# The Brothers Karamazov, At His Father's

Братья Карамазовы · Fyodor Dostoevsky · Book IV — Lacerations

Source: https://1732studios.com/books/karamazov/b4-c2. Data: https://1732studios.com/books/karamazov/b4-c2.json.


Прежде всего Алеша пошел к отцу.  
First of all Alyosha went to his father.
> Perfective motion verb + dative goal: «Пошел» is the perfective of «идти/пойти» — it marks the single, completed inception of the journey, moving the narrative forward to the father's house. The preposition «к» governs the dative «отцу», naming the person toward whom the motion is directed.

Подходя, он вспомнил, что отец очень настаивал накануне, чтоб он как-нибудь вошел потихоньку от брата Ивана.  
As he drew near, he remembered that the evening before his father had insisted very firmly that he should somehow come in quietly, unseen by his brother Ivan.
> Imperfective gerund: 'as he drew near': «Подходя» is the present (imperfective) деепричастие of «подходить» — a verb-adverb naming an action simultaneous with the main clause: 'while approaching, he remembered.' It is indeclinable and must share the subject of «вспомнил», a hallmark of literary narration.
> «чтоб» + past form for an indirect command: After «настаивал» (insisted) the clause uses «чтоб(ы)» plus the past-form verb «вошел» — Russian's irrealis for a willed or demanded outcome, not a plain reported fact. The contracted «чтоб» is colloquial for «чтобы».
> «потихоньку» — quietly, on the sly: An adverb built on «тихо» (quiet) with the soft, conspiratorial flavour of 'quietly, stealthily, without fuss.' It recurs through this passage as the keynote of the father's furtive request.

«Почему ж? — подумалось вдруг теперь Алеше. — Если отец хочет что-нибудь мне сказать одному, потихоньку, то зачем же мне входить потихоньку?  
"But why?" it suddenly occurred to Alyosha now. "If father wants to tell me something in private, on the quiet, then why should I have to slip in on the quiet?
> Impersonal -ся verb with dative experiencer: Not 'Alyosha thought' but literally 'it got-thought to Alyosha': the reflexive «подумалось» is impersonal and the thinker stands in the dative «Алеше». This dative-experiencer framing makes the thought arrive of its own accord — exactly Dostoevsky's interior register.
> Emphatic particle «ж» (= «же»): «Ж» is the reduced form of the modal particle «же», here intensifying the question — 'but why on earth?' It adds insistence and the texture of inner speech that English can only catch with stress.
> Non-specific «-нибудь»: 'something or other': «что-нибудь» marks a non-specific 'anything at all,' contrasting with «что-то» (a specific but unnamed thing). The father might want to say just any one thing, no particular thing being meant.

Верно, он вчера в волнении хотел что-то другое сказать, да не успел», — решил он.  
Surely, in his agitation yesterday, he meant to say something else and never got it out," he decided.
> Contrastive «да» = 'but': Here «да» is not 'and' or 'yes' but the folksy adversative 'but/yet' — 'he wanted to say something else, but didn't manage it.' This colloquial «да» for «но» colours the narrator's free indirect reasoning.
> Specific-but-unknown «что-то»: Now «что-то» (with «-то», not «-нибудь») signals a definite thing Alyosha imagines his father meant to say, even though neither he nor we can name it — the mirror of «что-нибудь» one sentence earlier.

Тем не менее очень был рад, когда отворившая ему калитку Марфа Игнатьевна (Григорий, оказалось, расхворался и лежал во флигеле/ сообщила ему на его вопрос, что Иван Федорович уже два часа как вышел-с.  
All the same he was very glad when Marfa Ignatyevna, who opened the gate for him (Grigory, it turned out, had fallen ill and was laid up in the lodge), told him in answer to his question that Ivan Fyodorovich had already gone out a good two hours since.
> Past active participle as compressed relative: «Отворившая» is the past active participle of «отворить» (to open), agreeing with «Марфа» in feminine nominative singular and packing 'who had opened the gate for him' into a single pre-posed modifier — denser and more bookish than a «которая»-clause.
> Servile particle «-с»: The clitic «-с» (from «сударь», 'sir') is tacked onto words as a marker of deference. In a servant's mouth it signals respect to the young master; Dostoevsky uses it constantly to map social rank in speech. There is no English equivalent beyond a deferential 'sir.'
> «расхвораться» — to fall properly ill: «расхвораться» = рас- + «хворать» (to be ill/ailing) + the reflexive -ся, added together; it intensifies to 'to be taken thoroughly ill, take to one's bed.' It is more colloquial and bodily than the neutral «заболеть».

— А батюшка?  
"And my father?"
> «батюшка» — affectionate 'father': A warm diminutive of «батя/отец», «батюшка» is the homey, slightly old-fashioned word for one's father (it also means a parish priest). Alyosha's choice of it over the neutral «отец» softens the inquiry with filial tenderness.

— Встал, кофе кушает, — как-то сухо ответила Марфа Игнатьевна.  
"He is up, taking his coffee," Marfa Ignatyevna answered rather dryly.
> «кушать» — the genteel 'to eat/take': «Кушать» is a softer, more polite verb than «есть» (to eat), used of others' eating or in deferential speech (here of food and drink together). In Marfa's mouth it lends the report a touch of respectful formality toward the master.
> «сухо» — 'drily', coldly: Literally 'dryly,' this adverb of manner means curt, unfriendly, without warmth. The narrator uses it to register Marfa's chilly mood toward the household after the previous night's violence.

Алеша вошел.  
Alyosha went in.

Старик сидел один за столом, в туфлях и в старом пальтишке, и просматривал для развлечения, без большого, однако, внимания, какие-то счеты.  
The old man sat alone at the table, in slippers and a worn old overcoat, looking over some accounts to pass the time, though without much attention.
> Imperfective past for a held scene: Both verbs are imperfective past, painting an ongoing tableau rather than a sequence of events: the old man 'was sitting' and 'was looking over.' This standing background is the imperfective's narrative job — the description holds still around Alyosha's entrance.
> Pejorative diminutive «пальтишко»: «Пальтишко» adds the belittling suffix «-ишк-» to «пальто» (overcoat): not just a small coat but a shabby, contemptible one — 'a wretched old coat.' The suffix carries the narrator's faint disdain for the old man's seediness.
> «счёты» — accounts / abacus: «Счёты» here means accounts or reckonings he is looking over; the same word also names the wooden bead-abacus once standard in Russian shops and households. Either way it points to Fyodor Pavlovich's money-mindedness, which the next sentences immediately probe.

Он был совсем один во всем доме (Смердяков тоже ушел за провизией к обеду). Но не счеты его занимали.  
He was quite alone in the whole house (Smerdyakov had also gone out to fetch provisions for dinner). But it was not the accounts that occupied him.
> Negation + word order shifting the focus: Fronting the negated «не счеты» ('it was not the accounts') throws the stress onto what did occupy him, deferred as the new information. The free word order lets Russian re-weight the sentence the way English needs a cleft ('it was not X that...').
> «за» + instrumental = 'to fetch': With a verb of motion, «за» plus the instrumental «провизией» means going after / to fetch something. «За» is the preposition that splits by case — accusative for 'behind/beyond,' instrumental for 'in order to get.'

Хоть он и встал поутру рано с постели и бодрился, а вид все-таки имел усталый и слабый.  
Though he had risen early that morning and was keeping his spirits up, he nonetheless looked tired and weak.
> Concessive «хоть... а» pairing: «Хоть(я)... а» is a concessive frame: 'though he had got up..., yet he looked...' The «и» reinforces the concession ('did indeed get up') and the «а» introduces the counter-clause. The construction is a staple of colloquial Russian argument.
> «бодриться» — to keep up one's spirits: A reflexive verb meaning to put on a brave, lively front, to force oneself to seem cheerful and vigorous. The irony is built in: he 'kept up his spirits' precisely because he felt weak.

Лоб его, на котором за ночь разрослись огромные багровые подтеки, обвязан был красным платком.  
His forehead, on which huge purple bruises had spread overnight, was bound up with a red handkerchief.
> Embedded «который»-clause inside the subject: The relative «на котором» ('on which') opens a clause describing the forehead before the main predicate arrives — the antecedent «лоб» governs the gender, while «котором» takes prepositional case from «на». Such nested relatives give the description its slow, clinical unfolding.
> Short passive participle + instrumental agent/means: «Обвязан» is the short-form past passive participle of «обвязать» (to bind round); with «был» it states a result — 'was bound up.' The means, «красным платком» (with a red kerchief), stands in the instrumental, the case of instrument and agent in the passive.
> «багровый» / «подтёк»: «Багровый» is a deep crimson-purple, the colour of bruised or congested flesh; «подтёк» is a bruise or weal where blood has spread under the skin. Together they make the beating of the night before lurid and visible.

Нос тоже за ночь сильно припух, и на нем тоже образовалось несколько хоть и незначительных подтеков пятнами, но решительно придававших всему лицу какой-то особенно злобный и раздраженный вид.  
His nose, too, had swollen badly during the night, and on it likewise several blotchy bruises had formed which, though slight, gave his whole face a peculiarly spiteful and irritable look.
> Genitive plural after «несколько»: The quantifier «несколько» ('several') governs the genitive plural «подтеков», and the verb «образовалось» takes default neuter-singular agreement, as Russian quantity-phrases do. This is the numeral/quantifier-plus-genitive pattern.
> Past active participle in the genitive plural: «Придававших» is the past active participle of «придавать» (to lend, impart), agreeing with «подтеков» in genitive plural — 'bruises which lent his whole face...' It also takes a dative object «всему лицу», the thing the look was given to.
> Reflexive «-ся» as middle voice: 'formed': «Образоваться» uses the «-ся» clitic for an intransitive, self-acting sense — the bruises 'formed' of themselves, with no external agent. This middle use of «-ся» turns a transitive verb into a change-of-state intransitive.

