# The Brothers Karamazov, Smerdyakov

Братья Карамазовы · Fyodor Dostoevsky · Book III — The Sensualists

Source: https://1732studios.com/books/karamazov/b3-c6. Data: https://1732studios.com/books/karamazov/b3-c6.json.


Он и вправду застал еще отца за столом.  
He did indeed still find his father at the table.
> Perfective «застать»: to catch in a state: «застал» is the perfective past of «застать» — to find someone in a particular situation, to catch them at it. The perfective frames it as a single completed discovery: Alyosha arrived and, sure enough, caught his father still at table. The English "did find" mirrors the emphatic «и вправду».
> «за» + instrumental: at an activity: «за столом» ("at the table") uses «за» with the instrumental to express being engaged at something — за столом, за работой, за обедом. The instrumental marks the location/activity one is occupied with, distinct from «за» + accusative for motion behind something.
> «вправду» — indeed, truly: An emphatic adverb, "truly, for real," fused from «в правду». «И вправду» = "sure enough, indeed," confirming an expectation. Warmer and more colloquial than «действительно».

Стол же был, по всегдашнему обыкновению, накрыт в зале, хотя в доме находилась и настоящая столовая.  
The table was laid, by long-standing custom, in the drawing room, even though the house had a proper dining room as well.
> The particle «же» resuming the topic: Here «же» is not contrastive but resumptive-emphatic: it picks the table back up as the topic just named and adds a slightly explanatory weight, "now the table was…" It is one of Dostoevsky's favourite connective particles, threading narration along.
> Short passive participle «накрыт»: «накрыт» is the short-form past passive participle of «накрыть» (to lay/set a table), here joined to «был» to state a result: "the table was laid." The short form predicates and inflects only for gender/number (накрыт, накрыта, накрыто).
> «по всегдашнему обыкновению» — by long-standing custom: A bookish set phrase, "according to the ever-present habit." «всегдашний» ("perpetual, habitual") is a slightly archaic adjective from «всегда», and «обыкновение» is the elevated word for custom. The whole has a period flavour.
> Concessive «хотя» and the particle «и»: «хотя» ("although") opens a concessive subordinate clause set off by a comma. The «и» before «настоящая столовая» is the emphatic/additive particle "even" — "even though the house did have a real dining room."

Эта зала была самая большая в доме комната, с какою-то старинною претензией меблированная.  
This drawing room was the largest room in the house, furnished with a certain old-fashioned pretension.
> Superlative with «самый»: «самая большая» is the ordinary periphrastic superlative: «самый» agrees with the adjective and noun in gender, number, and case (самая большая комната). Note the interlocking word order — «в доме» ("in the house") is tucked inside the superlative phrase, a literary squeeze.
> Archaic instrumental ending «-ою»: «какою-то старинною» shows the old, bookish feminine instrumental ending «-ою/-ею» (modern «-ой/-ей»): «с претензией … старинною». Dostoevsky uses these full forms freely for their literary weight; read them as ordinary feminine instrumentals.
> Past passive participle as modifier: «меблированная» ("furnished") is a long-form past passive participle from «меблировать», placed after its noun and trailing its own phrase «с какою-то старинною претензией». It condenses a whole который-clause ("which was furnished with…") into one inflected word.
> «претензия» — pretension, affected claim: Here not "a complaint" but "pretension, pretentiousness": the room is furnished with «старинною претензией», an old-fashioned reaching after grandeur. A faintly ironic word in the narrator's mouth.

Мебель была древнейшая, белая, с красною ветхою полушелковою обивкой.  
The furniture was extremely ancient, white, upholstered in a worn, reddish, half-silk fabric.
> Bookish superlative suffix «-ейш-»: «древнейшая» is the synthetic superlative/elative of «древний» (ancient), formed with «-ейш-» plus adjective endings: "most ancient" or simply "extremely ancient." This suffixed superlative is markedly literary beside the everyday «самый древний».
> A chain of instrumental modifiers: Three adjectives all agree with «обивкой» in feminine instrumental: «красною ветхою полушелковою» again show the old «-ою» ending. «С» + instrumental here means "with, having" — the furniture "with a … upholstery."
> «ветхий» and «полушелковый»: «ветхий» = decrepit, worn-out with age (the same word as in «Ветхий Завет», the Old Testament). «полушелковый» = "half-silk," a cheaper silk-cotton blend — a precise, deflating detail about Fyodor Pavlovitch's shabby-genteel furnishings.

В простенках между окон вставлены были зеркала в вычурных рамах старинной резьбы, тоже белых с золотом.  
In the wall spaces between the windows hung mirrors in elaborate frames of old-fashioned carving, likewise white with gilding.
> Passive participle + inverted word order: «вставлены были» is a short past passive participle («вставлены», plural) with «были» — "mirrors had been set in." The participle stands first for rhetorical weight, and the subject «зеркала» comes after the verb, a literary inversion typical of descriptive passages.
> «между» + genitive plural: «между окон» uses «между» with the genitive plural «окон» (from «окно»), an older government meaning "between the windows"; modern usage prefers «между окнами» (instrumental). The genitive here is slightly archaic and bookish.
> «простенок» — pier, wall between windows: «простенок» is the narrow stretch of wall between two windows or openings (from «про-» + «стена»). A precise architectural term; we render it "the wall spaces between the windows."
> «вычурный» and «резьба»: «вычурный» = over-elaborate, fancy, ornate (often with a hint of bad taste). «резьба» = carving (here of the frames). «старинной резьбы» is a genitive of quality: "frames of old-fashioned carving."

На стенах, обитых белыми бумажными и во многих местах уже треснувшими обоями, красовались два большие портрета — одного какого-то князя, лет тридцать назад бывшего генерал-губернатором местного края, и какого-то архиерея, давно уже тоже почившего.  
On the walls, papered in white paper already cracked in many places, two large portraits were displayed in places of honor — one of some prince who had been governor-general of the local region thirty years before, and one of some bishop, long since dead as well.
> Layered participles on «стены»: Two participles modify the walls: «обитых» (past passive, "covered/papered") and «треснувшими» (past active of «треснуть», "having cracked"), each agreeing with its noun. Stacking a passive and an active participle in one phrase is a hallmark of Dostoevsky's dense descriptive syntax.
> Past active participle + predicate instrumental: «бывшего» is the past active participle of «быть» ("who had been"), agreeing with «князя» in masculine genitive. Its predicate complement «генерал-губернатором» stands in the instrumental — the standard case for what one "was" in the past with «быть».
> Dismissive «какой-то» twice over: «какой-то» ("some… or other") marks a specific but unidentified, and here faintly dismissive, referent — "some prince," "some bishop." Repeated, it lends the narrator's catalogue of forgotten dignitaries an ironic, throwaway tone.
> «красоваться» — to be displayed in splendour: «красовались» (imperfective «красоваться», from «красивый») means to show oneself off, to be conspicuously on display. Of the two grand portraits it carries a touch of irony — they "flaunted themselves" on the cracked wallpaper.

В переднем углу помещалось несколько икон, пред которыми на ночь зажигалась лампадка… не столько из благоговения, сколько для того, чтобы комната на ночь была освещена.  
In the corner of honor stood several icons, before which a small oil lamp was lit at night… not so much out of reverence as so that the room would have some light through the night.
> Reflexive «-ся» as passive: «зажигалась» (imperfective «зажигаться») uses the reflexive «-ся» to form a passive/impersonal: the lamp "was lit" (got lit) each night, by no named agent. The imperfective marks it as a recurring nightly habit.
> «не столько… сколько» — not so much as: A correlative construction: «не столько X, сколько Y» = "not so much X as Y." It pairs with «для того, чтобы» ("in order that"), whose «чтобы» triggers the irrealis past «была освещена». The whole frames the narrator's deflating point about motive.
> «лампадка» — the icon-lamp: A «лампадка» (diminutive of «лампада») is the small oil lamp hung or set before icons in the corner of honor. The «-ка» suffix is both descriptive (it is small) and affectionate-domestic.

Федор Павлович ложился по ночам очень поздно, часа в три, в четыре утра, а до тех пор всё, бывало, ходит по комнате или сидит в креслах и думает.  
Fyodor Pavlovitch went to bed very late at night, around three or four in the morning, and until then he would keep walking about the room or sit in his armchair and think.
> «бывало» for habitual past: The little word «бывало» (literally "it used to happen") is dropped into a sentence to mark a repeated or customary action in the past, like English "would" or "used to." Here «всё, бывало, ходит» means "he would keep pacing." Note the present-tense verb «ходит» after «бывало» — the present form vividly stands in for repeated past action.
> Multidirectional «ходить» for pacing: «ходить» (not «идти») is the multidirectional motion verb — going this way and that, to and fro — exactly right for aimless pacing «по комнате» ("about the room," «по» + dative). Choosing «ходит» over «идёт» is what makes the picture one of restless wandering.
> «часа в три» — approximate time by inversion: Putting «в» after the noun («часа в три» instead of «в три часа») signals approximation: "around three o'clock." This number-after-preposition inversion is the standard colloquial way to say "about / roughly."

Такую привычку сделал.  
He had made it a habit.
> Object-first word order: The object «такую привычку» (accusative, "such a habit") stands before the verb «сделал», and the subject is dropped entirely. Fronting the object throws the weight onto "such a habit," and the clipped, subjectless sentence reads as the narrator's folksy aside.

Ночевал он нередко совсем один в доме, отсылая слуг во флигель, но большею частью с ним оставался по ночам слуга Смердяков, спавший в передней на залавке.  
He often spent the night entirely alone in the house, sending the servants off to the lodge, but for the most part the servant Smerdyakov stayed with him through the night, sleeping in the front hall on a bench-chest.
> Imperfective gerund «отсылая»: «отсылая» is the present (imperfective) gerund of «отсылать» — "sending [the servants] away," an attendant action simultaneous with «ночевал». «Слуг» is animate accusative = genitive plural form. The gerund must share the main subject (Fyodor Pavlovitch).
> Past active participle «спавший»: «спавший» (past active participle of «спать») modifies Smerdyakov: "[who was] sleeping in the front hall." Built on an imperfective stem, it gives an ongoing past sense, neatly replacing a который-clause and closing the sentence on the sleeping servant.
> «флигель» — outbuilding, wing: A «флигель» (from German Flügel) is a detached annex or service wing on a country estate, where servants or dependants were lodged. Sending the servants «во флигель» means packing them off to these separate quarters for the night.
> «залавок» — a bench-chest: A «залавок» is a long wooden bench with a hinged lid and storage box underneath, set in the entrance hall — a poor man's sleeping place. The detail fixes Smerdyakov's lowly station: he sleeps «в передней» (the front hall) on a chest.

Когда вошел Алеша, весь обед был уже покончен, но подано было варенье и кофе.  
When Alyosha came in, the whole dinner was already over, but preserves and coffee had been served.
> Short passive participle «покончен»: «покончен» is the short past passive participle of «покончить» (to finish off, be done with), with «был» giving a completed result: "the whole dinner was already over." The perfective stem underlines that it is fully finished.
> Impersonal passive «подано было»: «подано было» — neuter singular short passive participle of «подать» with «было» — is an agentless serving: "preserves and coffee had been served." The neuter participle stays singular even before a compound subject, and the inversion (participle first) is literary.

Федор Павлович любил после обеда сладости с коньячком.  
Fyodor Pavlovitch was fond of sweets with a little brandy after dinner.
> Affectionate diminutive «коньячок»: «коньячком» is the instrumental of «коньячок», a cozy diminutive of «коньяк» (brandy/cognac). The «-ок» suffix conveys not size but indulgent fondness — "a nice little brandy," perfectly fitting Fyodor Pavlovitch's self-pampering habits. «С коньячком» = "with a drop of brandy."

Иван Федорович находился тут же за столом и тоже кушал кофе.  
Ivan Fyodorovitch was sitting right there at the table, also drinking coffee.
> «кушать» — to eat/take, a genteel verb: «кушать» is a politer, softer verb than «есть/пить», used invitingly or of others' eating; here «кушал кофе» ("was taking coffee") sounds slightly mannered and old-fashioned. Note that «кофе» is masculine and indeclinable, a foreign loanword.
> «тут же» — right there: «тут же» pairs the locative «тут» (here) with emphatic «же»: "right here, right there." «Находился» (imperfective «находиться», reflexive) is the neutral verb for being situated/located. Together: "was sitting right there at the table."

