# The Brothers Karamazov, A Laceration in the Cottage

Братья Карамазовы · Fyodor Dostoevsky · Book IV — Lacerations

Source: https://1732studios.com/books/karamazov/b4-c6. Data: https://1732studios.com/books/karamazov/b4-c6.json.


У него было действительно серьезное горе, из таких, какие он доселе редко испытывал.  
He was carrying a genuine grief, of a kind he had rarely known until now.
> «У + genitive» possession: Russian expresses 'he had' not with a verb 'to have' but with «у» plus the genitive of the possessor («у него»), leaving the thing possessed in the nominative as the real subject — literally 'by him there was a grief'. The neuter past «было» agrees with neuter «горе».
> Correlative «такой … какой»: «из таких, какие…» pairs the demonstrative «такой» (such, of that kind) with the relative «какой» (of what kind), the standard way to say 'of a kind that…'. «какие» agrees in plural with «таких» but takes accusative as the object of «испытывал».
> «доселе» — until now (archaic): «доселе» ('hitherto, until now') is a bookish, period-elevated adverb that a 19th-century narrator reaches for where modern speech would say «до сих пор». It sets a faintly solemn, retrospective tone.

Он выскочил и «наглупил» — и в каком же деле: в любовных чувствах!  
He had blundered in, had "made a fool of himself" — and in what, of all things: in matters of love!
> Perfective verbs of a single misstep: Both «выскочил» (jumped/blundered out) and «наглупил» (did a foolish thing) are perfective pasts naming single, completed, result-bearing acts. The prefix «на-» on «наглупил» gives the flavour 'to have committed a quantity of foolishness'.
> The particle «же» as indignation: «же» here is not 'and' but an emphatic modal particle injecting exasperated self-reproach — 'and in what a matter, of all things!'. English can only render it with stress or an interjection.
> Prepositional of sphere after «в»: «в любовных чувствах» ('in matters of love') stands in the prepositional case after «в», here naming a domain rather than a physical location. The adjective «любовных» agrees in prepositional plural with «чувствах».

«Ну что я в этом понимаю, что я в этих делах разбирать могу? — в сотый раз повторял он про себя, краснея, — ох, стыд бы ничего, стыд только должное мне наказание, — беда в том, что несомненно теперь я буду причиною новых несчастий… А старец посылал меня, чтобы примирить и соединить. Так ли соединяют?»  
"What do I understand of any of this, what can I make out in such matters? — he repeated to himself for the hundredth time, flushing — oh, the shame would be nothing, shame is only the punishment I deserve — the trouble is that now, beyond doubt, I shall be the cause of fresh misfortunes… And the elder sent me to reconcile and to join them together. Is this how one joins people together?"
> Rhetorical «что» = 'what (at all)': «Что я … понимаю» is a rhetorical question — 'what do I understand?' = 'I understand nothing'. «что» is the neuter interrogative in the accusative as the object of «понимаю».
> Imperfect frame + simultaneous gerund: The imperfective «повторял» ('kept repeating') sets the durative background, while the present gerund «краснея» ('blushing') marks an action going on at the same time and sharing Alyosha's subject — a classic деепричастие of attendant circumstance.
> Elliptical conditional with «бы»: «стыд бы ничего» compresses a conditional — 'the shame, that would be nothing' — with the irrealis particle «бы» and an unstated «было». Note too the negative-concord pronoun «ничего».
> Instrumental predicate after «буду»: After the future of «быть» the predicate noun takes the instrumental: «причиною» ('the cause'), with the archaic instrumental ending «-ою» for modern «-ой». «новых несчастий» is genitive plural — 'cause of fresh misfortunes'.
> Purpose clause with «чтобы» + infinitive: «чтобы примирить и соединить» states the purpose of the sending. When the subject is the same, «чтобы» governs the bare infinitive rather than the past-form irrealis: 'in order to reconcile and to unite'.
> Interrogative particle «ли»: «Так ли…?» fronts the focused word «так» ('thus') and follows it with the enclitic «ли» to form a pointed yes/no question: 'Is this how one unites people?'. The impersonal 3rd-plural «соединяют» means 'one/people unite'.

Тут он вдруг опять припомнил, как он «соединил руки», и страшно стыдно стало ему опять.  
Here he suddenly remembered again how he had "joined their hands", and once more a terrible shame came over him.
> Perfective recollection: «припомнил» (perfective, 'suddenly recalled') names the punctual onset of memory; the prefix «при-» adds the nuance of a recollection surfacing. The embedded «соединил» is likewise a completed perfective act.
> Dative-subject shame: An impersonal construction: there is no nominative subject, the experiencer «ему» is in the dative, and the predicate is the invariable «стыдно» plus neuter «стало» ('became'). Literally 'it became terribly shameful to him' — the inward, subjectless framing typical of Dostoevsky's feeling.

«Хоть я сделал это всё и искренно, но вперед надо быть умнее», — заключил он вдруг и даже не улыбнулся своему заключению.  
"Even if I did it all sincerely, I must be wiser from now on" — he concluded abruptly, and did not even smile at his own conclusion.
> Concessive «хоть … но»: «хоть … (и) … но» is the concessive frame 'even though … nevertheless'. The «и» before «искренно» reinforces the concession ('did do it sincerely'), and «но» opens the contrasting main clause.
> Impersonal «надо» + comparative: Impersonal «надо» ('one must') governs the infinitive «быть»; «умнее» is the invariable predicative comparative of «умный» ('wiser'). No nominative subject is expressed.
> Reflexive «-ся» + dative object: «улыбнуться» ('to smile') is one of the verbs that exists only in the «-ся» form; here it governs a dative «своему заключению» ('at his own conclusion'). The reflexive possessive «своему» points back to the subject Alyosha himself.