Старик знал про это сам и недружелюбно поглядел на входившего Алешу.  
The old man was aware of this himself, and he glanced unkindly at Alyosha as he came in.
> Imperfective past active participle as object modifier: «Входившего» is the past active participle of «входить», in the animate accusative («входившего Алешу») — 'Alyosha as-he-was-coming-in.' Its imperfective stem keeps the entering ongoing, framing the glance against Alyosha's movement.
> Intensifier «сам» — 'himself': «Сам» here is the emphatic 'himself' agreeing with the subject — the old man, for his part, was well aware of it. It is distinct from the reflexive «себя»; «сам» underlines the subject rather than serving as an object.

— Кофе холодный, — крикнул он резко, — не потчую.  
"The coffee's cold," he barked sharply, "I shan't offer you any.
> Present-tense imperfective with future force: «Потчую» is the present of imperfective «потчевать»; with «не» and in this brusque context it reads as a flat refusal extending into the immediate future — 'I'm not treating/offering you any.' The imperfective present routinely covers such intentions.
> «потчевать» — to treat, regale: An old, hospitable verb meaning to ply a guest with food and drink. Fyodor Pavlovich's «не потчую» turns the gesture of hospitality inside out — he announces he will not host, the perfect note of his stinginess.

Я, брат, сам сегодня на одной постной ухе сижу и никого не приглашаю.  
I'm sitting down to nothing but a Lenten fish-soup myself today, brother, and I'm inviting no one.
> «сидеть на» + prepositional = 'to be living on': «Сидеть на чём-то» idiomatically means to subsist on a single food or regimen; «ухе» is the prepositional of «уха», governed by «на» in its locative sense. «Одной» ('nothing but') sharpens the meagreness.
> «брат» as buttonholing address: Literally 'brother,' but used here as a familiar, faintly condescending tag thrown into speech — 'my good fellow, mate.' Addressing his own son this way flattens the relation into matey banter, characteristic of the old buffoon.

Зачем пожаловал?  
What brings you?"
> «пожаловать» — to deign to come: «Пожаловать» is a courtly, old-fashioned verb for arriving or being so good as to come (cf. «пожалуйста»). Used curtly with «зачем» ('what for?'), it drips sarcasm — mock-ceremony layered over a rude 'what do you want?'

— Узнать о вашем здоровье, — проговорил Алеша.  
"To ask after your health," said Alyosha.
> «о» + prepositional for the topic: «О вашем здоровье» ('about your health') uses «о» plus the prepositional, the standard frame for the topic of asking, speaking, or thinking. Alyosha's polite «вашем» (your, formal) answers the old man's coarse «ты».

— Да.  
"Yes.

И, кроме того, я тебе вчера сам велел прийти.  
And besides, I told you myself yesterday to come.
> «велеть» + dative person + infinitive: «Велеть» (to order, bid) takes the person commanded in the dative, «тебе», and an infinitive «прийти» for the act ordered. «Сам» again stresses 'I myself.' The perfective infinitive «прийти» frames the coming as a single completed arrival.

Вздор всё это.  
It's all nonsense.
> Zero copula + topicalised predicate: No verb 'to be' surfaces in the present: «Вздор всё это» is literally 'Nonsense — all this.' The predicate noun «вздор» is fronted for emphasis, and the bare nominative does the work an English 'is' would.
> «вздор» — rubbish, twaddle: A dismissive noun for nonsense, idle stuff not worth attention. It is brusque, conversational, and exactly the old man's register as he waves away his own summons.

Напрасно изволил потревожиться.  
You needn't have troubled yourself.
> «изволить» — mock-deferential 'to deign': «Изволить» is an archaic, ceremonious verb ('to be pleased to, deign to') once used in courteous address. Here, dropping the pronoun and pairing it with «напрасно» ('in vain'), Fyodor Pavlovich speaks with sardonic faux-politeness — 'you were so good as to trouble yourself for nothing.'

Я так, впрочем, и знал, что ты тотчас притащишься...  
Still, I knew you'd come trailing over here at once..."
> Perfective future «притащишься»: «Притащишься» is the perfective future of «притащиться» (-ся form): a conjugated perfective verb carries future meaning with no auxiliary — 'you'd come dragging over.' The «-ся» here is the verb's lexically fixed reflexive form.
> «притащиться» — to come dragging/trailing in: Built on «тащить» (to drag, haul), the reflexive «притащиться» means to come trudging or trailing, with a contemptuous, effortful colour — as if Alyosha could not help lugging himself over. The narrator's diction here is the old man's own scorn.

Он проговорил это с самым неприязненным чувством.  
He said this with the most hostile feeling.
> Superlative «самый» + instrumental of manner: «Самым неприязненным» is the periphrastic superlative — «самый» declining in agreement with «чувством» — 'the most hostile feeling.' The whole phrase stands in the instrumental after «с», the case of accompanying manner.

Тем временем встал с места и озабоченно посмотрел в зеркало (может быть, в сороковой раз с утра) на свой нос.  
Meanwhile he got up from his place and anxiously studied his nose in the mirror (perhaps for the fortieth time since morning).
> Chain of perfectives advancing the action: After the static imperfective tableau, the verbs turn perfective — «встал», «посмотрел» — each a single completed act stepping the scene forward: he got up, then looked. Note also the dropped subject, recoverable from the verb endings.
> Ordinal «сороковой» — 'fortieth': «Сороковой» is the ordinal of «сорок» (forty), agreeing like an adjective with «раз» in the accusative-of-time phrase «в ... раз» ('for the Nth time'). The comic exaggeration measures his vanity.

Начал тоже прилаживать покрасивее на лбу свой красный платок.  
He also began arranging his red handkerchief more becomingly on his forehead.
> Comparative adverb «покрасивее» with softening «по-»: «Покрасивее» is the comparative of the adverb «красиво» (-ее) with the prefix «по-», which softens it to 'a bit more becomingly, somewhat prettier.' This «по-» + comparative is a very common colloquial 'a little more X.'
> Reflexive possessive «свой»: «Свой» means 'his own,' referring back to the clause's subject (the old man's own kerchief). Russian prefers «свой» over «его» here precisely to keep the possessor identical with the actor.

— Красный-то лучше, а в белом на больницу похоже, — сентенциозно заметил он. — Ну что там у тебя?  
"The red one's better; in white it looks too much like a hospital," he remarked sententiously. "Well, what is it with you?
> Topic-marking clitic «-то» + suppletive comparative: The hyphenated «-то» on «красный» highlights it as the known topic — 'the red one, now, is better.' «Лучше» is the suppletive comparative of «хороший» (good), one of the irregular pairs (хороший → лучше).
> Impersonal «похоже на» + accusative: «Похоже на больницу» is an impersonal predicate — 'it looks like a hospital' — where «похоже» governs «на» plus the accusative «больницу» for the thing resembled. No subject is named; the resemblance is stated flatly.
> «сентенциозно» — sententiously: A bookish adverb (from Latin sententia) meaning in the manner of one pronouncing a weighty maxim. The narrator's wry choice mocks the old man for dressing a remark about a kerchief in the tone of philosophy.

Что твой старец?  
How's that elder of yours?"

— Ему очень худо, он, может быть, сегодня умрет, — ответил Алеша, но отец даже и не расслышал, да и вопрос свой тотчас забыл.  
"He is very bad; he may die today," answered Alyosha, but his father did not even take it in, and forgot his own question the moment he had asked it.
> Dative-subject impersonal: 'he is very bad': There is no nominative subject: the sufferer stands in the dative «ему» and the predicate is the invariable «худо» ('badly, ill'). This experiencer-in-the-dative pattern is how Russian states someone's bodily or spiritual state.
> Reflexive possessive «свой» + emphatic word order: «Свой» ('his own') ties the question back to the father as its asker; fronting «вопрос свой» before «забыл» stresses that it was the very question he had just put that he forgot. The freedom of order foregrounds the irony.

— Иван ушел, — сказал он вдруг. — Он у Митьки изо всех сил невесту его отбивает, для того здесь и живет, — прибавил он злобно и, скривив рот, посмотрел на Алешу.  
"Ivan has gone out," he said suddenly. "He's doing everything in his power to cut Mitka's bride out from under him — that's the reason he's living here," he added spitefully, and twisting his mouth, looked at Alyosha.
> Perfective past gerund «скривив»: «Скривив» is the perfective past деепричастие of «скривить» (to twist) — 'having twisted his mouth,' a completed action just before the main verb «посмотрел». The «-в» ending marks the perfective gerund of prior action.
> «у» + genitive: taking from someone: «У Митьки» (genitive) marks the person from whom the bride is being 'cut out' — «у» + genitive of possession/source. «Отбивать» (to beat off, win away) is imperfective present, framing the rivalry as ongoing effort.
> «Митька» — the rough diminutive of Dmitri: «Митька» is Dmitri (Mitya) with the coarse, dismissive suffix «-ка», a step below the affectionate «Митя». The father's use of it drips contempt for his eldest son, just as «Грушка» below belittles Grushenka.

— Неужто ж он вам сам так сказал? — спросил Алеша.  
"Surely he didn't tell you so himself?" asked Alyosha.
> Incredulous particle «неужто» (+ «ж»): «Неужто» is a folksy, archaic variant of «неужели» ('surely not?, can it really be?'), expressing astonished disbelief; the added «ж» (= «же») heightens it. Alyosha can't credit that Ivan said such a thing.

— Да, и давно еще сказал.  
"Yes, and he said it long ago.
> Perfective past with «давно» — 'said long ago': «Сказал» (perfective past) names the single act of telling; «давно» locates that completed event far back in time. The reinforcing «еще» here means 'as far back as,' stressing how long the grievance has festered.