Слуги Григорий и Смердяков стояли у стола.  
The servants Grigory and Smerdyakov stood by the table.
> «у» + genitive: alongside the table: «у стола» ("by the table") uses «у» with the genitive «стола» to mark close proximity — beside, next to. That the servants «стояли» (stood) while the masters sit quietly encodes the household's hierarchy.

И господа, и слуги были в видимом и необыкновенно веселом одушевлении.  
Masters and servants alike were in a visible and uncommonly merry animation.
> Correlative «и… и…» — both… and…: Repeated «и… и…» means "both… and…," coordinating «господа» and «слуги» as joint subjects: masters and servants alike. The construction levels the two groups for a moment — fitting, since both share the «веселом одушевлении».
> «в» + prepositional for a state: «в… одушевлении» ("in animation") uses «в» with the prepositional to name the state they were in; both adjectives «видимом» and «веселом» agree in neuter prepositional. «Господа» (masters) is an irregular plural of «господин».
> «одушевление» — animation, high spirits: A bookish abstract noun in «-ение» (from «одушевить», to animate/enliven, lit. "to en-soul"): excited liveliness, elevated mood. The «-ение/-ие» nominalization is a literary register marker.

Федор Павлович громко хохотал и смеялся; Алеша еще из сеней услышал его визгливый, столь знакомый ему прежде смех и тотчас же заключил, по звукам смеха, что отец еще далеко не пьян, а пока лишь всего благодушествует.  
Fyodor Pavlovitch was laughing loudly and roaring with mirth; from the entryway Alyosha already caught his shrill laugh, so familiar to him from before, and at once concluded, from the sound of it, that his father was still far from drunk and only for now in a genial mood.
> Perfective chain moving the action: Two perfectives, «услышал» (heard) and «заключил» (concluded), each name a single completed step and carry the narrative forward event by event — Alyosha heard, then at once inferred. This is the perfective's storytelling job against the imperfective background of the description before.
> Dative «ему» of the experiencer + archaic «столь»: «знакомый ему» — "familiar to him" — takes the dative «ему» for the person to whom it is familiar. «столь» is the bookish equivalent of «так/настолько» ("so"), and «прежде» means "formerly," giving the elevated "so familiar to him from before."
> «далеко не» and contrastive «а»: «далеко не» = "far from" (emphatic negation): far from drunk. The contrastive «а» then pivots to the positive state — "but only, for now, in a genial mood." «Пьян» is a short-form adjective (predicate only), typical of stating a temporary condition.
> «благодушествовать» — to be in a placid good humour: A rare, slightly comic bookish verb from «благодушие» (good-naturedness, благо- "good" + душа "soul"): to bask in mellow contentment. The lofty Church-Slavonic-flavoured compound is wryly applied to a tipsy buffoon.
> «визгливый» — shrill, squealing: «визгливый» (from «визг», a shriek/squeal) describes a high, grating, squealy laugh. It characterizes Fyodor Pavlovitch's laughter as unpleasant and over-pitched, something Alyosha recognizes instantly.

— Вот и он, вот и он! — завопил Федор Павлович, вдруг страшно обрадовавшись Алеше.  
"There he is, there he is!" cried Fyodor Pavlovitch, suddenly tremendously delighted at Alyosha.
> Perfective gerund «обрадовавшись» + dative: «обрадовавшись» is the past (perfective) gerund of «обрадоваться» — "having suddenly become delighted" — expressing the circumstance accompanying «завопил». The verb «обрадоваться» governs the dative, hence «Алеше»: delighted at Alyosha.
> «завопить» — to start bawling/yelling: «завопил» — perfective of «вопить» with the ingressive prefix «за-» ("to start doing") — means he burst out yelling/howling. The prefix «за-» on such verbs marks the sudden onset of the action, vivid for Fyodor Pavlovitch's eruption.
> «страшно» as an intensifier: Literally "frightfully," «страшно» here is a colloquial intensifier meaning "terribly, awfully" — "awfully delighted." Such desemanticized adverbs (страшно, ужасно) are common in Dostoevsky's excitable speech.

— Присоединяйся к нам, садись, кофейку — постный ведь, постный, да горячий, да славный!  
"Join us, sit down, have some coffee — it's a Lenten dish, you know, Lenten, but hot, and splendid!
> Imperatives «присоединяйся, садись»: Two familiar (ты) imperatives: «присоединяйся» ("join," reflexive «-ся») and «садись» ("sit down," also reflexive). The «-й» forms come from vowel-final stems. The reflexive imperatives are the normal way to say "join us / take a seat."
> Partitive diminutive «кофейку»: «кофейку» is a partitive-genitive diminutive of «кофе»: "some coffee, a little coffee." The affectionate «-ку» ending plus partitive sense ("have some") is exactly the warm, coaxing register of a host pressing a drink on a guest.
> The particle «ведь»: «ведь» appeals to shared knowledge — "after all, you know, it is Lenten." Fyodor Pavlovitch uses it to nudge Alyosha into agreement, half-mockingly. The repetition «постный … постный» is his insistent, teasing rhythm.

Коньячку не приглашаю, ты постник, а хочешь, хочешь?  
Brandy I won't offer you, you're a faster — but would you like some, would you?
> Partitive genitive object «коньячку»: «коньячку» is again the partitive-diminutive genitive ("to a little brandy") fronted before the verb; «не приглашаю» = "I'm not inviting you [to brandy]." The object-first order and the diminutive keep the coaxing, jocular tone.
> «постник» — a faster, keeper of the fast: A «постник» is one who observes the fast (from «пост», fast). Calling Alyosha «ты постник» gently mocks the young novice's piety — he is "a faster" who must decline the brandy.

Нет, я лучше тебе ликерцу дам, знатный! — Смердяков, сходи в шкаф, на второй полке направо, вот ключи, живей!  
No, I'd better give you some liqueur, it's a fine one! — Smerdyakov, go to the cabinet, second shelf on the right, here are the keys, be quick!"
> Coaxing diminutive «ликерцу»: «ликерцу» — partitive-genitive diminutive of «ликёр» (sweet liqueur) — "a drop of liqueur." Yet another caressing «-цу» diminutive in Fyodor Pavlovitch's stream of hospitable enticement.
> Perfective imperative and comparative «живей»: «сходи» is the perfective imperative of «сходить» ("go and [fetch], make a quick trip"), ordering a single completed errand. «живей» is the comparative of «живо» used as an urging — "quicker! look lively!" — a brisk command to the servant.
> «знатный» — splendid, first-rate (colloquial): Properly «знатный» means "of high birth, noble," but colloquially it means "splendid, top-notch, a real beauty." Fyodor Pavlovitch uses it to praise the liqueur — "a fine one!"

Алеша стал было от ликера отказываться.  
Alyosha began to refuse the liqueur.
> The particle «было» of the abandoned attempt: «стал было отказываться» uses the special particle «было» after a past-tense verb to mark an action begun but immediately broken off or undone — "started to refuse [but didn't get to]." It signals a thwarted or reversed intention, distinct from the verb «быть».
> Reflexive «отказываться» + «от» + genitive: «отказываться от» (reflexive «-ся») means "to refuse, decline" something, governing «от» + genitive: «от ликера» = "the liqueur." The imperfective «отказываться» (begun action) suits «стал было».

— Всё равно подадут, не для тебя, так для нас, — сиял Федор Павлович.  
"It'll be brought out anyway — if not for you, then for us," beamed Fyodor Pavlovitch.
> Conditional «не…, так…» — if not…, then…: A colloquial conditional pairing: «не для тебя, так для нас» = "if not for you, then for us." «Так» here is not "so" but the consequence-marker "then." Both «для тебя» and «для нас» take genitive after «для».
> Indefinite 3rd-person plural «подадут»: «подадут» (3rd-pl. perfective future of «подать») with no subject is the indefinite "they"/agentless construction — "it'll be brought out anyway," by unspecified servants. «Всё равно» = "all the same, anyway."
> «сиял» — beamed, radiated: «сиял» (imperfective «сиять», to shine/radiate) is used here as a speech-frame: he said it "beaming." Substituting a verb of shining for "said" lets Dostoevsky paint Fyodor Pavlovitch's glowing, mischievous delight.

— Да постой, ты обедал аль нет?  
"But wait — have you dined or not?"
> Imperative «постой» — wait, hold on: «постой» is the perfective (ты) imperative of «постоять», idiomatically "wait, hold on, stop a moment." The «-й» imperative on a vowel-stem; the perfective marks a brief, bounded pause.
> «аль» — folksy "or": «аль» is a colloquial, rustic variant of «или/ли» ("or; or what?"): «обедал аль нет?» = "have you dined or not?" The dialectal particle flavours Fyodor Pavlovitch's speech with peasant-tinged familiarity.

— Обедал, — сказал Алеша, съевший, по правде, всего только ломоть хлеба и выпивший стакан квасу на игуменской кухне.  
"I have," said Alyosha, who in truth had eaten no more than a hunk of bread and drunk a glass of kvass in the Father Superior's kitchen.
> Paired past active participles describing Alyosha: Two perfective past active participles, «съевший» (having eaten) and «выпивший» (having drunk), both agree with Alyosha (masc. nom.) and pack a whole backstory into the dialogue tag — "who in truth had eaten… and drunk…" The perfective stems give completed, prior actions.
> Partitive genitive «-у»: «стакан квасу»: «квасу» is the special partitive genitive in «-у» (beside the regular «кваса»), used for a measured portion of a mass noun: "a glass of kvass." This «-у» partitive survives mainly in such quantity phrases (чашку чаю, кусок сахару) and has an old, homely ring.
> «ломоть» — a hunk/slab: «ломоть» is a thick-cut slice or hunk, especially of bread (from «ломать», to break). «Ломоть хлеба» = "a hunk of bread," emphasizing the plain, hand-broken meal.

— Вот я кофе горячего выпью с охотой.  
"But I'll gladly have some hot coffee."
> Partitive genitive object «кофе горячего»: Under the perfective «выпью» ("I'll drink [up]"), the object goes partitive-genitive — "some hot coffee" — with the adjective «горячего» agreeing in genitive. Object before verb throws the focus onto the coffee. «С охотой» = "gladly, willingly."

— Милый! Молодец! Он кофейку выпьет.  
"Dear boy! Good lad! He'll have some coffee.
> «милый» and «молодец» as affectionate praise: «Милый» = "dear one," «молодец» = "good lad! well done!" (an indeclinable term of approval for either sex). Flung out as exclamations, they convey Fyodor Pavlovitch's gushing, theatrical fondness.
> Diminutive «кофейку» again: He repeats the coaxing diminutive «кофейку» ("some nice coffee"), now in the perfective future «выпьет» — "he'll have some." The recurring «-ку» form is a thread of doting hospitality.

Не подогреть ли?  
Shall we warm it up?
> Deliberative «не… ли?» — shall we…?: An infinitive question with «не… ли» offering/proposing an action: «не подогреть ли?» = "shall we warm it up? / mightn't we heat it?" The interrogative particle «ли» follows the focused infinitive «подогреть» (perfective), and the bare infinitive carries an impersonal deliberative sense.

Да нет, и теперь кипит.  
No, no need, it's boiling as it is.
> Present-tense «кипит» of a current state: «кипит» (3rd-sg. present of «кипеть», to boil) — an imperfective present describing the ongoing state right now: "it's boiling as it is." «И теперь» = "even now, as it is."

Кофе знатный, смердяковский.  
Splendid coffee, Smerdyakov's own.
> Possessive adjective «смердяковский»: From the name Smerdyakov, Russian forms the relational adjective «смердяковский» ("Smerdyakov's, of-Smerdyakov's-making") rather than using a genitive. Such «-ский» adjectives from names are common and here mean "Smerdyakov's own [coffee]."

На кофе да на кулебяки Смердяков у меня артист, да на уху еще, правда.  
At coffee and at fish pies Smerdyakov is an artist for me, and at fish soup too, that's the truth.
> «на» + accusative: artist at something: «артист на что-то» — "an artist at" — governs «на» + accusative: «на кофе, на кулебяки, на уху». Fronting these objects throws the spotlight on Smerdyakov's specialties. «У меня» ("with me / in my house") is the possessive «у» + genitive idiom.
> Folksy connective «да»: «да» strung through the sentence is the colloquial, rustic "and": «да на уху ещё». It gives Fyodor Pavlovitch's praise a homey, additive rhythm, plainer than «и».

