone') answers with no verb and no copula — the bare pronoun plus «один» suffices for 'he's the only one'. The terseness closes the exchange on an ominous note.

Он мне и знать даст, коль та к старику придет.  
He's the one who'll let me know if she goes to the old man."
> «дать знать» — to let know: The idiom «дать знать» couples the perfective «даст» (simple future, 'will give') with the bare infinitive «знать» to mean 'will give notice, will let know'. Here «мне» is the dative of the person informed, and «и» before it is the emphatic particle 'the very one who, even'.
> «коль» — folksy 'if': «коль» is a colloquial, slightly archaic shortening of «если» ('if'), at home in peasant and servant speech. It flags the conditional clause «коль та к старику придёт» and gives the line its homely, unbookish flavour.
> «та» as a standalone demonstrative: «та» is the feminine demonstrative «тот» ('that one, she yonder') used here as a bare pronoun for Grushenka, whom the speakers avoid naming. The far-deixis «тот» (rather than «эта») keeps her at an insinuating distance.

— Это он тебе про пакет сказал?  
"Was it he who told you about the envelope?"
> Fronted «это» for emphasis: The question is built on topic–comment fronting: «Это он…» throws the focus onto «он» ('was it HE'), a cleft-like emphasis that free Russian word order achieves with no extra words. «тебе» is the dative addressee of «сказал».
> «про» + accusative — 'about': «про» plus the accusative «пакет» means 'about, concerning' — colloquially warmer than the neutral «о» plus the prepositional. «пакет» here is the sealed envelope of money, a recurring object of intrigue in the novel.

— Он. Величайший секрет.  
"It was. The greatest of secrets.
> Superlative «-айший»: «величайший» is the bookish superlative of «великий» ('great'), formed with the suffix «-айший» after a velar stem. The heightened, almost solemn form against the curt fragment «Величайший секрет» mimics the conspiratorial weight Mitya gives the matter.

Даже Иван не знает ни о деньгах, ни о чем.  
Even Ivan knows nothing — not about the money, not about anything.
> Negative concord with «ни… ни…»: The paired «ни… ни…» ('neither… nor…') reinforces the verbal negation in «не знает», a textbook case of Russian negative concord: the negatives pile up but cancel to a single 'knows nothing at all'. Each «ни»-phrase keeps the prepositional «о деньгах / о чём» governed by «о».

А старик Ивана в Чермашню посылает на два, на три дня прокатиться: объявился покупщик на рощу срубить ее за восемь тысяч, вот и упрашивает старик Ивана: «помоги, дескать, съезди сам» денька на два, на три, значит.  
And the old man is sending Ivan off to Chermashnya for two or three days to take a look at something: a buyer has turned up for the woodland, to cut it down for eight thousand, and so the old man keeps begging Ivan, 'Help me out, as it were, go yourself' — for a couple of days, three at most.
> Imperfective present for an unfolding plan: «посылает» ('is sending') is imperfective present, framing the scheme as ongoing and not yet accomplished; the dependent perfective infinitive «прокатиться» ('to take a quick trip') names the intended single completed errand. The «про-…-ся» verb adds the breezy nuance 'go for a little jaunt'.
> «покупщик» — old word for 'buyer': «покупщик» is a dated, merchant-class term for a purchaser, where modern Russian says «покупатель». It belongs to the world of timber deals and provincial trade and dates the speech to the 1860s–70s.
> «роща» — the woodland to be felled: «роща» is a grove or stand of trees; «срубить её за восемь тысяч» means to cut it down (for timber) for eight thousand roubles. The bargain over the «роща» is the pretext that gets Ivan out of the house.
> «дескать» — reportative 'as it were': «дескать» is a quotative particle that flags reported, second-hand speech with a touch of irony or distance — roughly 'so he says, supposedly'. Mitya drops it into his mimicry of his father's wheedling ('помоги, дескать') to mark the words as the old man's, not his own.
> Diminutive «денёк» softening the time: «денёк» is the affectionate diminutive of «день» ('day'); «денька на два, на три» ('for a wee couple of days') makes the trip sound trivial and brief. The suffix carries the coaxing, minimising tone of Fyodor's plea.