Как ты думаешь: недели с три как сказал.  
Imagine: he said it some three weeks back.
> Approximation by inversion: «с» + accusative: Putting «с» before the numeral phrase «три недели» (and inverting noun and number to «недели с три») yields 'about three weeks, some three weeks.' This «с» + accusative is the idiomatic way to say 'roughly.'
> «Как ты думаешь» — 'imagine, would you believe': Literally 'what do you think,' but tossed in as a buttonholing aside it means 'just imagine!, would you believe it' — inviting the listener's amazement. It is the old man's theatrical way of relishing his own gossip.

Не зарезать же меня тайком и он приехал сюда?  
He didn't come down here just to knife me on the sly, did he?
> Rhetorical negation with «же»: 'surely not...?': The fronted negated infinitive «не зарезать ... же» frames an ironic rhetorical question — 'it's not to knife me, after all, that he came?' «Же» carries the appeal to obviousness; the whole is a half-joking expectation of 'no.'
> «зарезать» / «тайком»: «Зарезать» is to kill with a knife, to cut someone's throat — brutally concrete. «Тайком» means 'secretly, on the sly.' The grim image, half-jested, eerily foreshadows the novel's coming parricide.

Для чего-нибудь да приехал же?  
He came for some reason or other, didn't he?"
> Insistent «да... же» around a perfective past: Here «да» is an emphatic particle ('but/surely') and «же» reinforces it: 'he did come for SOME reason, didn't he?' «Для чего-нибудь» ('for anything at all') keeps the reason vague, while the doubled particles press for assent.

— Что вы! Чего вы это так говорите? — смутился ужасно Алеша.  
"What do you mean! Why do you say such things?" Alyosha was terribly upset.
> «Что вы!» — 'what do you mean!': An exclamatory idiom protesting against what was just said — 'come now!, how can you!, what an idea!' Alyosha's shocked recoil from the talk of murder. The formal «вы» keeps his deference even in alarm.
> Reflexive «-ся» of emotional change of state: «Смутился» (-ся) is a change-of-state reflexive — Alyosha 'became confounded/upset,' the «-ся» turning «смутить» (to disconcert) intransitive. Inverting verb before subject throws the weight onto the emotion.

— Денег он не просит, правда, а всё же от меня ни шиша не получит.  
"He isn't asking for money, true, but all the same he won't get a single kopeck out of me.
> Genitive of negation: «денег»: Under negation the object of «просить» shifts from accusative to genitive: «денег» (gen.) not «деньги». Fronting it ('money he isn't asking for') also topicalises the contrast with what follows.
> "Ni shisha" — not a thing: «Шиш» literally means a fig-sign (a rude fist gesture); the set phrase «ни шиша» means "not a single thing, nothing at all." «Ни шиша не получит» = "he won't get a brass farthing." We render it here with a period-appropriate coin, "a single kopeck," to keep the contemptuous, small-change flavor of the original.
> Negative concord: «ни... не»: «Ни шиша» pairs the intensifier «ни» ('not a single') with the obligatory verbal «не» — Russian's negative concord, where two negatives reinforce rather than cancel: 'he won't get a thing.'

Я, милейший Алексей Федорович, как можно дольше на свете намерен прожить, было бы вам это известно, а потому мне каждая копейка нужна, и чем дольше буду жить, тем она будет нужнее, — продолжал он, похаживая по комнате из угла в угол, держа руки по карманам своего широкого, засаленного, из желтой летней коломянки, пальто.  
I intend, my dear Alexey Fyodorovich, to live on this earth as long as I possibly can — let that be known to you — and so every kopeck is precious to me, and the longer I live, the more precious it will be," he went on, pacing the room from corner to corner, his hands thrust into the pockets of his greasy, loose-fitting overcoat of yellow summer twill.
> Subjunctive «бы» wish: 'let it be known': «Было бы ... известно» joins the past-form «было» with the particle «бы» for an irrealis 'may it be / let it be known to you.' The dative «вам» marks the one to whom it should be known. The refrain recurs like a mocking incantation.
> «чем... тем» correlative with compound future: The «чем + comparative ... тем + comparative» frame is 'the more... the more.' Both clauses use the imperfective compound future «буду жить / будет нужнее» (быть + infinitive / comparative), naming ongoing future states.
> Two imperfective gerunds of attendant action: «Похаживая» and «держа» are present (imperfective) gerunds describing what he does while speaking — 'pacing... and holding...' Both share the main subject and run simultaneously with «продолжал», layering the scene.
> «похаживать» — to stroll about, pace: A frequentative/attenuative verb (prefix «по-» + iterative «-хаживать» from «ходить») meaning to walk about leisurely, to and fro. It paints the old man's unhurried, self-satisfied pacing as he lectures Alyosha on money.

Теперь я пока все-таки мужчина, пятьдесят пять всего, но я хочу и еще лет двадцать на линии мужчины состоять, так ведь состареюсь — поган стану, не пойдут они ко мне тогда доброю волей, ну вот тут-то денежки мне и понадобятся.  
"For now I'm still a man, only fifty-five all told, but I mean to rank as a man another twenty years yet; once I grow old I'll turn foul, and then they won't come to me of their own free will, and that's exactly when my little sums of money will come in handy.
> «состоять» + bookish set phrase: «Состоять на линии мужчины» ('to figure / rank as a man') is a stilted, semi-official turn — «состоять» (to consist, hold a position) lends it bureaucratic pomposity, comic in the mouth of a lecher boasting of virility.
> Perfective futures + predicate instrumental absent: «Состареюсь» and «стану» are perfective futures ('I'll grow old,' 'I'll become'). Note that «поган» appears as a short adjective predicate after «стану» rather than the usual instrumental noun — colloquial compression of 'I'll turn foul.'
> Dative «мне» with «понадобиться» + diminutive: «Понадобиться» ('to come to be needed') takes the needer in the dative «мне» — the thing needed («денежки») is grammatical subject. «Денежки» is the cooing diminutive of «деньги», money fondled with affection.
> «поганый» — foul, unclean: «Поган(ый)» originally meant 'pagan, heathen' (from Latin paganus) and came to mean ritually unclean, then simply foul, vile, loathsome. The old man's self-knowledge is brutal: in age he expects to become repellent.

Так вот я теперь и подкапливаю всё побольше да побольше для одного себя-с, милый сын мой Алексей Федорович, было бы вам известно, потому что я в скверне моей до конца хочу прожить, было бы вам это известно.  
So now I keep laying by more and more, for myself alone, sir, my dear son Alexey Fyodorovich — let that be known to you — because I mean to live in my filthiness to the very end, let that be known to you as well.
> Reduplicated comparative «побольше да побольше»: The «по-» + comparative «побольше» ('a bit more') is doubled with «да» to mean 'more and more,' an intensifying repetition. «Подкапливаю» is imperfective present — the steady, ongoing hoarding.
> Reflexive «себя» = 'for myself alone': «Себя» is the reflexive object pronoun pointing back to the speaker-subject, governed by «для» (+ genitive); «одного» ('alone, only') sharpens the selfishness. The servile «-с» absurdly garnishes this confession of greed.
> «скверна» — filth, defilement: «Скверна» is a heavy, churchly word for moral and ritual filth, defilement, abomination — the language of sin and the unclean. Fyodor Pavlovich seizes this religious vocabulary to flaunt his depravity, a deliberate blasphemy aimed at his pious son.

В скверне-то слаще: все ее ругают, а все в ней живут, только все тайком, а я открыто.  
Filthiness is the sweeter for it: everybody reviles it, yet everybody lives in it, only everyone does it on the sly, while I do it openly.
> Comparative «слаще» as impersonal predicate: «Слаще» is the regular consonant-mutating comparative of «сладкий» (sweet; д→ж, not suppletive) — 'sweeter,' here an impersonal predicate ('it's sweeter [to live] in filth'). The «-то» on «скверне» flags it as the dwelt-on topic.
> Contrastive «а»: 'yet': The two clauses are hinged by «а», the mild adversative that here means 'yet, while' — everyone reviles filth, and yet everyone lives in it. «А» marks the pointed turn without the strong opposition of «но».

Вот за простодушие-то это мое на меня все сквернавцы и накинулись.  
And it's just for that openheartedness of mine that all the filthy lot of them have set upon me.
> «за» + accusative = 'because of, for': «За» with the accusative «простодушие» gives the causal 'for, on account of' — 'it's for this openheartedness of mine.' The «-то» topicalises the quality the old man preens on, and «вот... и» frames the whole as 'and that's just why.'
> «сквернавец» / «накинуться на»: «Сквернавец» is a coarse abusive noun, 'a filthy/vile person,' coined on the same «скверн-» root he keeps playing with. «Накинуться на» means to fall upon, set upon someone — the whole 'filthy lot' pounced on him.

А в рай твой, Алексей Федорович, я не хочу, это было бы тебе известно, да порядочному человеку оно даже в рай-то твой и неприлично, если даже там и есть он.  
And as for that paradise of yours, Alexey Fyodorovich, I don't want it — let that be known to you — indeed, for a decent man your paradise is downright unseemly, even supposing it exists at all.
> Genitive of negation: «рая» implied, fronted topic: He fronts «в рай твой» ('into that paradise of yours') for scornful emphasis before «я не хочу». The mocking possessive «твой» recasts paradise as Alyosha's private property, not a shared truth.
> Dative experiencer with impersonal «неприлично»: «Порядочному человеку ... неприлично» is dative-subject again: 'for a decent man it is unseemly.' The affected one stands in the dative, the predicate is the invariable «неприлично», with no nominative subject.