Когда-нибудь на уху приходи, заранее дай знать…  
Come by sometime for the fish soup — let me know in advance…
> Imperatives «приходи» and «дай знать»: «приходи» is the imperfective imperative of «приходить» ("come [round]"), inviting repeatable, open visiting; «дай знать» = "let [me] know" (perfective imperative «дай» + infinitive «знать», an idiom). The imperfective invitation suits a standing, friendly offer.
> Indefinite «-нибудь»: sometime, any time: «когда-нибудь» = "sometime, ever" — the «-нибудь» suffix marks a non-specific, any-occasion time, unlike the specific «когда-то» ("once, at some particular time"). The open, "any time at all" sense fits a casual invitation.

Да постой, постой, ведь я тебе давеча совсем велел сегодня же переселиться с тюфяком и подушками?  
But wait, wait — didn't I tell you only a little while ago to move in this very day, with your mattress and pillows?
> «ведь» appealing to shared memory: «ведь» here invokes what both already know — "didn't I (after all) tell you…?" — turning a statement into a reproachful reminder. «Велел» (perfective «велеть», to order/bid) takes the dative «тебе» for the person commanded.
> Insistent «же» and «с» + instrumental: «сегодня же» — «же» tightens "today" to "this very day, today of all days." The infinitive «переселиться» (perfective, "to move in/relocate") is what was ordered; «с тюфяком и подушками» ("with mattress and pillows") uses «с» + instrumental of accompaniment.
> «давеча» — a little while ago: «давеча» is a homely, old-fashioned adverb meaning "a short while ago, earlier today." It marks Fyodor Pavlovitch's chatty, colloquial register and recurs in this scene (also in s35).

Тюфяк-то притащил? хе-хе-хе!..  
Did you bring the mattress along? Heh-heh-heh!.."
> Topic-emphasizing clitic «-то»: The hyphenated «-то» in «тюфяк-то» is not the indefinite suffix but the topic-highlighting clitic: "the mattress — did you bring it (then)?" It singles out the mattress as the known thing in question, a very speech-like touch.
> «притащить» — to lug/drag along: «притащил» (perfective, «при-» "hither" + «тащить» "to drag") means to haul or lug something here with effort. Used of the mattress, it is jocularly physical — "did you lug it over?" — heightening the teasing «хе-хе-хе».

— Нет, не принес, — усмехнулся и Алеша.  
"No, I didn't bring it," said Alyosha, smiling too.
> Additive «и» = "too" + inverted subject: Here «и» before «Алеша» means "also, too" — "Alyosha smiled too." The subject follows the verb (verb–subject inversion), normal in Russian dialogue tags. «Усмехнулся» is the perfective semelfactive «-ну-» of «усмехаться» (one quick smirk).

— А испугался, испугался-таки давеча, испугался?  
"But you got frightened, you did get frightened just now, didn't you?
> The particle «-таки» — "after all, did do it": «-таки» ("all the same, after all, did indeed") attaches to «испугался» to confirm against expectation: "you did get frightened after all." The triple repetition «испугался… испугался-таки… испугался» is Fyodor Pavlovitch's gleeful needling rhythm.

Ах ты, голубчик, да я ль тебя обидеть могу.  
Ah, my dear fellow, as if I could ever bring myself to hurt you.
> Rhetorical «ли» and «да»: «я ль» (= «я ли») fronts the focused «я» with the interrogative particle «ли» to make an incredulous rhetorical question: "as if I could hurt you!" The opening «да» is an exclamatory "why," not "yes." The modal «могу» governs the perfective infinitive «обидеть».
> «голубчик» — my dear (little dove): «голубчик» is a tender diminutive address from «голубь» (dove): "my dear fellow, darling." The «-чик» suffix makes it intimate and coaxing. Fyodor Pavlovitch's endearment here drips with performative affection.

Слушай, Иван, не могу я видеть, как он этак смотрит в глаза и смеется, не могу.  
Listen, Ivan, I can't bear to see the way he looks me in the eye like that and smiles — I can't.
> «не могу» + infinitive, with «как»-clause: «не могу видеть» = "I can't bear to see." The «как»-clause ("how he looks…") functions as the object of seeing. The repetition «не могу… не могу» frames the outburst, and inverted «не могу я» fronts the negated modal.
> «этак» — like this, in that way (colloquial): «этак» is a colloquial variant of «так/вот так» meaning "like this, in such a way" (paired demonstrative with «этот»). It gestures at Alyosha's manner — "the way he looks me in the eye like that."
> «смотреть в глаза» — «в» + accusative: «смотреть в глаза» ("to look [someone] in the eye") takes «в» + accusative «глаза», the directional sense of «в» (motion/aim toward). The present tense «смотрит» renders the habitual, characterizing gaze.

Утроба у меня вся начинает на него смеяться, люблю его!  
My whole insides begin to laugh at the sight of him — I love him!
> «начинать» + imperfective infinitive; «смеяться над/на»: Phasal «начинает» ("begins") obligatorily takes an imperfective infinitive — «смеяться». Note «смеяться» is a «-ся»-only verb (no form without it). Standard «смеяться над» (to laugh at) here appears colloquially as «на него».
> «утроба» — womb, belly, innards: «утроба» is the belly/womb/entrails, a heavy, bodily, somewhat archaic word (the «во чреве», innermost gut). Saying his whole «утроба» laughs at the sight of Alyosha gives the affection a visceral, almost grotesque intensity characteristic of Fyodor Pavlovitch.

Алешка, дай я тебе благословение родительское дам.  
Alyoshka, let me give you a father's blessing."
> «дай» + clause: "let me": «дай» (perfective imperative of «дать») followed by a 1st-person clause is the idiom for "let me…": «дай я тебе… дам» = "let me give you…" The construction uses «дай» as a permission-marker, not literally "give." «Тебе» is dative (the recipient).
> «Алёшка» — the blunt «-ка» diminutive: «Алёшка» is the «-ка» form of Alyosha — rougher and more familiar (even slightly coarse/condescending) than the tender «Алёша». From a father it is gruffly affectionate, fitting Fyodor Pavlovitch's mix of love and mockery.

Алеша встал, но Федор Павлович успел одуматься.  
Alyosha rose, but Fyodor Pavlovitch had time to think better of it.
> «успеть» + perfective infinitive: managed in time: «успел одуматься» = "had time to / managed to think better of it." «Успеть» (perfective) means to manage something within available time and pairs with a perfective infinitive «одуматься» (to change one's mind, come to one's senses).

— Нет, нет, я только теперь перекрещу тебя, вот так, садись.  
"No, no, for now I'll only make the sign of the cross over you, like so — sit down.
> Perfective future «перекрещу»: «перекрещу» is the perfective future (1st-sg.) of «перекрестить» — "I'll make the sign of the cross over you," a single completed act. The conjugated perfective carries future meaning with no auxiliary.
> Reflexive imperative «садись»: «садись» — familiar imperative of «садиться» ("sit down"), a «-ся» verb of changing posture. The imperfective imperative here is the ordinary, unmarked "have a seat."

Ну, теперь тебе удовольствие будет, и именно на твою тему.  
Well, now you're in for a treat, and on your very own subject too.
> Dative experiencer «тебе»: «тебе удовольствие будет» = "there'll be a treat for you / you're in for a treat." The person enjoying it stands in the dative «тебе», with «удовольствие» as the nominative subject — an experiencer-first framing typical of Russian.
> «именно» + «на» + accusative: «именно» = "precisely, exactly," pinpointing the topic: «на твою тему» ("on your subject," «на» + accusative). The phrasing teasingly promises something right up Alyosha's (religious) street.

Насмеешься.  
You'll laugh yourself silly.
> Reflexive perfective «насмеёшься» of satiation: «насмеёшься» (perfective future, «на-» + «смеяться» + «-ся») uses the «на-…-ся» pattern meaning "to do to one's fill, until satisfied" — "you'll laugh your fill, laugh yourself silly." A single, vivid intransitive future with the dropped «ты».

У нас валаамова ослица заговорила, да как говорит-то, как говорит!  
Our Balaam's ass has begun to talk — and how it talks, how it talks!"
> Exclamatory «как» and topical «-то»: «как говорит!» is exclamatory "how it talks!" (not the question "how"). The clitic «-то» in «говорит-то» highlights the verb as the marvel, and the doubling is Fyodor Pavlovitch's delighted insistence. Opening «да» is exclamatory "and, why."

Валаамовою ослицей оказался лакей Смердяков.  
The Balaam's ass turned out to be the lackey Smerdyakov.
> «оказаться» + instrumental predicate: «оказаться» ("to turn out to be") takes its predicate in the instrumental — «валаамовою ослицей» (note the archaic «-ою» ending). Fronting the predicate before the verb, with the subject «лакей Смердяков» last, is a literary inversion that lands the punchline on the name.

Человек еще молодой, всего лет двадцати четырех, он был страшно нелюдим и молчалив.  
Still a young man, only about twenty-four years old, he was terribly unsociable and taciturn.
> Genitive of age + «лет» after a numeral: Age is given in the genitive: «двадцати четырёх лет» ("of twenty-four years"). Here «лет» is genitive plural because the whole numeral phrase «двадцать четыре года» is itself put in the genitive (of age), and in oblique cases the counted noun shifts to the plural — «двадцати четырёх лет»; note 24 ends in «четыре» and would otherwise take the genitive singular «года». «Всего» = "only, just," emphasizing his youth.
> Short-form adjectives «нелюдим, молчалив»: Both predicates are short-form adjectives: «нелюдим» (unsociable) and «молчалив» (taciturn), used after «был» to state his character. The short form is the bookish, characterizing predicate typical of Dostoevsky's portraits.

Не то чтобы дик или чего-нибудь стыдился, нет, характером он был, напротив, надменен и как будто всех презирал.  
Not that he was shy or ashamed of anything — no, on the contrary, by temperament he was arrogant and seemed to despise everyone.
> «не то чтобы…» and genitive «чего-нибудь»: «не то чтобы…» = "not that he was exactly…," a hedging construction qualifying a description. «Дик» is a short-form adjective (wild/shy). «Стыдиться» (to be ashamed of) governs the genitive, hence «чего-нибудь» ("of anything"), with «-нибудь» marking a non-specific "any."
> Instrumental of respect «характером»: «характером» (instrumental) specifies in what respect — "in/by temperament he was arrogant." This instrumental of respect/manner answers "in what way." «Надменен» is again a short-form predicate adjective.
> «как будто» — as if; universal quantifier «всех»: «как будто» ("as though, seemingly") softens the claim to an impression. «Презирать» (to despise) takes a direct object; «всех» is the animate accusative/genitive plural of «весь» — "despised everyone."

Но вот и нельзя миновать, чтобы не сказать о нем хотя двух слов, и именно теперь.  
But there is no getting around saying at least a couple of words about him, and precisely now.
> Impersonal «нельзя» + double negation: «нельзя миновать, чтобы не сказать» is a doubly-negative impersonal construction: "one cannot avoid saying = there's no getting around saying." «Нельзя» + infinitive is the subjectless impossibility frame, and «чтобы не» adds the second negation that, in concord, yields a positive obligation.
> «хотя» = at least; genitive after «два»: Here «хотя» means "at least" (= «хотя бы»): "to say at least a couple of words." «Двух слов» shows the count phrase «два» drawing the genitive — in the genitive plural «слов» because the whole phrase is itself governed by «сказать».

Воспитали его Марфа Игнатьевна и Григорий Васильевич, но мальчик рос «безо всякой благодарности», как выражался о нем Григорий, мальчиком диким и смотря на свет из угла.  
He was raised by Marfa Ignatyevna and Grigory Vasilyevitch, but the boy grew up "without any gratitude at all," as Grigory put it about him — a wild boy who looked out at the world from a corner.
> Verb-first, object-before-subject order: The sentence opens with the verb «воспитали» and the object «его», pushing the subjects «Марфа… и Григорий…» to the end. This inversion makes "who raised him" the new, weighted information — a topic-comment ordering the case endings make possible.
> «расти» with instrumental of result: «рос … мальчиком диким» — «расти» (to grow up) takes an instrumental predicate describing what he grew up to be: "grew up a wild boy." The instrumental marks the resulting characterization (cf. «стать монахом»).
> Imperfective gerund «смотря»: «смотря» is the present gerund of «смотреть» — "looking out at the world from a corner," an attendant circumstance of growing up. It shares the subject «мальчик» and adds the indelible image of the watchful, alienated child.
> «безо всякой» — without any whatsoever: «без» appears as «безо» before the consonant cluster «вс-» (a euphonic variant). «Безо всякой благодарности» (genitive after «без») = "without any gratitude at all," «всякий» intensifying the absence — Grigory's bitter verdict, set in quotation marks as his own words.