Это он хочет, чтобы Грушенька без него пришла.  
What he wants is for Grushenka to come while he's away from him."
> «чтобы» + past form for a willed outcome: A verb of wanting takes «чтобы» plus a past-tense verb («пришла») when the subjects differ — 'he wants that Grushenka [should] come'. The «чтобы»-clause with the irrealis past is Russia's standard way of expressing a desired-but-not-yet-real event.
> «без» + genitive with prefixed «н-»: «без» ('without') governs the genitive, here the third-person pronoun «него» — note the prosthetic «н-» that all third-person pronouns take after a preposition («без него», 'in his absence').

— Стало быть, он и сегодня ждет Грушеньку?  
"So he's expecting Grushenka today as well?"
> «стало быть» — 'so, therefore': «стало быть» is a fixed inferential phrase (literally 'it has become to be') meaning 'so, then, that means' — a slightly homely equivalent of «значит» or «следовательно». It marks Alyosha drawing a conclusion from what he has just heard.

— Нет, сегодня она не придет, есть приметы.  
"No, she won't come today — there are signs.
> Perfective future under negation: «придёт» is the simple (perfective) future of «прийти» — a single anticipated arrival — here negated: 'she will not come (today)'. The perfective insists on the whole event being ruled out, not merely the process of coming.
> «приметы» — omens, signs: «приметы» are folk signs or omens read from everyday events. The flat «есть приметы» ('there are signs') invokes a whole world of popular superstition that hovers behind the Karamazovs' fatalism.

Наверно не придет! — крикнул вдруг Митя.  
She certainly won't come!" Mitya suddenly cried out.
> Perfective «крикнул» for a sudden cry: «крикнул» is the perfective past of «кричать», naming a single sharp outburst against the imperfective's ongoing 'was shouting'; «вдруг» ('suddenly') reinforces the punctual reading. The verb-before-subject order («крикнул… Митя») is the usual frame for a reported speech tag.

— Так и Смердяков полагает.  
"And Smerdyakov reckons so too.
> «полагать» — to reckon, suppose: «полагать» is a somewhat formal verb for 'to think, suppose, be of the opinion', a notch more deliberate than «думать». «Так и Смердяков полагает» — 'Smerdyakov reckons so too' — lends his guess a mock-judicious weight.

Отец теперь пьянствует, сидит за столом с братом Иваном.  
Father is drinking now, sitting at the table with brother Ivan.
> «пьянствовать» — to be on a drinking bout: «пьянствовать» means not just 'to drink' but to carouse, to be given over to drunkenness as an activity — heavier and more disreputable than «пить». The imperfective present paints Fyodor mid-binge.
> «за» + instrumental — seated at: «за столом» uses «за» with the instrumental to mean 'at (the table)', the locational sense of being seated at or busy over something; the same «за» with the accusative would mean motion behind it. «сидит» is durative imperfective — Fyodor is settled there.

Сходи, Алексей, спроси у него эти три тысячи…  
Go, Alexei, ask him for that three thousand…"
> Perfective imperatives for a single errand: «сходи» and «спроси» are perfective imperatives: «сходи» ('go [there and back]') is the round-trip prefixed motion verb «сходить», «спроси» ('ask') the perfective of «спрашивать». The perfective commands a single, completed action — go once, ask once.
> «спросить у» + genitive: To ask someone FOR something, Russian uses «спросить у кого-то» — «у» plus the genitive «него» marks the person you ask. «эти три тысячи» is the thing requested (genitive singular «тысячи» after «три»).

— Митя, милый, что с тобой! — воскликнул Алеша, вскакивая с места и всматриваясь в исступленного Дмитрия Федоровича.  
"Mitya, dear, what's the matter with you!" Alyosha exclaimed, springing up from his place and peering at the frenzied Dmitri Fyodorovich.
> Paired present gerunds («деепричастия»): «вскакивая» and «всматриваясь» are imperfective present gerunds ('springing up… peering'), naming actions simultaneous with the main verb «воскликнул» and sharing its subject, Alyosha. This chained-gerund construction packs three near-simultaneous movements into one literary sentence.
> «исступлённый» — frenzied, beside oneself: «исступлённый» describes someone in a state of frenzy or ecstatic distraction, 'beside himself'. Applied to «исступлённого Дмитрия Фёдоровича», it is a key Dostoevskian word for the soul pushed past its own limits.