По-моему, заснул и не проснулся, и нет ничего, поминайте меня, коли хотите, а не хотите, так и черт вас дери.  
To my mind, you fall asleep and don't wake up, and there's nothing more; remember me if you like, and if you don't care to, then the devil take the lot of you.
> Perfective pasts for a sealed sequence: «Заснул» and «(не) проснулся» are perfectives — 'you fell asleep and didn't wake up,' two completed wholes stating his vision of death as a single closed event. The «не» + perfective marks the non-occurrence of the waking.
> Imperative + folksy conditional «коли»: «Поминайте» is the imperfective imperative ('remember [me], commemorate me'), and «коли» is an archaic, peasant variant of «если» ('if'). The mix of churchly «поминать» with rustic «коли» catches the old man's mock-folk register.

Вот моя философия.  
There's my philosophy.
> Presentative «вот» + zero copula: «Вот» ('here / there is') presents the summing-up, and no verb 'to be' appears: «Вот моя философия» = 'there's my philosophy.' The bare nominative does all the predicating in the present tense.

Вчера Иван здесь хорошо говорил, хоть и были мы все пьяны.  
Ivan spoke well here yesterday, though we were all drunk.
> Concessive «хоть и» + short adjective «пьяны»: «Хоть и» is 'although,' and «пьяны» is the short-form predicate adjective ('drunk'), agreeing in plural with «мы». The short form, predicate-only, states the temporary condition — exactly what short adjectives are for.

Иван хвастун, да и никакой у него такой учености нет... да и особенного образования тоже нет никакого, молчит да усмехается на тебя молча, — вот на чем только и выезжает.  
Ivan's a braggart, and he hasn't any great learning either... nor any special education to speak of; he holds his tongue and smirks at you in silence — that's the only thing that carries him along."
> Negative concord + genitive of negation: «Никакой ... нет» piles the ни-word «никакой» onto the existential «нет», whose absent subject «учености»/«образования» stands obligatorily in the genitive. Multiple negatives, one meaning: 'he has no learning whatever.'
> Imperfective presents + gerund «молча»: «Молчит» and «усмехается» are imperfective presents for habitual behaviour ('he keeps silent and smirks'), and «молча» ('in silence') is the frozen gerund of «молчать», now used adverbially. «Да» links the verbs as folksy 'and.'
> «выезжать на чём-то» — to get by on: Literally 'to ride out on,' the idiom «выезжать на чём-то» means to get along, succeed, or save oneself by means of some single thing. The old man jeers that Ivan's silent smirk is the only thing carrying him.

Алеша его слушал и молчал.  
Alyosha listened to him and said nothing.
> Imperfective pasts: listened and stayed silent: Both verbs are imperfective past, naming durative states rather than events — Alyosha 'was listening and keeping silent' throughout the tirade. The aspect makes his silence a sustained posture, not a single act.

— Зачем он не говорит со мной?  
"Why won't he talk to me?
> «с» + instrumental for the interlocutor: «Говорить с кем» takes «с» plus the instrumental «мной» — 'to speak with me,' the case of accompaniment. «Зачем... не» ('why won't he') voices the old man's aggrieved bafflement.

А и говорит, так ломается; подлец твой Иван!  
And when he does talk, he puts on airs; he's a scoundrel, that Ivan of yours!
> Zero-copula insult + scornful «твой»: «Подлец твой Иван» is a verbless predicative — 'your Ivan [is] a scoundrel,' the bare nominative «подлец» carrying the charge. The dismissive «твой» ('that Ivan of yours') makes Alyosha share ownership of the disgrace.
> «ломаться» — to put on airs: Literally 'to break oneself,' the reflexive «ломаться» means to be affected, mince, give oneself airs, make a show of reluctance. The father accuses Ivan of insufferable posturing.

А на Грушке сейчас женюсь, только захочу.  
As for Grushka, I'll marry her in a moment, the instant I choose.
> «жениться на» + prepositional: A man marrying a woman is «жениться на ком», governing «на» + prepositional «Грушке». «Женюсь» is the perfective future ('I'll marry'), and «только захочу» ('the instant I choose') makes the marriage a matter of mere will.
> «Грушка» — the belittling form of Grushenka: «Грушка» is Agrafena (Grushenka) reduced with the coarse «-ка» suffix, just as «Митька» belittles Dmitri. The father's possessive lust and contempt are folded into the diminutive he chooses for the woman both he and his son desire.

Потому что с деньгами стоит только захотеть-с, Алексей Федорович, всё и будет.  
Because with money one need only choose to, sir, Alexey Fyodorovich, and everything follows.
> «стоит только» + infinitive = 'one need only': «Стоит только захотеть» is the impersonal 'one need only wish' — «стоит» ('it is worth / it suffices') plus a perfective infinitive. «С деньгами» ('with money') is instrumental of accompaniment; the result clause «всё и будет» follows with the linking «и» ('and then everything will be').

Вот Иван-то этого самого и боится и сторожит меня, чтоб я не женился, а для того наталкивает Митьку, чтобы тот на Грушке женился: таким образом хочет и меня от Грушки уберечь (будто бы я ему денег оставлю, если на Грушке не женюсь!), а с другой стороны, если Митька на Грушке женится, так Иван его невесту богатую себе возьмет, вот у него расчет какой!  
That's the very thing Ivan's afraid of, and he keeps watch over me to stop my marrying, and to that end he eggs Mitka on to marry Grushka himself: so he hopes both to guard me from Grushka (as if I'd leave him money if I don't marry Grushka!) and, on the other hand, that if Mitka marries Grushka then Ivan can take Mitka's rich bride for himself — there's the calculation behind him!
> «чтоб(ы)» + negated past for purpose: «Чтоб я не женился» is a negative purpose clause — «чтоб(ы)» plus the past-form irrealis «женился», 'so that I should not marry.' Purpose and willed outcome always take this past-form construction, never a present indicative.
> Hypothetical «будто бы» + genitive of negation: «Будто бы» ('as if, supposedly') with «бы» frames an ironic hypothesis; the negated condition «если ... не женюсь» triggers the genitive «денег» as the object of «оставлю» ('leave [no] money'). «Оставлю» is perfective future.
> Reflexive «себе» + free word order: «Себе» is the reflexive in the dative ('for himself'), pointing back to Ivan as subject. The marked order, with the rich-bride object «невесту богатую» before the verb «возьмет» (perf. future), spotlights the scheme the old man imputes.
> «расчёт» — the calculation, scheme: «Расчёт» is a reckoning or calculated motive, here a cold scheme. The exclamatory «вот ... какой» frames the unveiling — 'so that's the calculation behind him!' — a key word for the mercenary worldview the father projects onto everyone.

Подлец твой Иван!  
He's a scoundrel, that Ivan of yours!"

— Как вы раздражительны. Это вы со вчерашнего; пошли бы вы да легли, — сказал Алеша.  
"How irritable you are. It's from yesterday; you ought to go and lie down," said Alyosha.
> Exclamatory «как» + short adjective: «Как ... раздражительны» is the exclamatory 'how irritable you are!' with the short-form predicate adjective «раздражительны», agreeing in plural with the polite «вы». Short forms are the natural predicate in such exclamations of state.
> Conditional «бы» as gentle advice: «Пошли бы вы да легли» uses past-form verbs plus «бы» not for a real condition but as softened advice — 'you ought to go and lie down.' This polite-suggestion use of the «бы»-conditional is common, mild, and faintly caring here.

— Вот ты говоришь это, — вдруг заметил старик, точно это ему в первый раз только в голову вошло, — говоришь, а я на тебя не сержусь, а на Ивана, если б он мне это самое сказал, я бы рассердился.  
"There you are, you say that," the old man remarked suddenly, as though it had only just for the first time entered his head, "you say it, and I'm not angry with you, but if Ivan had said that very same thing to me, I would have been angry.
> «точно» as 'as though' + dative idiom: «Точно» here means 'as though, as if' introducing a comparison clause. «В голову вошло» ('entered the head') with the dative «ему» is the idiom for a thought striking someone — the experiencer in the dative once more.
> Counterfactual «если бы... бы»: A full counterfactual conditional: «если б(ы) ... сказал» (past + «бы») in the if-clause, «я бы рассердился» (past + «бы») in the main clause — 'if Ivan HAD said it, I WOULD have got angry.' Both halves take the past form, tense being read from context.

С тобой только одним бывали у меня добренькие минутки, а то я ведь злой человек.  
It's only with you that I've ever had any good little moments; otherwise I'm a wicked man, you know."
> Iterative «бывали» + instrumental «с тобой»: «Бывали» is the iterative imperfective past of «бывать» ('used to happen, would occur now and then'), naming repeated occasions. «С тобой ... одним» is «с» + instrumental ('with you alone'), the comitative case.
> Tender diminutives «добренькие минутки»: «Добренькие» («-еньк-» on «добрый») and «минутки» («-к-» on «минуты») are caressing diminutives — 'sweet little good moments.' The unexpected tenderness, aimed only at Alyosha, pierces the surrounding spite.
> Appealing particle «ведь»: «Ведь» appeals to shared knowledge — 'I'm a wicked man, you know / after all.' It invites Alyosha to acknowledge what the father takes as obvious about himself, a confiding, self-aware note.

— Не злой вы человек, а исковерканный, — улыбнулся Алеша.  
"You're not a wicked man, only a warped one," smiled Alyosha.
> Corrective «не... а» ('not X but Y'): «Не злой ..., а исковерканный» is the corrective frame «не X, а Y» — 'not wicked, but warped.' «А» here cancels and replaces the first predicate; this is the sharp contrastive «а», distinct from 'and.'
> "Warped" — twisted, not wicked: Alyosha pointedly rejects «злой» (wicked, ill-natured) and substitutes «исковерканный», the past passive participle of «исковеркать», "to twist/warp/mangle." The word implies the father was deformed by life rather than evil by nature — a key to how Alyosha sees everyone. We keep the participle force with "warped."