В детстве он очень любил вешать кошек и потом хоронить их с церемонией.  
As a child he was very fond of hanging cats and then burying them with ceremony.
> Imperfective infinitives of habit after «любил»: «любил» ("was fond of") governs imperfective infinitives «вешать» and «хоронить», naming the habitual, repeated activities he loved. «Кошек» is animate accusative (= genitive form). The grim content is delivered in the flat imperfective of routine.
> «хоронить» — to bury (with rites): «хоронить» is specifically to bury/inter the dead, with its overtones of funeral rite. «С церемонией» ("with ceremony") makes the child's burial of the cats a mock-liturgy — the chilling detail Dostoevsky builds on in the next sentences.

Он надевал для этого простыню, что составляло вроде как бы ризы, и пел и махал чем-нибудь над мертвою кошкой, как будто кадил.  
For this he would put on a sheet, which served him as a kind of vestment, and he would sing and wave something over the dead cat as if he were swinging a censer.
> Imperfective verbs of the repeated ritual: A run of imperfective past verbs — «надевал», «пел», «махал», «кадил» — depicts the whole performance as something he habitually did, a recurring scene rather than one event. The imperfective is what makes it a customary ritual.
> «вроде как бы» — a hedging "a kind of, sort of": «вроде как бы» piles up approximators ("something like as if a vestment") — «вроде» + genitive «ризы», softened by «как бы» ("as it were"). The fussy hedging is the narrator distancing himself from the blasphemous comparison.

Всё это потихоньку, в величайшей тайне.  
All of this on the sly, in the deepest secrecy.
> Superlative «величайшей» in «-айш-»: «величайшей» is the synthetic superlative of «великий» (with the «-айш-» variant after a velar), "the greatest/utmost": «в величайшей тайне» = "in the utmost secrecy." The bookish suffixed superlative heightens the sense of the hidden ritual.
> «потихоньку» — quietly, on the sly: «потихоньку» (from «тихо», quiet, with diminutive-adverbial shaping) means "quietly, stealthily, little by little, on the quiet." It underscores the secrecy of the boy's cat-burials — done furtively, where no one could see.

Григорий поймал его однажды на этом упражнении и больно наказал розгой.  
Grigory once caught him at this exercise and gave him a painful thrashing with a switch.
> Perfective «поймал» + «на» (caught at): «поймал… на этом упражнении» = "caught him at this exercise" — «поймать на чём-то» ("to catch in the act of") uses «на» + prepositional. The perfective marks the single moment of catching.

Тот ушел в угол и косился оттуда с неделю.  
The boy withdrew into a corner and glowered from there for a week or so.
> Demonstrative «тот» as subject pronoun: «Тот» ("that one") here works as a referential pronoun keeping track of the boy (the just-mentioned non-subject), avoiding repeating the name: "the boy withdrew." This topic-tracking «тот» is a staple of Russian narration. «Ушёл в угол» — «в» + accusative for motion into.
> «с» + accusative for approximate duration: «с неделю» uses «с» + accusative to mean "about a week, a week or so" — the approximative-duration idiom. «Косился» (imperfective «коситься», a «-ся» verb) = "kept glancing sideways / glowering," the imperfective marking the sustained sulking.

«Не любит он нас с тобой, этот изверг, — говорил Григорий Марфе Игнатьевне, — да и никого не любит.  
"He doesn't love you and me, this monster," Grigory said to Marfa Ignatyevna, "and he loves no one at all.
> «нас с тобой» — "you and me": «нас с тобой» (literally "us with you") is the idiomatic way to say "you and me": the inclusive pronoun «нас» plus «с» + instrumental «тобой». Russian regularly bundles the speaker and addressee this way. Fronted «не любит» negates the verb.
> Negative concord «никого… не»: «никого не любит» pairs the negative pronoun «никого» (animate genitive of «никто») with the obligatory «не» on the verb — Russian's double negation, one meaning: "he loves no one." «Да и» = "and indeed, and what's more."
> «изверг» — monster, fiend: «изверг» is a strong, archaic-flavoured word for a brute or monster, literally one "cast out" (из-вергнуть, to expel). Grigory's «этот изверг» brands the child as something inhumanly cruel — foreshadowing the murderer to come.

Ты разве человек, — обращался он вдруг прямо к Смердякову, — ты не человек, ты из банной мокроты завелся, вот ты кто…»  
Are you even a human being?" he would say, turning suddenly straight to Smerdyakov. "You're no human being, you came from bathhouse mildew — that's what you are…"
> The particle «разве» — "are you even…?": «разве» introduces an incredulous, challenging question expecting a "no": «Ты разве человек?» = "Are you even a human being?" It expresses the speaker's doubt or indignation, sharpening Grigory's cruel taunt.
> «из» + genitive of origin; «завестись»: «из банной мокроты» ("out of bathhouse damp," «из» + genitive) gives the source. «Завелся» (perfective «завестись», reflexive «-ся») here means "came into being, bred, sprang up" — as vermin or mildew breed. The «-ся» gives the spontaneous-arising sense.

Смердяков, как оказалось впоследствии, никогда не мог простить ему этих слов.  
Smerdyakov, as it turned out later, could never forgive him those words.
> Negative concord and dative + genitive with «простить»: «никогда… не мог» again shows negative concord (никогда + не). «Простить» takes the dative of the person («ему») and the accusative/genitive of the offence — here «этих слов» (genitive plural), "forgive him those words."
> «впоследствии» — afterwards, later on: «впоследствии» is a bookish adverb meaning "subsequently, later on." The narrator's aside «как оказалось впоследствии» ("as it turned out later") quietly plants foreshadowing of Smerdyakov's later treachery.

Григорий выучил его грамоте и, когда минуло ему лет двенадцать, стал учить священной истории.  
Grigory taught him to read and write, and when he turned about twelve, began to teach him sacred history.
> Impersonal «минуло» + dative of age: «минуло ему лет двенадцать» is the impersonal idiom for turning an age: neuter «минуло» ("there elapsed"), the person in the dative «ему», and the age «лет двенадцать» (note the inverted number = "about twelve"). No nominative subject — a classic dative construction.
> «грамота» — literacy, reading and writing: «грамота» is basic literacy — the skill of reading and writing. «Выучить грамоте» (with dative «грамоте» of the thing taught) = "to teach to read and write." Grigory gives the servant boy elementary letters.

Но дело кончилось тотчас же ничем.  
But the matter came to nothing at once.
> «кончиться» + instrumental of outcome: «кончилось ничем» — «кончиться» (reflexive «-ся», to end) takes the instrumental for the result it ended in: «ничем» (instrumental of «ничто») = "came to nothing." The instrumental of outcome answers "ending in what."
> «тотчас же» — at once, immediately: «тотчас» ("at once") reinforced by emphatic «же»: "immediately, right away." It stresses that the lessons collapsed instantly — a recurring intensifier in this scene (cf. s16).

Как-то однажды, всего только на втором или третьем уроке, мальчик вдруг усмехнулся.  
One day, at no more than the second or third lesson, the boy suddenly smirked.
> Ordinal numerals agree like adjectives: «на втором или третьем уроке» — the ordinals «второй/третий» decline and agree with «уроке» in masculine prepositional (after «на» for location/occasion): "at the second or third lesson." Ordinals behave grammatically as ordinary adjectives.
> Perfective «усмехнулся» — a single smirk: «усмехнулся» (perfective, semelfactive «-ну-» + reflexive «-ся») marks one sudden, momentary smirk — the single completed gesture that breaks the scene open and launches the next chapter's confrontation. «Вдруг» ("suddenly") underlines its abruptness.

— Чего ты? — спросил Григорий, грозно выглядывая на него из-под очков.  
"What's the matter with you?" asked Grigory, glaring at him menacingly from under his spectacles.
> Genitive «чего» for «что»: «Чего ты?» is a colloquial, brusque way of saying «Что ты?» — "What's with you?" The interrogative «что» appears here in its genitive form «чего», a marked, slightly rough register typical of spoken demand. The bare phrase, with the verb left out, reads as gruff impatience.
> Present gerund «выглядывая»: «выглядывая» is an imperfective present gerund («деепричастие») in -я, naming an action going on at the same time as the main verb «спросил» — Grigory glares while he asks. It shares the main subject (Grigory) and packs a whole attendant circumstance into a single word, a hallmark of literary narration.
> Compound preposition «из-под» + genitive: The double preposition «из-под» ("from under") governs the genitive «очков». It pictures motion or vantage emerging out from beneath something — here Grigory's gaze coming up from under his spectacles.

— Ничего-с.  
"Nothing, sir."
> The deferential particle -с: The «-с» tacked onto «Ничего-с» ("nothing, sir") is a clitic shortened from «сударь» ("sir"). Added to words in pre-revolutionary speech, it signals deference or politeness toward a social superior. Smerdyakov uses it with Grigory. English has no exact equivalent, so we approximate it by adding "sir"; often it simply has no counterpart at all.

Свет создал господь бог в первый день, а солнце, луну и звезды на четвертый день.  
"The Lord God created light on the first day, and the sun, the moon, and the stars on the fourth day.
> Object-first word order: The sentence opens with the object «свет» ("light") before the subject «господь бог» and verb «создал». Because the cases keep subject and object distinct, Russian fronts «свет» as the topic — what is being talked about — letting the new information fall later. The effect is a catechism-like, recitation rhythm.
> «на» + accusative for a point in time: «на четвертый день» ("on the fourth day") uses «на» with the accusative to fix a day of an unfolding sequence, contrasting with «в первый день» where «в» + accusative also marks the day. Both are accusative-of-time constructions; the choice of preposition is idiomatic.

Откуда же свет-то сиял в первый день?  
So where did the light shine from on the first day?"
> Emphatic clitic «-то»: The hyphenated «-то» on «свет-то» is not the indefinite suffix but the topic-emphasizing clitic — it underlines a known item the speaker now pointedly returns to: "the light, that is." It gives Smerdyakov's question its needling, gotcha quality.
> Insistent particle «же»: «же» after the interrogative «откуда» sharpens the challenge — "So where on earth...?" It is one of Russian's modal particles, adding the speaker's pressing insistence that English can render only with stress or an added "then / on earth."
> Imperfective past «сиял»: «сиял» ("shone / was shining") is the imperfective past, viewing the shining as a state or process rather than a single completed event — appropriate to a question about where ongoing light came from. The -л form agrees with the masculine subject «свет».

Григорий остолбенел.  
Grigory was dumbfounded.
> «остолбенеть» — to be turned to a pillar: «остолбенел» means to be struck dumb, rooted to the spot — literally "to turn into a post/pillar" (from «столб», "post"). The perfective prefix «о-» captures the sudden onset of stunned paralysis; the image is more physical than the bland English "dumbfounded."

Мальчик насмешливо глядел на учителя.  
The boy looked at his teacher mockingly.
> Imperfective «глядел» + «на» + accusative: «глядел» ("was looking / gazed") is imperfective, framing the boy's mocking look as a sustained gaze rather than a glance. The verb «глядеть на» takes «на» with the accusative «учителя» — animate masculine, so its accusative borrows the genitive form.

Даже было во взгляде его что-то высокомерное.  
There was even something supercilious in his gaze.
> Existential «было» with «что-то»: Word order fronts the verb «было» before the indefinite subject «что-то высокомерное» ("something supercilious") — an existential "there was" pattern. The indefinite pronoun «что-то» takes neuter agreement, and its modifier «высокомерное» agrees as a neuter adjective.
> Prepositional «во взгляде» of location: «во взгляде» ("in his gaze") is «в» governing the prepositional case to express location — here a figurative one, the place where the haughtiness resides. The vowelled form «во» appears before the consonant cluster «вз-» for ease of pronunciation.