Одно мгновение он думал, что тот помешался.  
For an instant he thought his brother had lost his mind.
> «тот» tracking the other party: «тот» ('that one, the other') here points to Mitya, distinguishing him from the clause's own subject, Alyosha ('he thought that the other had gone mad'). Russian uses «тот» precisely to keep two third persons apart where English would risk an ambiguous 'he'.
> «помешаться» — to go mad: «помешаться» (reflexive «-ся») means 'to lose one's mind, go out of one's wits'. The perfective marks the completed onset of madness — 'had gone mad' — which Alyosha fears has just happened to his brother.

— Что ты? Я не помешан в уме, — пристально и даже как-то торжественно смотря, произнес Дмитрий Федорович.  
"What's the matter with you? I haven't gone out of my mind," said Dmitri Fyodorovich, looking at him intently and even somehow solemnly.
> Short passive participle «помешан»: «помешан» is the short (predicative) form of the past passive participle of «помешать(ся)», used here as a predicate adjective: 'I am not deranged'. The set phrase «помешан в уме» ('disturbed in mind') uses «в уме» as the prepositional of respect — mad in which faculty.
> Gerund «смотря» — 'looking': «смотря» is the imperfective present gerund of «смотреть» ('looking, gazing'), describing the manner attending «произнёс» ('he uttered'). The adverbs «пристально» ('intently') and «торжественно» ('solemnly') modify this gaze, lending his denial an unsettling gravity.

— Небось я тебя посылаю к отцу и знаю, что говорю: я чуду верю.  
"Never fear — I'm sending you to Father and I know what I'm saying: I believe in a miracle."
> «небось» — 'never fear, I daresay': «небось» is a folk particle, originally «не бойся» ('don't be afraid'), now meaning 'I daresay, surely, never fear'. It opens Mitya's reassurance with a colloquial, almost peasant confidence.
> «верить» + dative — to believe IN: «верить» takes the dative of what one trusts in: «чуду» is the dative of «чудо» ('miracle'), so «чуду верю» means 'I believe in a miracle'. Note the marked word order, object before verb, throwing weight onto «чуду».

— Чуду?  
"In a miracle?"
> Dative echo as a question: Alyosha echoes back just the dative «Чуду?» ('in a miracle?'), the case Mitya's «верить» demanded. A single inflected word, lifted out and re-intoned, carries the whole incredulous question — a compression Russian's case system makes possible.

— Чуду промысла божьего.  
"In a miracle of God's providence.
> Stacked genitive of 'of': «промысла божьего» is genitive ('of [God's] providence') modifying the dative «чуду» — 'in a miracle of divine providence'. «божьего» is the possessive adjective from «Бог», agreeing with «промысла» in the genitive.

Богу известно мое сердце, он видит всё мое отчаяние.  
God knows my heart, He sees the whole of my despair.
> Dative experiencer with «известно»: «Богу известно» is an impersonal predicate: the dative «Богу» ('to God') is the one to whom something is known, and «известно» ('it is known') is the invariable short-form predicate. The thing known, «моё сердце», stands as the grammatical subject in the nominative.

Он всю эту картину видит.  
He sees this entire picture.
> Accusative object «всю эту картину»: «всю эту картину» is the feminine accusative direct object of «видит» — determiner «всю» ('the whole'), demonstrative «эту» ('this'), and noun «картину» all agree in the accusative singular. The fronting of the object before the verb gives the line a hammering, insistent rhythm across this and the next sentences.

Неужели он попустит совершиться ужасу?  
Can He really allow the horror to come to pass?
> «неужели» — incredulous 'can it really be?': «неужели» opens a rhetorical question charged with disbelief or dread — 'surely not?', 'can it really be that…?'. It is one of the great Dostoevskian particles of agonised doubt, here directed at God Himself.
> Dative subject of the infinitive: «попустит совершиться ужасу» means 'will allow the horror to come to pass': «попустит» (perfective future) governs the infinitive «совершиться», whose logical subject «ужасу» stands in the dative. This dative-with-infinitive after verbs of permitting is a fine point of high style.
> «попустить» — to permit (suffer to happen): «попустить» is a bookish, often religious verb for 'to allow, suffer (something evil) to happen' — distinct from neutral «позволить». It carries the theological idea of God permitting evil, sharpening Mitya's near-blasphemous plea.