— Слушай, я разбойника Митьку хотел сегодня было засадить, да и теперь еще не знаю, как решу.  
"Listen, I'd meant to have that brigand Mitka locked up today, and even now I don't know how I'll decide.
> The particle «было»: an intention cut short: «Было» here is not the past of 'to be' but the special particle marking an action begun or intended and then abandoned — 'I had been about to lock him up [but...].' It signals a thwarted or revoked perfective, a fine literary nuance.
> «разбойник» / «засадить»: «Разбойник» is a brigand, robber, ruffian — the father's lurid name for his son Dmitri. «Засадить» (here) is colloquial for 'to clap in jail, lock up.' The pairing dramatises the feud as melodrama.

Конечно, в теперешнее модное время принято отцов да матерей за предрассудок считать, но ведь по законам-то, кажется, и в наше время не позволено стариков отцов за волосы таскать, да по роже каблуками на полу бить, в их собственном доме, да похваляться прийти и совсем убить — всё при свидетелях-с.  
Of course, in these fashionable modern times it's accepted to count fathers and mothers a prejudice, but surely even by the laws of our day it isn't permitted to drag old fathers about by the hair, to kick them in the face with one's heels on the floor of their own house, and to threaten to come back and kill them outright — all of it before witnesses, sir.
> Impersonal «не позволено» + genitive object: «Не позволено» is a short passive predicate used impersonally ('it is not permitted'), governing the infinitives «таскать», «бить». Under the negation the animate plural object «стариков отцов» appears in the genitive/accusative-as-genitive — the genitive of negation reaching across the infinitive.
> «считать ... за» + accusative = 'to count as': «Считать кого за что» ('to consider X as Y') governs «за» + accusative «предрассудок» ('a prejudice'). «Принято ... считать» is the impersonal 'it is accepted to consider.' «Да» links 'fathers and mothers' in folksy coordination.
> «рожа» — mug, ugly face: «Рожа» is a coarse, abusive word for 'face' — 'mug, snout.' That the old man applies it to his own beaten face, kicked «каблуками» (with bootheels), heightens the grotesque self-pity of his catalogue of grievances against Dmitri.

Я бы, если бы захотел, скрючил его и мог бы за вчерашнее сейчас засадить.  
If I chose to, I'd bend him double and could have him locked up this minute for what happened yesterday."
> A double conditional with бы: The whole boast is irrealis: «бы» plus a past-tense verb builds the conditional (here three times — «скрючил», «мог бы», and the «если бы захотел» clause). Note how «бы» floats to the front, leaning on «Я», before the verb even arrives — a hallmark of its mobility.
> «скрючить» — to bend double: From «крюк» (a hook): literally to twist someone into a hook, hence to crumple or double them up. A vivid, physical threat in Fyodor Pavlovich's mouth, coarser than a neutral «согнуть».
> «засадить» — to have locked up: Colloquial for clapping someone in jail (literally 'to plant/sit them in'). Paired with «за вчерашнее» (genitive after «за», 'for yesterday's [business]'), it makes the threat of a legal complaint concrete and casual at once.

— Так вы не хотите жаловаться, нет?  
"So you don't mean to lodge a complaint, no?"
> Negated infinitive complement: «не хотите жаловаться» — the negation «не» attaches to the finite verb «хотите», while the imperfective infinitive «жаловаться» (to complain, a -ся reflexive verb) names the action declined. The tag «нет?» tacked on the end seeks confirmation, like English 'no?'.

— Иван отговорил. Я бы наплевал на Ивана, да я сам одну штуку знаю...  
"Ivan talked me out of it. I'd snap my fingers at Ivan, but I have a little trick of my own up my sleeve..."
> «наплевать на» — to spit on / not give a damn: Literally 'to spit on someone', the idiom means to treat them with contempt, to snap one's fingers at them. Here in the conditional («Я бы наплевал»), it expresses how little weight Ivan's advice would carry — coarse, dismissive register.
> «да» as a hinge and «сам» for emphasis: Sentence-initial «да» here is the colloquial adversative-additive 'but/and yet', not 'yes'. The intensifier «сам» ('myself, on my own') stresses that he, personally, has a card up his sleeve — «штука» here meaning a trick or scheme.

И, нагнувшись к Алеше, он продолжал конфиденциальным полушепотом:  
And bending toward Alyosha, he went on in a confidential half-whisper:
> Perfective gerund «нагнувшись»: «нагнувшись» (having bent down) is a perfective past деепричастие in -вшись — a verbal adverb naming the prior, completed action that sets up the main clause. It shares the subject «он» and compresses 'he bent toward Alyosha and went on' into one clause, a typical narrative move.
> «полушепот» — a half-whisper: The prefix «полу-» ('half-') yields the conspiratorial 'half-whisper'; it stands in the instrumental «полушепотом» as the manner of speaking. «конфиденциальным» is a French/Latin loan that sits with deliberate, faintly comic ostentation in the old man's narration.

— Засади я его, подлеца, она услышит, что я его засадил, и тотчас к нему побежит.  
"If I have him locked up, the scoundrel, she'll hear that I've had him locked up, and she'll run to him at once.
> Imperative form as a conditional: «Засади» looks like an imperative ('lock up!'), but with the subject «я» it forms a colloquial conditional: 'were I to lock him up...'. This 'imperative-of-condition' is a lively spoken pattern equivalent to «если я засажу».
> Animate accusative «подлеца»: «подлеца» (the scoundrel) is in the accusative, in apposition to «его» as the object of «засади»; because it is animate masculine, the accusative borrows the genitive ending -а. A small grammatical tell that the noun is a person, not a thing.
> Perfective future «побежит»: «побежит» (she'll run) is a perfective verb conjugated with present-tense endings, which yields a single completed future action. The prefix «по-» on the unidirectional motion verb «бежать» gives the sense of setting off running, here toward him («к нему», dative after «к»).

А услышит если сегодня, что тот меня до полусмерти, слабого старика, избил, так, пожалуй, бросит его, да ко мне придет навестить...  
But if she hears today that he beat me, a feeble old man, half to death, then she may well throw him over and come to visit me instead...
> Inverted, fronted «если»: Normal order would be «А если услышит сегодня»; the speaker fronts the verb «услышит» (perfective future) and tucks «если» after it — a colloquial, emphatic dislocation. The conjunction still opens the conditional clause.
> Accusative object framing a pitiful self-portrait: «меня... слабого старика» — the object pronoun «меня» is expanded by the appositive «слабого старика» (a feeble old man), both accusative, animate. «до полусмерти» (genitive after «до») means 'to within a half-death', i.e. nearly to death — the old man cannily casts himself as the victim.
> Chain of perfective futures: «бросит... придет» are perfective futures stacking single completed events — she'll throw him over, then come. «придет навестить» (come to visit) pairs a perfective motion verb with a purpose infinitive; «ко мне» takes the dative after «к».

Вот ведь мы какими характерами одарены — только чтобы насупротив делать.  
That's the kind of natures we're endowed with — bent only on doing the contrary.
> Short passive participle «одарены»: «одарены» is the short (predicative) form of the past passive participle of «одарить» (to endow): 'we are endowed'. The thing we are endowed with stands in the instrumental — «какими характерами» (with what sorts of natures). The particle «ведь» appeals to shared understanding ('after all').
> «чтобы» + infinitive of purpose: «чтобы делать» states the bent of those natures — 'only so as to do the contrary'. «насупротив» is a folksy adverb ('contrariwise, in opposition'), older and earthier than the standard «наоборот».

Я ее насквозь знаю!  
I know her through and through!
> «насквозь» — through and through: An adverb meaning 'all the way through', from «сквозь» (through). «Я ее насквозь знаю» — 'I know her clean through', i.e. inside out — confident, possessive knowledge of Grushenka's character.

А что, коньячку не выпьешь?  
Well, won't you have a drop of brandy?
> Diminutive partitive genitive «коньячку»: «коньячку» is the partitive genitive of the diminutive «коньячок» — 'a little drop of brandy'. Russian uses a special -у/-ю partitive genitive for 'some of' a mass noun, and the diminutive makes the offer cozy. The negated question «не выпьешь?» is the polite Russian way to offer ('won't you have...?').
> «А что» — conversational opener: A loose discourse opener, 'And, say...' / 'Well, what about...', launching the offer with a casual nudge. «А» here is the soft contrastive/topic-shifting conjunction, not 'but'.

Возьми-ка кофейку холодненького, да я тебе и прилью четверть рюмочки, хорошо это, брат, для вкуса.  
Take a little cold coffee, and I'll pour you a quarter-glass into it; it's good, brother, for the flavor."
> Diminutives that coax: Fyodor Pavlovitch piles on diminutive endings: «коньячку» and «кофейку» are diminutive partitive genitives (a little brandy, a little coffee), «холодненького» softens 'cold,' and «рюмочки» is a tiny «рюмка» (shot-glass). These forms make the offer sound cozy and wheedling. English has no grammatical diminutive, so we carry the tone with words like 'a drop,' 'a quarter-glass,' and 'brother.'
> Imperative softened by «-ка»: «Возьми» is the imperative 'take'; the clitic «-ка» softens it into a coaxing 'do take', 'go on and take'. The particle gives commands a familiar, wheedling warmth — exactly the old man's tone.

— Нет, не надо, благодарю.  
"No, I don't want any, thank you.
> Impersonal «не надо»: «надо» (it is necessary / one must) is an impersonal predicative with no nominative subject; negated, «не надо» means 'there's no need / no, thanks'. Alyosha's clipped refusal leaves the dative experiencer («мне») unspoken but understood.