Григорий не выдержал.  
Grigory could not contain himself.
> «не выдержать» — to lose self-control: «не выдержал» literally "did not hold out / endure," idiomatically "could not contain himself," "cracked." The perfective marks the single breaking-point moment. The verb «выдержать» elsewhere means to withstand or pass (a test); here the threshold simply gives way.

«А вот откуда!» — крикнул он и неистово ударил ученика по щеке.  
"Here's where from!" he shouted, and gave his pupil a furious slap on the cheek.
> Chained perfectives moving the action: Both «крикнул» ("shouted") and «ударил» ("struck") are perfective pasts, two single completed events fired off in sequence — the narrative-advancing function of the perfective, against which imperfectives supply background.
> «ударить по» + dative for the struck part: Russian marks the body part receiving a blow with «по» + dative: «по щеке» ("on/across the cheek"). The person struck appears as the accusative object «ученика»; the dative locates where the blow lands.

Мальчик вынес пощечину, не возразив ни слова, но забился опять в угол на несколько дней.  
The boy bore the blow without answering a single word, but again shut himself away in his corner for several days.
> Negated gerund + genitive of negation: «не возразив» is a perfective past gerund ("having not objected / without a word of objection"), naming a completed circumstance attending the main verb. Its object «ни слова» stands in the genitive under negation, with «ни» intensifying to "not a single word."
> «забиться» — to shrink away: «забился в угол» means he huddled/buried himself away in a corner. The reflexive «-ся» and the prefix «за-» convey withdrawal into a hidden, enclosed spot — a recurring image of Smerdyakov's reclusive nature.

Как раз случилось так, что через неделю у него объявилась падучая болезнь в первый раз в жизни, не покидавшая его потом во всю жизнь.  
It so happened that a week later the falling sickness declared itself in him for the first time in his life, and it never left him afterward as long as he lived.
> "падучая" — the falling sickness: «падучая болезнь» (literally "the falling disease," from «падать», "to fall") is the old Russian folk name for epilepsy — parallel to the archaic English "falling sickness," which we keep here to preserve that flavor. The illness recurs across the novel and is central to Smerdyakov's character.
> Past active participle «не покидавшая»: «не покидавшая» is an imperfective past active participle ("that did not leave him"), formed with the -вш- suffix and declining like an adjective to agree with «болезнь» (feminine). It condenses a «которая»-clause into a single modifier — bookish, characteristically literary.
> «у» + genitive possessor with reflexive «объявилась»: The sickness "declares itself in him" framed impersonally: «у него» ("at him," «у» + genitive) marks the person it befalls, while the reflexive «объявилась» (middle voice) lets the illness be its own grammatical subject. The construction makes the affliction something that happens to him, not something he does.

Узнав об этом, Федор Павлович как будто вдруг изменил на мальчика свой взгляд.  
On learning of this, Fyodor Pavlovitch seemed suddenly to change his view of the boy.
> Perfective gerund «узнав»: «Узнав» is a perfective past gerund ("having learned") opening the sentence with a prior completed action — first he learns, then he changes his view. It shares the subject «Федор Павлович» and uses «об» (the vowelled «о») before the vowel of «этом» in the prepositional.
> Reflexive possessive «свой»: «свой взгляд» ("his [own] view") uses the reflexive possessive «свой», which refers back to the clause's subject Fyodor Pavlovitch — his own outlook, not someone else's. The hedge «как будто» ("as if") softens the claim to a seeming.

Прежде он как-то равнодушно глядел на него, хотя никогда не бранил и, встречая, всегда давал копеечку.  
Before, he had looked at him somehow indifferently, though he never scolded him and, on meeting him, always gave him a copeck.
> Negative concord with «никогда»: «никогда не бранил» ("never scolded") shows the obligatory double negative: the «ни»-adverb «никогда» co-occurs with «не» on the verb. Russian requires this negative concord — two negatives reinforcing, not cancelling, one meaning.
> Imperfective gerund + habitual past: «встречая» is an imperfective present gerund ("on meeting / whenever he met him") pairing with the imperfective past «давал» to describe a recurring habit. The imperfective throughout — «глядел, бранил, давал» — paints settled background, not single events.
> Diminutive «копеечка»: «копеечку» is the affectionate diminutive of «копейка» (a copeck, the smallest coin). The -ечк- suffix here conveys the casual, offhand triviality of the small change Fyodor tosses the boy — a warm-sounding form for a cold gesture.

В благодушном настроении иногда посылал со стола мальчишке чего-нибудь сладенького.  
In a genial mood he would sometimes send the boy something sweet from the table.
> Indefinite «чего-нибудь» + partitive genitive: «чего-нибудь сладенького» ("something sweet, anything") uses the non-specific indefinite «-нибудь» — no particular sweet, just whatever — and stands in the genitive, a partitive "some of something sweet." The recipient «мальчишке» is dative.
> Expressive diminutive «сладенькое»: «сладенького» softens «сладкое» ("something sweet") with the affectionate -еньк- suffix — "a little treat." The diminutive flags the indulgent, coaxing tone of a master's casual handout from the table.

Но тут, узнав о болезни, решительно стал о нем заботиться, пригласил доктора, стал было лечить, но оказалось, что вылечить невозможно.  
But now, on learning of the illness, he resolved decidedly to look after him, called in a doctor, set about treating him, but it turned out that there was no curing it.
> The particle «было» of the interrupted attempt: «стал было лечить» uses the special particle «было», which marks an action begun or about to happen but then thwarted or reversed — "he set about treating him (but...)." It perfectly cues the failure announced next: «но оказалось, что вылечить невозможно».
> Impersonal predicate «невозможно» + infinitive: «вылечить невозможно» ("it is impossible to cure") is a subjectless impersonal construction: the invariable predicate word «невозможно» governs a bare perfective infinitive, with no nominative subject. This experiencer-less framing is everywhere in Russian.

Средним числом припадки приходили по разу в месяц, и в разные сроки.  
On average the fits came about once a month, and at irregular intervals.
> Distributive «по» + «разу»: «по разу в месяц» ("once a month each") uses distributive «по», which spreads a quantity across units of time. Note the older «разу» (genitive/dative-flavored form) rather than «по разу» being merely "once" — the construction reads "at the rate of one per month."
> «средним числом» — on average: «средним числом» (instrumental, literally "by middle number") is a fixed adverbial phrase meaning "on average." The instrumental case here expresses the manner or measure of the reckoning.

Припадки тоже бывали разной силы — иные легкие, другие очень жестокие.  
The fits also varied in severity — some mild, others very violent.
> Iterative «бывали» + genitive of quality: «бывали» is the iterative imperfective of «быть» — "used to be, would be (from time to time)" — fitting the recurring fits. «разной силы» ("of varying force") is a genitive of quality describing the fits' character.
> «иные ... другие» — some ... others: «иные легкие, другие очень жестокие» pairs «иные» ("some") with «другие» ("others") to partition the set. «иные» here is the bookish equivalent of «некоторые» — a slightly elevated literary touch.

Федор Павлович запретил наистрожайше Григорию наказывать мальчишку телесно и стал пускать его к себе наверх.  
Fyodor Pavlovitch most strictly forbade Grigory to punish the boy bodily and began to let him come up to his own rooms.
> «запретить» + dative person + infinitive: «запретил Григорию наказывать» ("forbade Grigory to punish") puts the person forbidden in the dative «Григорию» and the forbidden action in the infinitive. The dative marks the one to whom the prohibition is addressed.
> Superlative adverb «наистрожайше»: «наистрожайше» is an emphatic bookish superlative adverb, "most strictly of all," built on the -айш- superlative suffix plus the intensifying prefix «наи-». Such -ейший/-айший superlatives belong to elevated, literary register.
> Pejorative «мальчишка»: «мальчишку» (from «мальчик») carries the dismissive -ишк- suffix — "the brat / the lad," a slightly contemptuous or belittling shade rather than mere smallness. It tints how the household regards the boy.

Учить его чему бы то ни было тоже пока запретил.  
For the time being he also forbade teaching him anything whatsoever.
> Generalizing «бы то ни было»: «чему бы то ни было» ("anything whatsoever") is a fixed concessive formula: an interrogative pronoun (here dative «чему») + «бы то ни было», meaning "no matter what." The «бы ... ни» pattern generalizes to "any ... at all," a bookish all-inclusive.

Но раз, когда мальчику было уже лет пятнадцать, заметил Федор Павлович, что тот бродит около шкафа с книгами и сквозь стекло читает их названия.  
But once, when the boy was already about fifteen, Fyodor Pavlovitch noticed that he was hanging about the bookcase and reading the titles of the books through the glass.
> Dative of age + approximate inversion: Age is expressed impersonally with the dative: «мальчику было ... лет пятнадцать» ("the boy was about fifteen"). Inverting «лет пятнадцать» (instead of «пятнадцать лет») signals approximation — "around fifteen" — a neat idiomatic trick.
> Reported clause with «что» + demonstrative «тот»: «заметил, что тот бродит» ("noticed that he was hanging about") uses «что» to open a factual reported clause, with the demonstrative «тот» ("that one") tracking the boy as topic — the present-tense «бродит» is retained as a vivid live action inside past narration.

У Федора Павловича водилось книг довольно, томов сотня с лишком, но никто никогда не видал его самого за книгой.  
Fyodor Pavlovitch had a fair number of books — a hundred-odd volumes — but no one ever saw him himself with a book.
> Quantified genitive subject: «водилось книг» ("there were books, a stock of books") puts the counted noun «книг» in the genitive plural after an implied quantity, and «томов сотня» ("a hundred volumes") likewise governs the genitive «томов». The reflexive «водилось» is impersonal, taking neuter agreement.
> Triple negative concord: «никто никогда не видал» stacks «никто» + «никогда» + «не» — three negatives, one meaning: "no one ever saw." Russian's mandatory negative concord requires every «ни»-word plus «не» on the verb. «видал» is the colloquial iterative of «видеть».
> «с лишком» — and then some: «сотня с лишком» means "a hundred-odd, a hundred and more" — «с лишком» ("with a surplus") is an idiomatic tag appended to round numbers to mean "a bit over." It lends the count an offhand, approximate air.

Он тотчас же передал ключ от шкафа Смердякову: «Ну и читай, будешь библиотекарем, чем по двору шляться, садись да читай.  
He at once handed Smerdyakov the key to the bookcase: "Well then, read — you'll be my librarian; better than loafing about the yard, sit down and read.
> Predicate instrumental + future copula «будешь»: «будешь библиотекарем» ("you'll be a librarian") shows the predicate noun in the instrumental «библиотекарем» after the future of «быть» — the standard rule for a role assumed in the future. «будешь» here is the simple future of the copula «быть» (a future copula), not a compound/periphrastic future — there is no infinitive.
> Imperatives joined by folksy «да»: «садись да читай» ("sit down and read") strings two imperfective imperatives with the colloquial coordinating «да» ("and"), folksier than «и». The imperfective imperative invites settling into the activity, not a one-off act.
> «шляться» — to loaf about: «шляться» is a low, colloquial-pejorative verb for aimless loafing or gadding about, "to loiter, knock around." Fyodor's choice of so crude a word, against the elevated «библиотекарем», is pure comic register-clash.

Вот прочти эту», — и Федор Павлович вынул ему «Вечера на хуторе близ Диканьки».  
Here, read this one," and Fyodor Pavlovitch took out for him "Evenings on a Farm near Dikanka."
> Dative «ему» of benefit: «вынул ему» ("took out for him") uses the dative «ему» not as an indirect object proper but as a dative of interest/benefit — the action is done for his sake. Russian readily slots a dative in to mark the person concerned.

Малый прочел, но остался недоволен, ни разу не усмехнулся, напротив, кончил нахмурившись.  
The fellow read it, but came away dissatisfied, never once smiling — on the contrary, he finished with a frown.
> Perfective gerund «нахмурившись»: «нахмурившись» is a perfective past gerund ("having frowned / with a frown"), here describing the state in which he finished reading. The «-вшись» form (reflexive gerund) attaches to «нахмуриться», "to knit one's brows."
> «ни разу не» — not even once: «ни разу не усмехнулся» ("never once smiled") uses «ни разу» ("not a single time") with the obligatory «не» on the verb — negative concord again. The perfective «усмехнулся» names a single (here, absent) instance of a smirk.
> «малый» — the fellow, the lad: «Малый» as a noun means "a young fellow, lad" (distinct from the adjective «малый», "small"). It is a familiar, faintly condescending way the narrator labels the grown-up Smerdyakov, like «парень».