Алеша, я чуду верю, иди!  
Alyosha, I believe in a miracle — go!"
> Imperative «иди!»: «иди!» is the imperative of the unidirectional motion verb «идти» ('go!'), commanding a single setting-out. Its bare, exclamatory force closes Mitya's appeal — half command, half prayer.

— Я пойду. Скажи, ты здесь будешь ждать?  
"I'll go. Tell me, will you wait here?"
> Compound (imperfective) future: «будешь ждать» is the analytic imperfective future — conjugated «быть» plus the imperfective infinitive «ждать» — naming an ongoing, durative future state ('will you be waiting'). The imperfective fits 'waiting', an open-ended process, where a perfective would force a completed end-point.

— Буду, понимаю, что нескоро, что нельзя этак прийти и прямо бух!  
"I will — I understand it won't be quick, that you can't just walk in and blurt it straight out!
> Impersonal «нельзя» + infinitive: «нельзя… прийти» is an impersonal modal construction: the invariable «нельзя» ('one cannot, it is impossible') plus the perfective infinitive «прийти» — 'one can't just walk in'. No nominative subject appears; the prohibition stands impersonally.
> «этак» and «бух!» — colloquial dash: «этак» is a folksy variant of «так» ('like that, in this fashion'), and «бух!» is an onomatopoeic interjection for a sudden thud or blurt — 'and straight out with it, plonk!'. Together they give Mitya's speech its blunt, gestural energy.

Он теперь пьян.  
He's drunk now.
> Short adjective «пьян»: «пьян» is the short (predicative) form of «пьяный» ('drunk'), used here as a predicate of temporary state: 'he is drunk (right now)'. The short form, paired with «теперь» ('now'), stresses the momentary condition rather than a permanent trait.

Буду ждать и три часа, и четыре, и пять, и шесть, и семь, но только знай, что сегодня, хотя бы даже в полночь, ты явишься к Катерине Ивановне, с деньгами или без денег, и скажешь: «Велел вам кланяться».  
I'll wait three hours, and four, and five, and six, and seven — but only know this: that today, even if it's at midnight, you'll present yourself to Katerina Ivanovna, with money or without, and you'll say: 'He told me to give you his regards.'
> Numerals governing «час»: After «три» and «четыре» the noun takes the genitive singular «часа»; from «пять» up it would be the genitive plural «часов». The hammering list «и три, и четыре, и пять…» (each «и» = 'even') dramatises Mitya's vow to wait however long it takes.
> Concessive «хотя бы» with «бы»: «хотя бы» ('even if, if only') is a concessive built on the irrealis particle «бы», here intensified by «даже» — 'even if it should be at midnight'. The phrase concedes the most extreme case to bind the promise more tightly.
> Perfective futures as an injunction: «явишься» and «скажешь» are perfective futures ('you will present yourself… and you will say') used with imperative force — a solemn 'you shall'. Russian often issues binding instructions through the future indicative rather than the imperative for extra gravity.

Я именно хочу, чтобы ты этот стих сказал: «Велел, дескать, кланяться».  
I want you to say exactly that line: 'He told me, as it were, to give you his regards.'"
> «чтобы» + past for indirect command: Again a verb of wishing governs «чтобы» plus a past-form verb («сказал») when the subjects differ — 'I want you to say'. The «чтобы»-clause with the irrealis past is the standard Russian frame for an indirect command or wished-for act.
> «стих» as 'line, verse': «стих» normally means a verse or line of poetry; calling the little message «этот стих» ('this verse/line') half-jokingly elevates the formula «велел кланяться» to something solemn and rehearsed, almost liturgical — typical of Mitya's theatrical self-dramatising.