Вот этот хлебец возьму с собой, коли дадите, — сказал Алеша и, взяв трехкопеечную французскую булку, положил ее в карман подрясника. — А коньяку и вам бы не пить, — опасливо посоветовал он, вглядываясь в лицо старика.  
I'll take this roll with me, though, if you'll let me," said Alyosha, and taking a three-kopeck French roll, he put it in the pocket of his cassock. "And you'd do better not to drink brandy either," he advised warily, peering into the old man's face.
> «хлебец» — diminutive of bread: A diminutive of «хлеб» (bread/loaf), here a small roll. The affectionate suffix suits Alyosha's gentle plainness; it pairs with the «трехкопеечную французскую булку» — a cheap white roll.
> «коли» — archaic/folksy 'if': «коли» is a colloquial, slightly old-fashioned conjunction for «если» (if), common in 19th-century peasant and informal speech. «дадите» is a perfective future ('if you give/allow'); the formal «вы» form fits Alyosha's deference to his father.
> Conditional «бы» + infinitive as gentle advice: «вам бы не пить» — dative «вам» plus «бы» plus an infinitive forms a soft recommendation: 'you'd do better not to drink'. The negated object «коньяку» takes the genitive of negation (genitive of the mass noun, not accusative).

— Правда твоя, раздражает, а спокою не дает.  
"You're right, it does irritate me and gives me no peace.
> Inverted possessive «Правда твоя»: Word order is inverted from «твоя правда» for a folksy, conceding ring — 'right you are'. The possessive «твоя» agrees with feminine «правда» in gender, number, and case (nominative).
> Genitive of negation «спокою»: «не дает» governs a genitive object under negation: «спокою» is the old genitive/partitive of «спокой» (peace, rest) — 'gives no peace'. The contrastive «а» pivots between two effects of the brandy.

А ведь только одну рюмочку... Я ведь из шкапика...  
But only one little glass... I'll just get it from the cupboard..."
> The wheedling particle «ведь»: «ведь» appeals to shared, self-evident reasoning — 'but after all... only one little glass'. It softens the self-justification, the verb of drinking left unspoken. Note again the diminutive «рюмочку».
> «шкапик» — diminutive of an old word for cupboard: «шкап» is the 19th-century form of modern «шкаф» (cupboard/cabinet); «шкапик» is its diminutive ('little cupboard'). Dostoevsky even sets the word in quotation marks later, half-mocking the old man's pet hiding-place for his brandy. «из» takes the genitive.

Он отворил ключом «шкапик», налил рюмочку, выпил, потом шкапик запер и ключ опять в карман положил.  
He unlocked the "cupboard" with a key, poured out a glass, drank it off, then locked the cupboard again and put the key back in his pocket.
> A chain of perfective pasts: Five perfective past verbs march the action forward step by step — unlocked, poured, drank, locked, put back — each a discrete completed event. This staccato perfective sequence is how Russian narrates a brisk series of finished actions.
> Instrumental of means «ключом»: «ключом» (with a key) is the instrumental of «ключ», naming the instrument of the action — the core use of this case. «отворил» is a slightly bookish perfective for 'opened/unlocked', warmer than «открыл».

— И довольно, с рюмки не околею.  
"And that's enough; one glass won't be the death of me."
> Genitive after «с» + colloquial negation: «с рюмки» here means 'from one glass' (the preposition «с» with the genitive, expressing cause/source). «не околею» is a perfective future, 1st person — 'I won't drop dead'.
> «околеть» — to croak (of animals): «околеть» properly means to die of an animal — to perish, to drop dead — and is crude, even self-deprecating, when used of a person. Fyodor Pavlovich's coarse word choice mocks his own mortality.

— Вот вы теперь и добрее стали, — улыбнулся Алеша.  
"There, you've grown kinder already," smiled Alyosha.
> Comparative «добрее» as predicate after «стать»: «добрее» is the invariable predicative comparative of «добрый» (kinder). With «стали» (became, perfective past of «стать»), it states a change of state — 'you've grown kinder'. «стать» typically takes an instrumental noun complement but a bare comparative adjective here.

— Гм! Я тебя и без коньяку люблю, а с подлецами и я подлец.  
"Hm! I love you even without the brandy, but with scoundrels I'm a scoundrel too.
> Genitive after «без»: «без коньяку» — the preposition «без» (without) governs the genitive, here the -у partitive variant of «коньяк». The «и» before «без» is the emphatic 'even' ('I love you even without the brandy'), not the conjunction 'and'.
> Instrumental after «с» + zero-copula present: «с подлецами» (with scoundrels) takes the instrumental after «с» ('together with'). The second clause «и я подлец» has no copula — Russian omits 'to be' in the present, juxtaposing subject «я» and nominative predicate «подлец».

Ванька не едет в Чермашню — почему?  
Vanka isn't going to Chermashnya — why is that?
> «Ванька» — a dismissive form of Ivan: «Ваня» is the affectionate diminutive of Иван, but the «-ка» suffix in «Ванька» turns it contemptuous/familiar — a belittling 'Vanka'. The old man's choice of name is characterization: he diminishes his clever son even as he speaks of him.

Шпионить ему надо: много ль я Грушеньке дам, коли она придет.  
He has to spy: how much I'll give Grushenka if she comes.
> Dative-subject impersonal «ему надо»: A classic subjectless construction: the experiencer stands in the dative («ему», to/for him) with the impersonal predicative «надо» (it is necessary) plus the infinitive «шпионить» — 'he has to spy'. No nominative subject appears.
> The interrogative particle «ль» (= ли): «ль» is the reduced enclitic «ли», forming an embedded indirect question after «много»: '[to learn] how much I'll give'. «Грушеньке» is the dative indirect object ('to Grushenka'); «дам» is the perfective future of «дать».

Все подлецы!  
They're all scoundrels!
> «подлец» — scoundrel, a leitmotif word: «подлец» (base wretch, scoundrel) and its plural «подлецы» toll through this whole scene as Fyodor Pavlovich's favorite term of abuse — and self-description. The repetition is a deliberate motif of the chapter's moral atmosphere.

Да я Ивана не признаю совсем.  
And as for Ivan, I don't acknowledge him at all.
> Genitive of negation «Ивана»: Under negation the direct object shifts to genitive: «Ивана» (animate, gen. = acc. here anyway) as object of «не признаю» — 'I don't acknowledge Ivan at all'. «совсем» with negation reinforces 'not at all'.

Откуда такой появился?  
Where did such a fellow come from?
> Demonstrative «такой» standing alone: «такой» ('such a one', 'a fellow like that') functions as a noun phrase, subject of «появился» (perfective past, 'turned up'). «Откуда» ('from where') asks rhetorically where this alien son sprang from.

Не наша совсем душа.  
His soul is no kin of ours at all.
> Zero-copula negation with possessive: A copula-less present-tense statement: '[his] soul [is] not ours at all'. «наша» is the possessive agreeing with feminine «душа»; «не» negates the predicate, «совсем» intensifies. The elided 'is' is normal in the Russian present.

И точно я ему что оставлю?  
And do I really mean to leave him anything?
> Indefinite «что» = «что-нибудь»: Bare «что» here stands for «что-нибудь» ('anything') — a colloquial reduction in questions. «ему» is the dative indirect object ('to him'); «оставлю» is the perfective future. «точно» means 'really, indeed' here.

Да я и завещания-то не оставлю, было бы это вам известно.  
Why, I shan't even leave a will, let that be known to you.
> Genitive of negation + topic clitic «-то»: «завещания» is genitive of negation (object of negated «не оставлю» — 'won't leave a will'). The hyphenated clitic «-то» fastens onto «завещания» to mark it as the known topic, with a faintly insistent shade: 'a will, mind you'.
> Conditional «бы» in a polite formula: «было бы... известно» — short passive participle «известно» (known) with «было» and the irrealis «бы» forms a set, slightly formal flourish: 'let this be known to you'. The dative «вам» names whom it should be known to.

А Митьку я раздавлю, как таракана.  
And Mitka I'll crush like a cockroach.
> Fronted animate accusative «Митьку»: The object «Митьку» is fronted to the head of the clause for emphasis (topic-comment word order); cases keep the roles clear regardless. Both «Митьку» and «таракана» are animate accusatives borrowing the genitive ending. «раздавлю» is the perfective future ('I'll crush').
> «Митька» — a coarse diminutive of Dmitri: Дмитрий → Митя (affectionate) → Митька, where «-ка» now carries contempt or rough familiarity. The old man belittles his eldest son, his rival for Grushenka, even as he names him.

Я черных тараканов ночью туфлей давлю: так и щелкнет, как наступишь.  
At night I squash the black cockroaches with my slipper: they go off with a crack when you step on them.
> Instrumental of means «туфлей»: «туфлей» (with a slipper) is the instrumental naming the instrument of squashing. «давлю» is imperfective present, here habitual — 'I [regularly] squash', describing his nightly routine rather than a single act.
> Perfective for a vivid instantaneous event: «щелкнет» (it'll go off with a crack) is a perfective with the semelfactive suffix -ну-, naming a single sharp instantaneous sound. «как наступишь» (when/as you step) is a perfective future used in a generalizing 'whenever' sense. «так и» heightens the sudden vividness.

Щелкнет и Митька твой.  
That Mitka of yours will crack too.
> Verb-first order for menace: The perfective future verb «Щелкнет» leads, subject «Митька твой» trailing — fronting the comment (he'll crack) ahead of the topic for ominous emphasis. The free word order, enabled by the case system, lets Dostoevsky land the threat first.

Твой Митька, потому что ты его любишь.  
Your Mitka, because you love him.
> Causal «потому что»: «потому что» (because) opens a subordinate clause of cause, set off by a comma. The old man taunts Alyosha by tagging Mitka as 'yours' — «твой» possessive — precisely because Alyosha loves him.