— Что ж? Не смешно? — спросил Федор Павлович.  
"Well? Not funny?" asked Fyodor Pavlovitch.
> Filler particle «ж» (= «же»): «Что ж?» is «Что же?» with «же» reduced to «ж» after a vowel — a conversational "Well? So?" The particle adds a prodding, expectant nudge rather than asking a literal "what."

Смердяков молчал.  
Smerdyakov was silent.
> Imperfective «молчал» of sustained silence: «молчал» ("was silent / kept silent") is imperfective, presenting silence as a held-out state rather than an event — Smerdyakov's characteristic, willful muteness. The recurring «молчал / всё молчал» across the chapter is a leitmotif of his withdrawn nature.

— Отвечай, дурак.  
"Answer, you fool."
> Imperfective imperative «отвечай»: «Отвечай» is the imperfective imperative of «отвечать» — a blunt, impatient "answer (now)!" The imperfective command here conveys urgency and a demand to get on with it, harsher than the perfective «ответь».

— Про неправду всё написано, — ухмыляясь, прошамкал Смердяков.  
"It's all written about things that aren't true," Smerdyakov mumbled with a smirk.
> Simultaneous gerund «ухмыляясь»: «ухмыляясь» is an imperfective present gerund ("smirking") naming what accompanies the main verb «прошамкал» — he mumbles while smirking. Both share Smerdyakov as subject.
> «прошамкать» — to mumble toothlessly: «прошамкал» means to mumble in a slurred, toothless, old-man way (from «шамкать»). Coupled with the smirk, the word makes Smerdyakov sound prematurely senile and unpleasant — an aural cue to his repellent affect.
> Short passive participle «написано»: «написано» is the short-form past passive participle ("is/has been written"), neuter to agree with the implied «всё». This is the standard resultative passive — the content stands "written" — with «про неправду» ("about untruth") fronted for emphasis.

— Ну и убирайся к черту, лакейская ты душа.  
"Well then, go to the devil, you lackey soul.
> «убирайся к чёрту» — go to the devil: «убирайся к черту» is a coarse dismissal, "clear off / get the hell out" (literally "to the devil"). The reflexive imperative «убирайся» (from «убираться») is the rude colloquial "get lost."
> «лакейская душа» — a lackey's soul: «лакейская ты душа» ("you lackey soul") brands Smerdyakov with a servile, base nature — «лакей», a footman/flunkey, was a byword for cringing servility. The inserted «ты» is the abusive vocative pattern «adjective + ты + noun», pure invective.

Стой, вот тебе «Всеобщая история» Смарагдова, тут уж всё правда, читай.  
Stop — here's Smaragdov's 'Universal History' for you; now it's all true, read that."
> Imperative «стой» — wait!: «Стой» (imperative of «стоять») literally "stand," but idiomatically "wait! / hold on!" — an interjection-like command checking the other person mid-action. The bare imperfective imperative fits the abrupt, spoken moment.
> Presentative «вот тебе» + dative: «вот тебе» ("here's ... for you") is a handing-over formula with the dative «тебе». The whole title «Всеобщая история» Смарагдова is the offered object, with «Смарагдова» a possessive genitive ("Smaragdov's").

Но Смердяков не прочел и десяти страниц из Смарагдова, показалось скучно.  
But Smerdyakov did not read even ten pages of Smaragdov — he found it dull.
> Genitive of negation + emphatic «и»: Under the negated «не прочел», the object «десяти страниц» ("ten pages") shifts to the genitive — the genitive of negation. The particle «и» here means "even" — "didn't read even ten pages."
> Impersonal «показалось скучно»: «показалось скучно» ("it seemed dull (to him)") is a subjectless impersonal: the verb «показалось» is neuter and the predicate is the invariable «скучно», with the experiencer left implicit (understood dative). Such impersonal verdicts on feeling are pervasively Russian.

Так и закрылся опять шкаф с книгами.  
And so the bookcase was shut again.
> Reflexive middle «закрылся» + summarizing «так и»: «закрылся» is the reflexive/middle of «закрыть» — the bookcase "got shut" intransitively, no agent named. The opener «Так и» ("and so / just so") draws a resigned conclusion: that was the end of it.

Вскорости Марфа и Григорий доложили Федору Павловичу, что в Смердякове мало-помалу проявилась вдруг ужасная какая-то брезгливость: сидит за супом, возьмет ложку и ищет-ищет в супе, нагибается, высматривает, почерпнет ложку и подымет на свет.  
Soon afterward Marfa and Grigory reported to Fyodor Pavlovitch that a kind of dreadful fastidiousness had little by little come over Smerdyakov: he sits over his soup, takes up his spoon and hunts and hunts about in the soup, bends down, peers in, scoops up a spoonful and holds it to the light.
> Reflexive «проявилась» of an emerging trait: «проявилась брезгливость» ("a fastidiousness manifested itself") uses the reflexive/middle «проявиться» to let an abstract quality surface as its own subject — the fastidiousness appears, no one makes it appear. «вдруг ужасная какая-то» heaps on hedging modifiers.
> Gnomic present + reduplication for habit: The narration slips into the present/perfective-future («сидит, возьмёт, почерпнёт, подымет») to paint a habitual, repeated scene vividly before the eyes. The reduplicated «ищет-ищет» ("hunts and hunts") expresses drawn-out, insistent repetition.
> «брезгливость» — squeamish fastidiousness: «брезгливость» is fastidious squeamishness, disgust at anything unclean or contaminating. It is a key word for Smerdyakov — a physical revulsion that mirrors his moral coldness, set against the household's earthy ordinariness.
> «мало-помалу» — little by little: «мало-помалу» is a fixed reduplicative adverb meaning "gradually, bit by bit" (paired with «вдруг», "suddenly," in a slight tension — gradual emergence, sudden onset). Such doubled adverbs are an idiomatic feature of the spoken-flavored narration.

— Таракан, что ли? — спросит, бывало, Григорий.  
"A cockroach, is it?" Grigory would ask.
> «бывало» + future-form for past habit: «спросит ... бывало» pairs the perfective present-future «спросит» with the parenthetical «бывало» ("used to, would") to express a recurring past habit — "Grigory would ask." This «бывало» + perfective is a classic device for iterative past narration.
> Dubitative particle «что ли»: «Таракан, что ли?» tags «что ли» onto the noun for a hesitant, guessing question — "A cockroach, or what / is it?" The particle conveys uncertainty and casual surmise, a very colloquial flavor.

— Муха, может, — заметит Марфа.  
"A fly, maybe," Marfa would remark.
> Parenthetical «может» + habitual «заметит»: «может» here is shorthand for «может быть» ("maybe"), inserted parenthetically. «заметит» is again the perfective present-form used habitually ("Marfa would remark"), matching «спросит ... бывало» in the previous line.

Чистоплотный юноша никогда не отвечал, но и с хлебом, и с мясом, и со всеми кушаньями оказалось то же самое: подымет, бывало, кусок на вилке на свет, рассматривает точно в микроскоп, долго, бывало, решается и наконец-то решится в рот отправить.  
The fastidious youth never answered, but with the bread, too, and with the meat, and with every dish it was the same: he would lift, say, a morsel on his fork to the light, examine it as though under a microscope, deliberate a long while, and finally make up his mind to send it into his mouth.
> Repeated «и ... и ...» + instrumental of «с»: The correlative «и ... и ... и ...» ("both ... and ... and ...") lists each item, every noun in the instrumental after «с» ("with"): «с хлебом, с мясом, со всеми кушаньями». Note «со» before the cluster «вс-». The piling-up enacts his exhaustive scrutiny of everything.
> Emphatic «-то» + perfective resolve: «наконец-то» ("at long last") uses the emphatic clitic «-то» to underscore the relief of finally deciding; «решится» is the perfective present-future for the habitual single act of making up his mind. The slow «долго ... решается» (imperfective) then «решится» (perfective) contrasts process and completion.
> «точно» — as if, just like: «точно» here is not "exactly" but the comparative "as though, just like" (= «как будто»): he examines the morsel "as if under a microscope." This «точно» of likeness is common in 19th-century literary prose.

«Вишь, барчонок какой объявился», — бормотал, на него глядя, Григорий.  
"Just look what a fine little gentleman has turned up," Grigory would mutter, watching him.
> «вишь» — just look, see now: «Вишь» is a folksy contraction of «видишь» ("you see"), used as an exclamatory particle of ironic notice — "well, look at that!" It marks Grigory's earthy, peasant speech, contrasting with Smerdyakov's pretension.
> «барчонок» — little master: «барчонок» is a mocking diminutive of «барин» ("gentleman, master"): a young master's son, a pampered little gentleman — exactly the airs Grigory derides in the servant-born Smerdyakov. The -онок suffix (used for young creatures) heightens the sarcasm.
> Gerund «глядя» with object-fronting: «на него глядя» is the present gerund «глядя» ("looking at him"), with the object «на него» placed before it for rhythm. It names the simultaneous circumstance accompanying «бормотал» ("muttered").

Федор Павлович, услышав о новом качестве Смердякова, решил немедленно, что быть ему поваром, и отдал его в ученье в Москву.  
Fyodor Pavlovitch, hearing of this new quality in Smerdyakov, decided at once that he should be a cook, and sent him off to Moscow to train.
> Perfective gerund «услышав»: «услышав» is a perfective past gerund ("having heard") setting the prior action; «о новом качестве» is «о» + prepositional, the case of topic — "about the new quality." The gerund neatly subordinates the cause to the main decision.
> Dative subject of an infinitive + predicate instrumental: «быть ему поваром» ("that he should be a cook") is a dative-with-infinitive of destiny/obligation: the person fated stands in the dative «ему», and the predicate noun «поваром» takes the instrumental after «быть». A compact, fatalistic construction — "he was to be a cook."

В ученье он пробыл несколько лет и воротился, сильно переменившись лицом.  
He spent several years in training and came back greatly altered in the face.
> Perfective gerund «переменившись» + instrumental of respect: «переменившись» is a perfective reflexive gerund ("having changed") describing the state in which he returned; «лицом» is an instrumental of respect — changed "in the face," specifying in what regard. The verb «воротился» is the older/folksier variant of «вернулся».

Он вдруг как-то необычайно постарел, совсем даже несоразмерно с возрастом сморщился, пожелтел, стал походить на скопца.  
He had somehow grown extraordinarily old all at once, even quite disproportionately to his age, had shriveled and turned sallow, and come to look like a eunuch.
> Chain of inchoative perfectives: A run of perfective pasts — «постарел» (grew old), «сморщился» (shriveled), «пожелтел» (turned yellow), «стал походить» (came to resemble) — each an inchoative "became" verb. The «по-» and «за-/с-» prefixes mark the onset of new states, stacking up a sudden transformation.

Нравственно же воротился почти тем же самым, как и до отъезда в Москву: всё так же был нелюдим и ни в чьем обществе не ощущал ни малейшей надобности.  
Morally, however, he came back almost the same as he had been before leaving for Moscow: just as unsociable as ever, and feeling not the slightest need for anyone's company.
> Double «ни» + genitive of negation: Two «ни»-phrases frame the negated verb: «ни в чьем обществе» ("in no one's company") and the object «ни малейшей надобности» ("not the slightest need"), the latter in the genitive of negation. Three negative markers, all reinforcing — the obligatory concord — with «не» on «ощущал».
> Contrastive «же» + instrumental predicate «тем же самым»: Fronted «Нравственно же» uses «же» to pivot — "morally, on the other hand" — against the physical change just described. «воротился ... тем же самым» ("came back the same") puts the predicate in the instrumental «тем же самым» after a verb of returning-to-a-state.