— Митя! А вдруг Грушенька придет сегодня… не сегодня, так завтра аль послезавтра?  
"Mitya! But what if Grushenka comes today… not today, then tomorrow, or the day after?"
> «а вдруг» — 'but what if': «а вдруг» introduces a sudden anxious hypothesis — 'but what if (suddenly)…'. It is the very voice of nervous contingency, opening Alyosha's worried 'what if Grushenka comes after all'.
> «аль» — folk 'or': «аль» is a colloquial, dialectal variant of «или» / «либо» ('or'), at home in peasant speech and folk song. In «завтра аль послезавтра» ('tomorrow or the day after') it colours Alyosha's question with a homely, oral cadence.

— Грушенька? Подсмотрю, ворвусь и помешаю..  
"Grushenka? I'll spy her out, burst in, and stop it.."
> Chain of perfective futures: Three perfective futures fire off in sequence — «подсмотрю» ('I'll spy out'), «ворвусь» ('I'll burst in'), «помешаю» ('I'll prevent it') — each a single completed act. The asyndetic rush of perfectives stages Mitya's plan as a burst of decisive, violent motions.

— А если…  
"And if…"
> The contrastive «а» plus a broken-off «если»: «а» is the mild contrastive conjunction ('and yet, but'), here launching a question Alyosha cannot finish — «А если…» ('And if…'). The dangling «если» ('if') leaves the dreadful condition unspoken, a hesitation the next line will brutally complete.

— А коль если, так убью. Так не переживу.  
"And if there's an 'if,' then I'll kill. I couldn't live through that."
> Folk conditional «коль… так…»: Mitya catches up Alyosha's «если» and answers with the colloquial conditional frame «коль (если)… так…» ('if there's an "if", then…'). «коль» is the folksy 'if' and the resumptive «так» ('then') heads the apodosis; «убью» is the bare perfective future, 'I'll kill'.
> «переживу» — negated perfective future: «не переживу» is the perfective future of «пережить» under negation — 'I won't survive it, I couldn't live through it'. The perfective rules out the whole act of surviving, framing his own destruction as the certain sequel.

— Кого убьешь?  
"Kill whom?"
> Animate accusative «кого»: «кого» is the accusative/genitive form of the interrogative «кто», used because the question asks about a person (animate) — 'whom will you kill?'. «убьёшь» is the perfective future of «убить» ('you will kill').

— Старика. Ее не убью.  
"The old man. Her I won't kill."
> Animate accusative and fronted object: «Старика» is the animate accusative (= genitive form) of «старик», the bare answer 'the old man'. In «Её не убью» the object «её» ('her') is fronted before the negated verb for sharp contrast — 'HER I will not kill', setting Grushenka against the father.

— Брат, что ты говоришь!  
"Brother, what are you saying!"

— Я ведь не знаю, не знаю… Может быть, не убью, а может, убью.  
"I don't know, I really don't… Maybe I won't kill him, and maybe I will.
> The particle «ведь»: «ведь» appeals to shared knowledge and softens the admission — 'you see, after all, I don't know'. It carries no lexical content; it tints the confession with helpless candour, a quintessentially Dostoevskian use of the modal particle.
> Contrastive «а» weighing both outcomes: «не убью, а может, убью» pivots on the contrastive «а» ('and yet') to set the two possibilities against each other — 'maybe I won't, but maybe I will'. The repeated perfective future «убью» holds the murder suspended as an open, equally weighted choice.

Боюсь, что ненавистен он вдруг мне станет своим лицом в ту самую минуту.  
I'm afraid that at that very minute his face will suddenly become hateful to me.
> Short adjective predicate with «стать»: «ненавистен» is the short masculine form of «ненавистный» ('hateful'), serving as the predicate complement of «станет» ('will become') — 'he will become hateful to me'. The short adjective as predicate after «стать» is the bookish, charged norm here; «мне» is the dative of the person to whom he grows hateful.
> Reflexive «свой» + instrumental of cause: «своим лицом» — 'by his (own) face' — uses the reflexive possessive «свой», pointing the face back to its owner (the father), in the instrumental of means/cause. The instrumental answers 'hateful by what?' — it is his very face that will provoke the loathing.