Вот ты его любишь, а я не боюсь, что ты его любишь.  
There, you love him, and I'm not afraid that you love him.
> Reflexive «бояться» + «что»-clause: «боюсь» is from «бояться» (to fear), a verb existing only in the -ся reflexive form. Here it takes a «что»-clause of fact ('I'm not afraid that you love him'). The contrastive «а» pivots from 'you love him' to his own fearlessness.

А кабы Иван его любил, я бы за себя боялся того, что он его любит.  
But if Ivan loved him, I'd be afraid for myself that he loved him.
> Counterfactual with «кабы» and «бы»: «кабы» is a folksy, archaic conditional 'if' (= «если бы»), pairing with «бы» in the main clause to build a counterfactual: 'were Ivan to love him, I'd fear...'. Both verbs are past-tense forms, as the irrealis requires.
> Reflexive pronoun «себя»: «себя» points back to the clause subject «я» — 'I'd fear for myself'. It has no nominative and takes its case from the governing «за» (here accusative). Distinct from the verbal clitic -ся on «боялся».

Но Иван никого не любит, Иван не наш человек, эти люди, как Иван, это, брат, не наши люди, это пыль поднявшаяся... Подует ветер, и пыль пройдет...  
But Ivan loves no one; Ivan is not one of us; people like Ivan are not our people, brother — they're dust kicked up... The wind blows, and the dust passes..."
> Negative concord «никого... не»: «никого не любит» — the ни-pronoun «никого» (genitive/accusative of «никто', nobody) co-occurs obligatorily with «не» on the verb. Russian piles negatives in agreement, not cancellation: 'loves nobody' literally reads 'nobody-not-loves'.
> Past active participle «поднявшаяся»: «поднявшаяся» is a past active participle of «подняться» (to rise up), agreeing with feminine «пыль» — 'dust that has risen / been kicked up'. The participle, with its -ся still attached, condenses a whole который-clause into one elevated modifier.
> Perfective futures for a gnomic image: «Подует... пройдет» are perfective futures used in a proverbial, timeless sense — 'the wind blows and the dust passes'. The perfective casts each as a single completed event, giving the image its clean, fated finality.

Вчера было глупость мне в голову пришла, когда я тебе на сегодня велел приходить: хотел было я через тебя узнать насчет Митьки-то, если б ему тысячку, ну другую, я бы теперь отсчитал, согласился ли бы он, нищий и мерзавец, отселева убраться совсем, лет на пять, а лучше на тридцать пять, да без Грушки и уже от нее совсем отказаться, а?  
"Yesterday a foolish notion came into my head, when I told you to come today: I'd meant to find out from you about Mitka — whether, if I were to count out for him now a thousand, say, or another, he'd agree, the beggar and blackguard, to clear out of these parts altogether, for five years, or better thirty-five, and without Grushka, and to renounce her completely — eh?"
> Idiom «прийти в голову» with dative experiencer: «в голову пришла» (literally 'came into the head') is the idiom for a thought occurring; the person it occurs to stands in the dative — «мне». «глупость» (a foolish thing) is the nominative subject. A vivid example of Russia's experiencer-centered framing of inner life.
> The particle «было» of a thwarted intention: «хотел было» uses the special particle «было», which marks an action begun or intended but interrupted or abandoned — 'I had meant/started to'. It signals the plan that the old man is now retracting.
> Nested conditional + embedded «ли»-question: A tangle of irrealis: «если б... я бы отсчитал» (were I to count out) is the conditional, and inside it «согласился ли бы он» is an indirect yes/no question ('whether he'd agree') marrying «ли» to the conditional «бы». «тысячку» is the diminutive accusative of «тысяча».
> «отселева» — archaic 'from here': «отселева» (= modern «отсюда», 'from here / hence') is a markedly archaic, folk-bookish adverb. Its old-fashioned ring colors the old man's would-be banishment of Mitka with a quasi-legalistic, antique solemnity.
> «нищий», «мерзавец» — beggar and blackguard: «нищий» is a pauper/beggar; «мерзавец» a villain or blackguard (from «мерзкий», loathsome). Standing in apposition to «он», they spit contempt at Dmitri — the old man's habitual abuse, echoing his «подлец».

— Я... я спрошу его... — пробормотал Алеша. — Если все три тысячи, так, может быть, он...  
"I... I'll ask him..." Alyosha murmured. "If it were all three thousand, then perhaps he..."
> Genitive after «три» — «три тысячи»: After «три» the counted noun takes the genitive singular: «тысячи» (genitive sg. of «тысяча»). The «так» here is the resumptive 'then' answering the «если» clause — a colloquial 'if X, then...'.

— Врешь! Не надо теперь спрашивать, ничего не надо!  
"That's a lie! There's no need to ask now, no need for anything!
> Negative concord in an impersonal: «ничего не надо» — the ni-pronoun «ничего» (genitive of «ничто») agrees with the negated impersonal «не надо»: 'no need for anything'. The genitive «ничего» also reflects the negation governing it.
> «Врёшь!» — 'You're lying!' / 'Nonsense!': From «врать» (to lie, to talk nonsense), 2nd-person present. As an exclamation it is less a literal accusation than a brusque 'rubbish! / that's not it!' — the old man dismissing Alyosha's tentative suggestion.

Я передумал.  
I've changed my mind.
> Perfective «передумать»: «передумал» is the perfective past of «передумать» (to change one's mind), where the prefix «пере-» conveys 'thinking over / reversing'. The perfective marks a single completed mental turn — the decision is made and done.

Это вчера глупость в башку мне сглупу влезла.  
It was just a foolish notion that crept into my noggin yesterday out of foolishness.
> Dative experiencer + folksy diction: Same 'into the head' idiom as before, but coarser: «башка» is a slangy 'noggin/skull' and «сглупу» a colloquial adverb 'out of foolishness'. «мне» is again the dative the thought happened to; «влезла» (crept/climbed in) is a vivid perfective.
> «башка» and «сглупу» — low colloquial coloring: «башка» (head/noggin, originally Turkic) is markedly low and earthy beside neutral «голова»; «сглупу» means 'foolishly, out of stupidity'. The clustered slang paints Fyodor Pavlovich's self-mocking, vulgar register.

Ничего не дам, ничегошеньки, мне денежки мои нужны самому, — замахал рукою старик. — Я его и без того, как таракана, придавлю.  
I'll give nothing, not a thing; I need my little hoard for myself," the old man waved his hand. "I'll crush him like a cockroach anyway.
> «ничегошеньки» — 'not a blessed thing': An expressive, emphatic diminutive of «ничего» (nothing) built with -ошеньк-, intensifying the negation to 'not the tiniest thing'. The cooing suffix on a word of refusal is grimly comic, very much in the old man's voice.
> Dative + «нужен» agreeing + intensifier «самому»: «нужны» (needed) is a short adjective agreeing with the plural subject «денежки»; the needer stands in the dative «мне», reinforced by the dative intensifier «самому» ('I myself'). «денежки» is an affectionate diminutive of «деньги' — his beloved 'little money'.
> Animate accusative «таракана» + perfective: «таракана» (cockroach) is an animate accusative borrowing the genitive ending, object in the simile «как таракана». «придавлю» is a perfective future — 'I'll squash [him]'. The recurring cockroach image links these threats across the scene.

Ничего не говори ему, а то еще будет надеяться.  
Say nothing to him, or he'll only start hoping.
> Negative imperative + concord: «не говори» is the negated imperfective imperative ('don't tell'), and imperfective aspect is the norm for prohibitions. «Ничего» is the ni-object in concord with «не»; «ему» the dative addressee.
> «а то» + compound future «будет надеяться»: «а то» means 'or else / otherwise'. «будет надеяться» is the imperfective compound future (быть + imperfective infinitive «надеяться», a -ся verb) — 'he'll [go on] hoping', stressing an ongoing state rather than a single act.

Да и тебе совсем нечего у меня делать, ступай-ка.  
And there's nothing for you to do here either, so off you go.
> The negative «нечего» + dative + infinitive: «нечего делать» is the negative-existential construction 'there is nothing to do', built on «нечего» (the stressed negative pronoun) plus an infinitive; the person concerned takes the dative «тебе». «у меня» ('at my place', genitive after «у») marks where.
> Imperative «ступай» + softening «-ка»: «ступай» is the imperative of «ступать», an old-fashioned, folksy 'go / be off'; the clitic «-ка» softens it to a brusque-but-familiar 'off you go now'.

Невеста-то эта, Катерина-то Ивановна, которую он так тщательно от меня всё время прятал, за него идет али нет?  
That bride of his, Katerina Ivanovna, whom he's kept hidden so carefully from me all this time — is she going to marry him or not?
> Relative «которую» in the accusative: «которую» agrees with its antecedent «невеста/Катерина» in feminine singular but takes the accusative its own clause demands (object of «прятал», hid). «от меня» (genitive after «от») marks from whom; «прятал» is imperfective past for the drawn-out concealment.
> «идти за» = 'to marry' + folksy «али»: «идти за [кого]» (literally 'to go behind/for someone') is the set idiom for a woman marrying a man; «за него» takes the accusative. «али» is an archaic, folk variant of «или» (or) — 'or not?'.
> Topic clitic «-то» twice: The emphatic clitic «-то» fastens onto «Невеста» and «Катерина» to flag them as the known topic being raised — 'that bride, this Katerina, the one we know'. Doubling it gives a buttonholing, gossipy insistence.

Ты вчера ходил к ней, кажется?  
You went to see her yesterday, I think?"
> Multidirectional «ходил» — a round trip: «ходил» is the multidirectional motion verb (versus unidirectional «шёл»), here in the past with the sense of a completed there-and-back visit: 'you went to see her [and came back]'. «к ней» takes the dative after «к».