Он и в Москве, как передавали потом, всё молчал; сама же Москва его как-то чрезвычайно мало заинтересовала, так что он узнал в ней разве кое-что, на всё остальное и внимания не обратил.  
In Moscow, too, as was told afterward, he kept silent the whole time; Moscow itself somehow interested him extraordinarily little, so that he learned scarcely anything there at all, and paid no attention to everything else.
> Emphatic «сама» + topic «же»: «сама же Москва» ("Moscow itself") uses the intensifier «сам(а)» ("-self") with «же» to single Moscow out as topic — "as for Moscow itself." The fronting and the particle together steer the focus, a typical Dostoevskian conversational rhythm in narration.
> Impersonal «передавали» — it was reported: «как передавали потом» ("as was told afterward") is a subject-implied impersonal plural — the unspecified "they reported," a Russian way of saying "it was said" without naming a source. The imperfective «передавали» frames it as ongoing hearsay.
> «разве» + indefinite «кое-что»: «разве кое-что» means "hardly anything beyond a little / scarcely a thing." Here «разве» works as a limiting "except perhaps," and «кое-что» is the indefinite "a few things, something or other" — together belittling how little he absorbed.

Был даже раз в театре, но молча и с неудовольствием воротился.  
He even went to the theater once, but came back silent and displeased.
> Frozen gerund «молча» + instrumental of manner: «молча» ("silently") is the lexicalized present gerund of «молчать», now functioning as a plain adverb. Beside it, «с неудовольствием» ("with displeasure") is «с» + instrumental expressing manner — two ways of coloring how he returned.

Зато прибыл к нам из Москвы в хорошем платье, в чистом сюртуке и белье, очень тщательно вычищал сам щеткой свое платье неизменно по два раза в день, а сапоги свои опойковые, щегольские, ужасно любил чистить особенною английскою ваксой так, чтоб они сверкали как зеркало.  
On the other hand, he arrived back to us from Moscow in fine clothes, in a clean frock coat and linen, brushing his clothes most carefully himself, without fail twice a day, and his calfskin boots — dandyish things — he was terribly fond of polishing with a special English blacking until they shone like a mirror.
> Prepositional «в» of attire + adjective agreement: Dress is described with «в» + prepositional: «в хорошем платье», «в чистом сюртуке». Each adjective agrees in case and gender with its noun (neuter «платье», masculine «сюртуке»), the prepositional endings making the case visible.
> Purpose clause «чтоб» + irrealis past: «чтоб они сверкали» ("so that they shone") is a purpose/result clause with «чтоб» (reduced «чтобы»), which obligatorily takes the past-tense form «сверкали» as its irrealis verb. The «-бы» fused inside «чтобы» is what forces the past form.

Поваром он оказался превосходным.  
As a cook he turned out to be excellent.
> Predicate instrumental with «оказаться»: «оказался превосходным поваром» ("turned out to be an excellent cook") puts the predicate noun «поваром» and its adjective «превосходным» in the instrumental after «оказаться», like «быть/стать». Fronting «Поваром» makes the role the topic — "as a cook, he proved excellent."

Федор Павлович положил ему жалованье, и это жалованье Смердяков употреблял чуть не в целости на платье, на помаду, на духи и проч.  
Fyodor Pavlovitch set him a wage, and this wage Smerdyakov spent almost entirely on clothes, on pomade, on perfume, and so on.
> Object-fronting + «на» + accusative of purpose: The object «это жалованье» is fronted as topic before subject and verb, and the spending targets take «на» + accusative: «на платье, на помаду, на духи». «на» of purpose ("on / for") repeats with each item, listing where the wage went.
> «и проч.» — and so forth: «и проч.» abbreviates «и прочее» ("and the rest, et cetera"), a bookish list-closer. It lends the catalogue of vanities (clothes, pomade, perfume...) a faintly ironic, off-handed completeness.

Но женский пол он, кажется, так же презирал, как и мужской, держал себя с ним степенно, почти недоступно.  
But the female sex, it seems, he despised just as much as the male, conducting himself toward women with gravity, almost unapproachably.
> Comparative correlative «так же ... как и»: «так же ... как и» ("just as ... as") frames the equality of contempt: he despised the female sex as much as the male. «как и» ("as also") tightens the comparison. The contrastive «Но» opens with a turn against the preceding grooming-vanity.
> Reflexive pronoun «себя» in «держать себя»: «держал себя» ("conducted himself") uses the full reflexive pronoun «себя» (no nominative form), pointing back to the subject — distinct from the verbal clitic «-ся». The manner adverbs «степенно» ("with gravity") and «недоступно» ("unapproachably") describe the bearing.

Федор Павлович стал поглядывать на него и с некоторой другой точки зрения.  
Fyodor Pavlovitch began to regard him from a somewhat different point of view as well.
> Inceptive «стал» + iterative «поглядывать»: «стал поглядывать» ("began to regard / glance at") pairs the inceptive «стать» with the iterative-diminutive verb «поглядывать», whose «по-...-ива-» pattern means to do something now and then, off and on. «с ... точки зрения» ("from a point of view") is «с» + genitive.

Дело в том, что припадки его падучей болезни усилились, и в те дни кушанье готовилось уже Марфой Игнатьевной, что было Федору Павловичу вовсе не на руку.  
The thing was that the fits of his falling sickness had grown more frequent, and on those days the cooking was already done by Marfa Ignatyevna, which suited Fyodor Pavlovitch not at all.
> Reflexive passive + instrumental agent: «готовилось Марфой» is an imperfective reflexive passive: the food "was being cooked," and the agent, when named, goes in the instrumental «Марфой Игнатьевной». This «-ся» passive is the regular imperfective counterpart to the participial passive.
> Dative experiencer + idiom «не на руку»: «было Федору Павловичу ... не на руку» frames an impersonal judgment with the dative experiencer «Федору Павловичу». The idiom «не на руку» means "not convenient, not to one's advantage" — literally "not to hand."

— С чего у тебя припадки-то чаще? — косился он иногда на нового повара, всматриваясь в его лицо.  
"Why are your fits coming more often?" he would sometimes ask, eyeing his new cook askance and studying his face.
> Topic clitic «-то» + comparative «чаще»: «припадки-то» foregrounds the fits as the known topic under discussion ("these fits of yours"); «чаще» is the suppletive-ish comparative of «частый/часто» ("more often"). The bare comparative as predicate needs no «более».
> Iterative «косился» + present gerund «всматриваясь»: «косился» (imperfective, habitual "would eye askance") sets the recurring scene; «всматриваясь» is a present gerund ("peering closely") naming the simultaneous action. The verb «всматриваться в» takes «в» + accusative «лицо».

— Хоть бы ты женился на какой-нибудь, хочешь женю?..  
"You ought to marry someone — would you like me to marry you off?.."
> Optative «хоть бы» + past-form irrealis: «Хоть бы ты женился» ("you ought to marry / if only you'd marry") is an optative wish built on «хоть бы» plus the past-tense form «женился» — the «бы» making it irrealis. It voices Fyodor's half-coaxing suggestion.
> «жениться на» + prepositional; non-reflexive «женю»: «жениться на ком-нибудь» ("to marry someone") governs «на» + prepositional «какой-нибудь» (indefinite "some woman or other"). Note the contrast: reflexive «женился» = "get married," but transitive «женю» ("I'll marry you off") drops the «-ся» to take an object.

Но Смердяков на эти речи только бледнел от досады, но ничего не отвечал.  
But at such talk Smerdyakov only turned pale with vexation, and answered nothing.
> Imperfective reactions + «от» of cause: The imperfective pasts «бледнел» and «не отвечал» present his reactions as repeated, characteristic responses, not single events. «от досады» is «от» + genitive of cause — he paled "from vexation." «ничего не отвечал» is the negative-concord "answered nothing."
> «речи» — talk, words: «речи» (plural of «речь») here means not formal "speeches" but loosely "such talk, words, remarks." «на эти речи» ("at such talk") frames Smerdyakov's reaction to Fyodor's marriage-banter — a slightly elevated word for everyday chatter.

Федор Павлович отходил, махнув рукой.  
Fyodor Pavlovitch would walk away with a wave of his hand.
> Perfective gerund «махнув» + instrumental tool: «махнув рукой» is a perfective past gerund ("having waved his hand") — here the completed gesture accompanying «отходил». «рукой» is instrumental, the hand as the instrument of the wave. «махнуть рукой (на кого-то)» idiomatically means to give up on, dismiss.

Главное, в честности его он был уверен, и это раз навсегда, в том, что он не возьмет ничего и не украдет.  
Most important, he was certain of his honesty, and that once and for all — certain that he would take nothing and steal nothing.
> «уверен в» + prepositional: The short adjective «уверен» ("sure, certain") governs «в» + prepositional: «в честности» ("of his honesty"). The short predicative form, common in 19th-century prose, names a state; the phrase is fronted for emphasis ("of his honesty he was certain").
> Perfective future + negative concord: «не возьмёт ничего и не украдёт» are perfective futures expressing a settled certainty about what Smerdyakov never would do. «ничего ... не» is the obligatory double negative — "would take nothing."

Раз случилось, что Федор Павлович, пьяненький, обронил на собственном дворе в грязи три радужные бумажки, которые только что получил, и хватился их на другой только день: только что бросился искать по карманам, а радужные вдруг уже лежат у него все три на столе.  
It once happened that Fyodor Pavlovitch, a little tipsy, dropped in the mud of his own yard three rainbow notes he had just received, and missed them only the next day: no sooner had he rushed to search his pockets than all three of the rainbow notes were suddenly lying there before him on the table.
> "радужные" — rainbow notes: «радужные бумажки» ("rainbow notes") was slang for the multicolored 100-rouble banknote of imperial Russia, so named for its iridescent printing; we keep the literal "rainbow notes" and gloss it here. That Smerdyakov returned three of them untouched is what convinces Fyodor Pavlovitch of his absolute honesty.
> «хватиться» + genitive of the missed thing: «хватился их» ("missed them, suddenly noticed them gone") governs the genitive «их» — «хватиться чего» takes the genitive of the thing whose absence is discovered. The reflexive verb names the sudden realization.
> «только что ... а ...» — no sooner than: The pattern «только что бросился ... а ... уже лежат» expresses "no sooner had he rushed to search than they were already lying there." The contrastive «а» pivots between the two clauses, and the present «лежат» drops into vivid narration.
> Diminutive «пьяненький»: «пьяненький» softens «пьяный» ("drunk") with the -еньк- diminutive — "a little tipsy, pleasantly tight." The affectionate suffix paints Fyodor's tipsiness as endearing-comic rather than ugly, typical of the narrator's indulgent irony toward him.

Откуда?  
"Where from?"
> One-word elliptical question «Откуда?»: «Откуда?» ("From where?") stands alone as Fyodor's stunned, elliptical question — the verb and everything else dropped. Russian freely reduces a question to its interrogative word when context supplies the rest.

Смердяков поднял и еще вчера принес.  
Smerdyakov had picked them up and brought them in the day before.
> Two perfectives narrating the event: «поднял» ("picked up") and «принёс» ("brought") are perfective pasts, two completed acts narrating what Smerdyakov had done the day before. «ещё вчера» ("as early as the day before") underlines the prior timing.

«Ну, брат, я таких, как ты, не видывал», — отрезал тогда Федор Павлович и подарил ему десять рублей.  
"Well, brother, I've never seen the likes of you," Fyodor Pavlovitch declared then, and made him a present of ten roubles.
> Genitive of negation + iterative «видывал»: «таких ... не видывал» ("never saw the likes") has the negated object «таких» in the genitive of negation. «видывал» is the iterative-frequentative of «видеть» ("to have ever seen, time and again"), a folksy, expressive form heightening "in all my days."
> «брат» as familiar address: «брат» ("brother") here is not literal kinship but a familiar, hearty form of address to a man — "well, brother / mate." Fyodor's matey tone, mixing condescension and warmth, is typical of his patter.
> «отрезать» — to say curtly: «отрезал» literally "cut off," idiomatically means to say something sharply and conclusively — to snap out a final word. The metaphor is of speech sliced clean, leaving no reply.

Надо прибавить, что не только в честности его он был уверен, но почему-то даже и любил его, хотя малый и на него глядел так же косо, как и на других, и всё молчал.  
It must be added that he was not only certain of his honesty but for some reason even fond of him, although the fellow looked at him just as askance as he did at everyone else, and kept silent all the time.
> Correlative «не только ... но ... даже»: «не только ... но ... даже» ("not only ... but even") is a graded correlative escalating the claim — from certainty of honesty to actual fondness. «почему-то» ("for some reason," indefinite «-то») hedges the surprising affection.
> Concessive «хотя» + concessive «и»: «хотя ... и глядел» ("although the fellow did look") opens a concessive clause with «хотя»; the «и» here reinforces the concession ("did indeed look"). «так же косо, как и на других» repeats the "just as ... as" comparison of askance looks.