Ненавижу я его кадык, его нос, его глаза, его бесстыжую насмешку.  
I hate his Adam's apple, his nose, his eyes, his shameless sneer.
> Accusative objects in anaphoric list: «Ненавижу» ('I hate') governs a string of accusative objects, each preceded by the invariable possessive «его» ('his'). The drumbeat repetition of «его… его… его…» — itemising the father's body part by part — turns abstract hatred into visceral, physical disgust.
> «кадык» and «бесстыжий» — vivid contempt: «кадык» is the Adam's apple — a deliberately ugly, bodily detail; «бесстыжая насмешка» is a 'shameless sneer', «бесстыжий» being a coarse, expressive adjective for brazen shamelessness. The lexis itself drips with Mitya's revulsion.

Личное омерзение чувствую.  
I feel a personal loathing.
> Object-first word order: The object phrase «личное омерзение» ('personal loathing') stands before the verb «чувствую» ('I feel'), the topic–comment ordering that throws the new, stressed information — the loathing — to the front. The dropped subject «я» is recoverable from the verb ending.
> «омерзение» — physical loathing: «омерзение» is visceral disgust or loathing, stronger and more bodily than «отвращение». 'Personal loathing' («личное омерзение») names exactly the gut-level, face-to-face revulsion Mitya dreads will overpower him.

Вот этого боюсь.  
That's what I'm afraid of.
> Genitive after «бояться»: «бояться» ('to fear') is a reflexive «-ся» verb that governs the genitive of what is feared: «этого» is the genitive of «это» — 'it is THIS that I fear'. The deictic «вот» plus fronted «этого» drives the focus onto the dreaded thing.

Вот и не удержусь…  
That I won't be able to hold myself back…"
> Reflexive «удержаться» — to restrain oneself: «не удержусь» is the perfective future of the reflexive «удержаться» ('to hold oneself back, restrain oneself') — 'I won't be able to restrain myself'. The «-ся» turns the action inward onto the agent, and the perfective future names the feared, decisive failure of self-control.

— Я пойду, Митя. Я верю, что бог устроит, как знает лучше, чтобы не было ужаса.  
"I'll go, Mitya. I believe that God will arrange it as He knows best, so that no horror comes to pass."
> Perfective future + comparative «лучше»: «устроит» is the perfective future ('will arrange') of «устроить»; «как знает лучше» ('as He knows best') uses the suppletive comparative «лучше» (from «хороший»). Alyosha's faith is voiced as a confident completed act of divine ordering.
> «чтобы не было» + genitive of negation: The purpose clause «чтобы не было ужаса» ('so that no horror might be') joins «чтобы» with the past-form «было»; under the negated existential «не было», the subject «ужаса» stands in the genitive of negation. 'So that there be no horror' — a textbook нет/не было construction.

— А я буду сидеть и чуда ждать. Но если не свершится, то…  
"And I'll sit and wait for the miracle. But if it doesn't come to pass, then…"
> Compound future + genitive object of «ждать»: «буду сидеть… ждать» is the imperfective compound future (durative 'I'll be sitting and waiting'). «ждать» here governs the genitive «чуда» ('to wait FOR a miracle'), the case it takes with abstract or uncertain objects — fittingly, an awaited miracle is the very type of the unsure.
> Conditional with a suppressed apodosis: «если не свершится, то…» ('but if it doesn't come to pass, then…') sets up a full conditional — «если» protasis, resumptive «то» heading the apodosis — but breaks off before the consequence. «свершится» is the perfective future of the bookish «свершиться» ('to be accomplished'); the unspoken 'then…' hangs with menace.

Алеша, задумчивый, направился к отцу.  
Alyosha, deep in thought, set off toward his father.
> Prefixed reflexive motion + «к» + dative: «направился» is the perfective past of the reflexive «направиться» ('to set off, head toward'); «к отцу» uses «к» plus the dative «отцу» to mark the goal of motion ('toward his father'). Together they fix the single, completed setting-out.
> «задумчивый» — lost in thought: «задумчивый» ('pensive, lost in thought') is set off by commas as a depictive of Alyosha's state as he leaves. The single adjective quietly carries the weight of all he has just heard — his brother's threat to commit parricide.
---

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.