— Она его ни за что не хочет оставить.  
"She won't give him up for anything."
> Emphatic «ни за что» in negative concord: «ни за что» ('for nothing, on no account') is a fixed ни-phrase intensifying the negation, in concord with «не хочет». «оставить» (to leave/give up) is the perfective infinitive complement; «его» its animate accusative object.

— Вот таких-то эти нежные барышни и любят, кутил да подлецов!  
"So that's the sort these tender young ladies fall in love with — rakes and scoundrels!
> Fronted accusative «таких-то» + emphatic «и»: «таких-то» (the accusative animate plural of «такой», 'just such ones') is fronted for contemptuous emphasis, with the topic clitic «-то» and the emphatic particle «и» ('it's precisely such men these ladies love'). Word order, not case, carries the sneer.
> «кутила» — a carouser/rake: A «кутила» is a debauchee, a man given to wild drinking-and-spending sprees («кутить»); paired with «подлецов» (scoundrels) it caps the old man's cynical theory of what such ladies fall for. The folksy «да» links them ('rakes and scoundrels').

Дрянь, я тебе скажу, эти барышни бледные; то ли дело...  
Trash, I tell you, these pale young ladies; now if it were...
> Zero-copula predicate, fronted for scorn: «Дрянь... эти барышни бледные» — 'these pale young ladies [are] trash', with the predicate «дрянь» fronted and no copula in the present. The dislocated order spits the verdict out first.
> «то ли дело» — 'now that's a different matter': A fixed colloquial expression introducing a favorable contrast — 'now if it were... that'd be another thing entirely'. The old man trails off, implying his preference for a more full-blooded sort of woman (Grushenka).

Ну! кабы мне его молодость, да тогдашнее мое лицо (потому что я лучше его был собой в двадцать восемь-то лет), так я бы точно так же, как и он, побеждал.  
Ah! If only I had his youth and the face I had back then (for at twenty-eight I was better-looking than he is), then I'd carry all before me, exactly as he does.
> «кабы»-counterfactual answered by «так»: Another archaic «кабы» (= «если бы») conditional, its apodosis introduced by «так» and built with «бы» + past «побеждал». The wished-for thing «молодость» sits with dative «мне» in a 'if only I had...' frame.
> Suppletive comparative «лучше» + «его»: «лучше» is the irregular (suppletive) comparative of «хороший/хорошо' (better). The thing compared against takes the bare genitive «его» ('better than he'), the standard Russian comparative-of-comparison without «чем». «собой» (instrumental of «себя») specifies 'in looks'.
> Genitive plural «лет» after a numeral: «лет» (genitive plural of «год', supplied suppletively from «лето») follows the compound numeral «двадцать восемь», which ends in «восемь» (8), so requires the genitive plural. The clitic «-то» adds an aside-emphasis on the age.

Каналья он!  
He's a rogue!
> «каналья» — rascal, scoundrel: A French-Italian loan («canaille»), 'rabble / blackguard', used as a vivid term of abuse with a faintly archaic, theatrical flavor. The old man relishes such colorful invective.

А Грушеньку все-таки не получит-с, не получит-с... В грязь обращу!  
But Grushenka he shan't have, sir, he shan't have her... I'll grind him into the mud!"
> The deferential clitic «-с»: «-с» (slovoer, a contraction of «сударь», 'sir') tacked onto words lends an obsequious, mock-polite or ironic deference. Here, doubled on «получит» ('he shan't have her, sir'), it gives the threat a sneering, servile sarcasm. A vanished marker of pre-revolutionary speech.
> Accusative of result after «обратить в»: «обратить в [что]» means 'to turn into'; the result «грязь» (mud/filth) takes the accusative after «в» (motion-into sense). «обращу» is a perfective future — 'I'll grind him into the mud'.

Он снова рассвирепел с последних слов.  
He had flown into a rage again at his last words.
> Perfective «рассвирепел» — entering a rage: «рассвирепел» (perfective past) marks the onset of a state — the prefix «рас-» here conveys flaring up into fury. Aspect makes it a single completed transition ('flew into a rage') rather than ongoing anger. «с последних слов» = 'from/at his last words' (genitive after «с»).

— Ступай и ты, нечего тебе у меня делать сегодня, — резко отрезал он.  
"Off you go too; there's nothing for you to do here today," he snapped harshly.
> «нечего» + dative + infinitive, again: The same negative-existential «нечего делать» ('nothing to do') with dative «тебе» recurs as the old man's brush-off. «и ты» ('you too') with imperative «ступай» dismisses Alyosha as he had dismissed others.
> «отрезать» — to snap (a retort): Figuratively «отрезать» (literally 'to cut off') means to retort curtly, to bite off a sharp reply; with «резко» ('sharply') it doubles the abruptness. Note the play of the «рез-» root in both words.

Алеша подошел проститься и поцеловал его в плечо.  
Alyosha went up to take his leave and kissed him on the shoulder.
> Prefixed motion + perfective chain: «подошел» (perfective of «подходить/подойти', to approach) plus «поцеловал» narrates two completed acts in sequence. «проститься» (to take one's leave, a -ся verb) is the purpose infinitive. «в плечо» — accusative after «в» for the point of contact (kissed on the shoulder).

— Ты чего это? — удивился немного старик. — Еще увидимся ведь. Аль думаешь, не увидимся?  
"What's this for?" the old man wondered a little. "We'll see each other again, surely. Or do you think we won't?"
> Colloquial genitive «чего»: «чего» here is a colloquial substitute for «что» ('what's this for? / what are you up to?'), the genitive form doing service as a casual interrogative. «это» tags it with bemused emphasis.
> Reciprocal -ся future + «ведь»: «увидимся» is the perfective future of «увидеться» — the reciprocal -ся meaning 'to see each other'. «ведь» appeals for shared reassurance ('we'll meet again, surely'), betraying a flicker of the old man's unease.
> Folksy «аль» introducing a question: «аль» is a colloquial/dialectal variant of «или / разве» ('or / surely not'), opening a worried question: 'or do you think we won't?'. Its rustic ring suits the old man's earthy speech.

— Совсем нет, я только так, нечаянно.  
"Not at all; I only did it, just so, without thinking."
> «так» (just because) and «нечаянно»: «только так» is the idiomatic 'just so, for no particular reason'; «нечаянно» means 'accidentally, without intending'. Together they let Alyosha downplay his unexpectedly tender kiss — though the reader feels it as a quiet farewell.

— Да ничего и я, и я только так... — глядел на него старик. — Слышь ты, слышь, — крикнул он ему вслед, — приходи когда-нибудь, поскорей, и на уху, уху сварю, особенную, не сегодняшнюю, непременно приходи!  
"And it was nothing with me either, just so..." the old man looked at him. "Listen here, listen," he called after him, "come again sometime, soon, for some fish-soup; I'll cook a soup, a special one, not today's sort — be sure to come!
> «вслед» + dative «ему»: «вслед» ('after, in the wake of') governs the dative — «ему вслед», 'called after him' as Alyosha leaves. «крикнул» is the perfective (semelfactive) of a single shout.
> Imperfective imperatives of invitation + «-нибудь»: «приходи» is repeated in the imperfective imperative — fitting for an open invitation to repeated visiting. «когда-нибудь» ('sometime, any time') uses the non-specific indefinite particle «-нибудь», while «непременно» ('without fail') urges him on.
> «уха» — Russian fish-soup: «уха» is a clear fish-broth, a homely Russian dish; «на уху» means 'for [a meal of] fish-soup'. The old man's sudden hospitable warmth — a special «уха», not «сегодняшнюю» (today's) — flickers oddly against his just-spent rage.

Да завтра, слышишь, завтра приходи!  
Tomorrow, do you hear, come tomorrow!"
> Insistent imperative «приходи»: The imperfective imperative «приходи» repeats with «завтра» ('come tomorrow!'), the imperfective fitting an invitation to a (potentially repeated) visit. «слышишь» ('do you hear') tacked in heightens the pleading insistence.

И только что Алеша вышел за дверь, подошел опять к шкапику и хлопнул еще полрюмочки.  
And the moment Alyosha was out the door, he went over to the cupboard again and tossed off another half-glass.
> «только что» + perfective for 'the moment...': «только что» here means 'as soon as / the moment that', launching a temporal clause; «вышел» is the perfective past of «выйти» (to go out), a prefixed motion verb. «за дверь» — accusative after «за» for motion to behind/beyond the door.
> «хлопнуть» — to knock back a drink: Colloquial «хлопнуть» (literally 'to clap/slap') means to toss off a drink in one go; «полрюмочки» is 'half a little glass'. The earthy verb captures the old man's furtive, greedy gulp.

— Больше не буду! — пробормотал он, крякнув, опять запер шкапик, опять положил ключ в карман, затем пошел в спальню, в бессилии прилег на постель и в один миг заснул.  
"No more!" he muttered, grunting, locked the cupboard again, put the key back in his pocket, then went into the bedroom, lay down feebly on the bed, and in an instant was asleep.
> Perfective gerund «крякнув»: «крякнув» (having grunted/given a grunt) is a perfective past деепричастие in -в, naming a brief completed act accompanying «пробормотал». It shares the subject «он» and tucks a second action into the same clause.
> A closing chain of perfectives: The paragraph ends on a rapid file of perfective pasts — locked, put, went, lay down, fell asleep — each a finished event sealing the scene. The repeated «опять» ('again') underscores the old man's ritual furtiveness with key and cupboard.
> Prepositional «в бессилии» + «в один миг»: «в бессилии» ('in feebleness/exhaustion', prepositional after «в' for a state) and «в один миг» ('in an instant', accusative for a span) frame his sudden collapse into sleep. «прилег» and «заснул» are perfectives — he lay down and dropped off, each complete.
---

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.