Редко, бывало, заговорит.  
He would speak only rarely.
> «бывало» + perfective future for past habit: «заговорит» is the perfective present-form used with «бывало» to mean a recurring past act — "he would (only rarely) start to speak." The inceptive prefix «за-» on «говорить» marks the onset of speaking. Fronted «Редко» ("rarely") closes the chapter on his habitual silence.

Если бы в то время кому-нибудь вздумалось спросить, глядя на него: чем этот парень интересуется и что всего чаще у него на уме, то, право, невозможно было бы решить, на него глядя.  
Had it occurred to anyone at that time to look at him and ask what this fellow was interested in and what was most often on his mind, it would truly have been impossible to decide just from looking at him.
> A hypothetical framed with бы: The whole sentence is irrealis: the conditional «Если бы… вздумалось» (had it occurred to someone) is answered by «невозможно было бы решить» (it would be impossible to decide). The particle «бы» plus a past-tense form builds Russia's single 'would' mood, here imagining a test never actually carried out.
> Dative experiencer with «вздуматься»: «Вздуматься» is an impersonal -ся verb: there is no nominative subject, and the person to whom the whim occurs stands in the dative — «кому-нибудь вздумалось» (it occurred to someone). It is the same experiencer-first pattern as «мне хочется».
> The gerund «глядя» — 'while looking': «Глядя» is the imperfective present деепричастие (adverbial participle) of «глядеть»: 'while looking', an action simultaneous with the main verb and sharing its subject. Dostoevsky frames the whole sentence with it and then echoes it at the close in «на него глядя».
> «право» as an aside — 'truly, really': Here «право» is not the noun 'right' but a parenthetical particle meaning 'truly, honestly, I assure you' — a colloquial hedge the narrator drops in to vouch for the claim, like English 'really'.

А между тем он иногда в доме же, аль хоть на дворе, или на улице, случалось, останавливался, задумывался и стоял так по десятку даже минут.  
And yet sometimes, in the house, or even out in the yard, or in the street, it would happen that he stopped, fell to musing, and stood like that for as much as ten minutes at a stretch.
> «аль» — folksy 'or': «Аль» is a dialectal, peasant-flavoured variant of «или / али» ('or'). Slipped into the narration alongside «в доме же» and «по десятку», it tints the sentence with the colloquial, popular voice that suits the milieu being described.
> Imperfective past for a recurring habit: All three verbs are imperfective past — «останавливался… задумывался… стоял» — describing not one event but a repeated, habitual scene ('it would happen that he stopped… and stood'). The imperfective is precisely what carries this iterative 'used to' sense.
> Emphatic particle «же»: The particle «же» here is not 'but'; it leans on «в доме» to mean 'in the very house, of all places' — a small emphatic nudge marking the unexpectedness of his stopping right there. Such particles carry shading English can only render with stress.
> «по десятку минут» — distributive 'a good ten minutes': «По» with «десятку» gives a distributive, approximate 'about ten minutes at a time'; «десяток» is the noun 'a ten / a tenful', and «даже» ('even') stresses how long that is for a man simply standing still.

Физиономист, вглядевшись в него, сказал бы, что тут ни думы, ни мысли нет, а так какое-то созерцание.  
A physiognomist, peering at him, would have said that there was neither thought nor reflection there, but only a kind of contemplation.
> «физиономист» — a reader of faces: A 'physiognomist', a believer in the 19th-century pseudo-science of reading character from facial features. The word frames the narrator's playful claim that even such an expert would find nothing legible in Smerdyakov's face.
> Perfective gerund «вглядевшись»: «Вглядевшись» is the perfective past деепричастие of «вглядеться» (to peer intently): 'having peered at him', a completed action prior to the main verb. The perfective -вши form marks the looking as finished before the verdict «сказал бы» is given.
> «сказал бы» — 'would have said': Past form plus «бы» again yields the conditional: the physiognomist 'would say'. Russian makes no distinction between 'would say' and 'would have said' — both ride on this same past+бы construction, and context supplies the time.
> «ни… ни… нет» — negative concord with genitive: The paired «ни… ни…» ('neither… nor…') reinforces the existential «нет», and the negated nouns slip into the genitive — «ни думы, ни мысли» (gen. sg.) rather than nominative. This is the genitive of negation working hand in hand with «ни» double negation.
> «созерцание» — contemplation, the chapter's key word: A bookish -ние noun meaning wordless, mystical 'contemplation' — gazing without thought. Dostoevsky plants it here, in quotation marks, as the term he will build the whole 'Contemplator' passage around; note its Church-Slavonic-flavoured abstract suffix.

У живописца Крамского есть одна замечательная картина под названием «Созерцатель»: изображен лес зимой, и в лесу, на дороге, в оборванном кафтанишке и лаптишках стоит один-одинешенек, в глубочайшем уединении забредший мужичонко, стоит и как бы задумался, но он не думает, а что-то «созерцает».  
The painter Kramskoy has a remarkable canvas titled "The Contemplator": a forest is depicted in winter, and in the forest, on the road, in a tattered little caftan and bast shoes, stands all alone — sunk in the deepest solitude — a peasant who has wandered in; he stands as though lost in thought, but he is not thinking, he is "contemplating" something.
> Pejorative suffixes -ишк-/-онк- — 'a wretched little…': The string «кафтанишке», «лаптишках», «мужичонко» piles on the belittling, pitying suffixes -ишк- and -онк-: not a coat but a sorry little coat, not a peasant but a poor scrap of a peasant. The morphology itself does the work of compassion and contempt at once.
> Past active participle «забредший»: «Забредший» is the past active participle of «забрести» (to wander in): 'who had wandered in'. It condenses a whole «который забрёл» relative clause into a single adjective modifying «мужичонко», a hallmark of literary description.
> «один-одинёшенек» — all utterly alone: An expressive reduplication: «один» doubled with the affectionate-intensive suffixed «одинёшенек» to mean 'all alone, utterly by himself'. The folk-poetic form deepens the picture's solitude beyond a plain «один».
> Superlative «глубочайшем»: «Глубочайший» is the bookish suffixal superlative of «глубокий» (deep), formed with -айший: 'deepest'. This synthetic superlative belongs to elevated literary register, more solemn than the everyday «самый глубокий».

Если б его толкнуть, он вздрогнул бы и посмотрел на вас, точно проснувшись, но ничего не понимая.  
Were you to give him a shove, he would start and look at you as if just waking, yet understanding nothing.
> Conditional with an infinitive protasis: «Если б… толкнуть» uses a bare infinitive after «если б» — 'were one to give him a shove' — answered by «он вздрогнул бы» ('he would start'). Both halves are irrealis; the protasis leaves the agent unnamed, a generalised 'you/one', while «бы» carries the whole hypothesis.
> Gerund «проснувшись» in a simile: «Проснувшись» is the perfective past деепричастие of «проснуться» (to wake up): 'having woken'. Paired with «точно» ('as if'), it forms a compact simile — he would look at you 'as though just woken' — a completed action set against the main verb.
> Negation plus simultaneous gerund: «Не понимая» is the imperfective present gerund of «понимать», 'understanding nothing' — a state simultaneous with his gaze. Note the negative concord: «ничего… не понимая» pairs the ни-word «ничего» with «не» on the verb, two negatives for one meaning.

Правда, сейчас бы и очнулся, а спросили бы его, о чем он это стоял и думал, то наверно бы ничего не припомнил, но зато наверно бы затаил в себе то впечатление, под которым находился во время своего созерцания.  
True, he would come to his senses at once; but were you to ask him what he had been standing there thinking about, he would surely recall nothing — and yet he would surely keep buried within himself the impression he had been under during his contemplation.
> A chain of perfective conditionals: The sentence strings perfective verbs under «бы» — «очнулся бы», «не припомнил бы», «затаил бы» — each naming a single completed hypothetical outcome ('would come to', 'would recall nothing', 'would keep buried'). The perfective is what makes each a finished, resultative imagined act.
> Contrastive «а» plus conditional: «А» is the mild contrastive conjunction, hinging from 'he'd come to' to the new condition 'but were one to ask him'. «Спросили бы» again uses an agentless past+бы form to mean 'if you/one were to ask', the same generalised hypothetical as in the previous sentence.
> Relative «который» in the instrumental: «Под которым находился» shows «который» taking the case its own clause demands: the preposition «под» governs the instrumental, so 'the impression he was under' becomes «под которым». The relative agrees in gender/number with «впечатление» but draws its case locally.
> «затаить» — to hide/harbour within: «Затаить» means to conceal, to keep secret and pent up inside — «затаить в себе впечатление» is to bury an impression within oneself. The verb carries a hint of something held back and brooded over, prefiguring Smerdyakov's secretive, hoarding nature.

Впечатления же эти ему дороги, и он наверно их копит, неприметно и даже не сознавая, — для чего и зачем, конечно, тоже не знает: может, вдруг, накопив впечатлений за многие годы, бросит всё и уйдет в Иерусалим, скитаться и спасаться, а может, и село родное вдруг спалит, а может быть, случится и то, и другое вместе.  
These impressions are dear to him, and he is surely hoarding them, imperceptibly and without even being aware of it — to what end and why, he of course does not know either: perhaps, all at once, having hoarded up his impressions over many years, he will abandon everything and set off for Jerusalem, to wander and to seek his salvation; or perhaps he will suddenly burn down his native village; or perhaps both the one and the other will come to pass together.
> Particle «же» and dative-of-interest «ему»: «Же» here picks up and stresses the topic ('these impressions, now'), while «дороги» is the short-form plural adjective 'dear' predicated of them, with «ему» a dative 'to him'. The fronting of «Впечатления же эти» is classic topic-first word order.
> Two gerunds, two aspects: The sentence pairs an imperfective present gerund «(не) сознавая» ('not being aware', simultaneous) with a perfective past gerund «накопив» ('having hoarded up', prior and completed). The aspectual contrast in the деепричастие is exactly what distinguishes ongoing from finished attendant action.
> Perfective present = future: «Бросит», «уйдёт», «спалит» are perfective verbs conjugated like a present but meaning the future: 'he will abandon… will set off… will burn down'. With no auxiliary, the single completed future sits entirely in the ending — the perfective has no real present at all.
> «спалить» — to burn down: «Спалить» is a colloquial, intensive perfective of 'to burn (down) completely' — harsher and more total than «сжечь». The juxtaposition of pilgrimage and arson — saving one's soul or torching one's own village — captures the disquieting unpredictability of the 'contemplator'.

Созерцателей в народе довольно.  
There are contemplators enough among the common people.
> Genitive after the quantifier «довольно»: The quantity word «довольно» ('enough, a good many') governs the genitive plural «созерцателей» — 'there are contemplators enough'. Russian routinely puts the counted noun in the genitive after such quantifiers, exactly as numbers above four do.

Вот одним из таких созерцателей был наверно и Смердяков, и наверно тоже копил впечатления свои с жадностью, почти сам еще не зная зачем.  
Smerdyakov was surely one such contemplator, and he too was surely hoarding up his impressions with a kind of greed, hardly knowing yet himself to what purpose.
> Instrumental predicate after «был»: After past-tense «был» the predicate noun takes the instrumental: «был… одним из таких созерцателей» (was one of such contemplators). Russian frames a past or assumed role in the instrumental, where the present would simply juxtapose nominatives with no copula.
> Reflexive possessive «свои»: «Свои» means 'his own', referring back to the clause's subject Smerdyakov — «впечатления свои» = his own impressions. Using «его» instead would point to someone else's; «свой» keeps the possession anchored to the subject. Note too the bookish post-positioning of the possessive after its noun.
> Imperfective «копил» plus a gerund tail: «Копил» is imperfective past — the ongoing, characteristic activity of hoarding — closed off by the simultaneous imperfective gerund «(не) зная» ('not knowing'). The imperfective renders this as habitual, unfinished accumulation, matching «копит» earlier in the present.
> «жадность» — greed, avidity: «Жадность» is greed or grasping avidity; «копить с жадностью» — to hoard greedily — lends the otherwise passive 'contemplation' a covetous, miserly edge. The word quietly aligns Smerdyakov's inner hoarding with material avarice.
---

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.