Поручение Катерины Ивановны было дано в Озерную улицу, а брат Дмитрий жил как раз тут по дороге, недалеко от Озерной улицы в переулке.  
Katerina Ivanovna's errand was directed to Lake Street, and his brother Dmitri happened to live right along the way, not far from Lake Street, in a side lane.
> Periphrastic passive with short participle: «было дано» is the past passive: «было» plus the neuter short form of the participle «данный» ('given'). It states a result — the errand had been assigned — agreeing in neuter singular with «поручение».
> Contrastive «а» of topic-shift: The «а» joining the two clauses is not 'but' in the adversative sense; it gently shifts the topic from the errand to the brother — 'and his brother Dmitri, as it happened, lived right along the way'. This mild contrastive «а» is a constant hinge in Russian narration.

Алеша решил зайти к нему во всяком случае прежде, чем к штабс-капитану, хоть и предчувствовал, что не застанет брата.  
Alyosha decided to call on him in any case before going to the captain, though he had a feeling he would not find his brother in.
> Temporal «прежде чем» (before): «прежде, чем» is a subordinating conjunction meaning 'before' (doing something else); here it governs an elliptical phrase 'before [going] to the captain'. It is more bookish than the plain «до того как».
> Animate accusative = genitive: «застанет брата» — the animate masculine «брат» takes its accusative from the genitive form «брата», keeping object distinct from subject. «застать» (perfective) means to catch someone in/at home, so «не застанет» = 'will not find him in'.

Он подозревал, что тот, может быть, как-нибудь нарочно будет прятаться от него теперь, но во что бы то ни стало надо было его разыскать.  
He suspected that the man might somehow be deliberately hiding from him now, but he had to track him down whatever it took.
> Imperfective compound future: «будет прятаться» is the compound (imperfective) future — «будет» plus the imperfective infinitive «прятаться» — naming an ongoing/habitual hiding rather than a single act. «прятаться» carries reflexive «-ся» (hide oneself).
> «во что бы то ни стало» — at all costs: A fixed idiom meaning 'whatever it takes, come what may'. It fossilises an old conditional with «бы» and the negative-concord «ни», and is invariable — never parse it word by word.
> Impersonal necessity in the past: «надо было … разыскать» is the past of impersonal «надо» (neuter «было») governing the perfective infinitive — 'it was necessary to track him down', with no nominative subject.

Время же уходило: мысль об отходившем старце ни на минуту, ни на секунду не оставляла его с того часа, как он вышел из монастыря.  
Time, meanwhile, was slipping away: the thought of the dying elder had not left him for a single minute, not for a single second, from the very hour he had walked out of the monastery.
> Imperfective process + «же»: The imperfective «уходило» ('was slipping away') paints time as an ongoing process. The particle «же» here is lightly contrastive/resumptive — 'time, meanwhile…' — knitting this clause to the surrounding narration.
> Emphatic «ни … ни … не»: Russian negative concord: the doubled «ни … ни …» intensifies the negation that the verb still carries in «не оставляла» — 'did not leave him for a single minute, not for a single second'. The three negative markers add up to one emphatic denial.
> Past active participle «отходивший»: «отходившем» is the past active participle of «отходить», declined in the prepositional after «о» to agree with «старце». Of a dying person «отходить» means 'to be passing away'; the participle condenses 'the elder who was dying' into one modifier.

В поручении Катерины Ивановны промелькнуло одно обстоятельство, чрезвычайно тоже его заинтересовавшее: когда Катерина Ивановна упомянула о маленьком мальчике, школьнике, сыне того штабс-капитана, который бежал, плача в голос, подле отца, то у Алеши и тогда уже вдруг мелькнула мысль, что этот мальчик есть, наверное, тот давешний школьник, укусивший его за палец, когда он, Алеша, допрашивал его, чем он его обидел.  
In Katerina Ivanovna's errand one detail had flashed by that interested him exceedingly as well: when Katerina Ivanovna had mentioned the little boy, a schoolboy, the son of that captain who had run alongside his father weeping aloud, the thought had already darted into Alyosha's mind even then that this boy was, surely, the very schoolboy from earlier who had bitten his finger when he, Alyosha, had been asking how he had wronged him.
> Past active participle modifying the subject: «заинтересовавшее» is the past active participle of «заинтересовать», agreeing in neuter with «обстоятельство» — 'a circumstance that had interested him'. Such participles let Dostoevsky pile a relative clause onto a noun without a separate «который»-clause.
> Relative «который» + gerund chain: «который» ('who') opens a relative clause about the boy/son (who ran weeping beside his father, the captain), agreeing masculine singular but nominative as its own subject. Nested inside is the present gerund «плача» ('weeping') — a simultaneous action — giving the dense participial layering of literary narration.
> Correlative «этот … тот» + participle: «этот» (this, near) is identified with «тот» (that, previously mentioned), the demonstratives doing the topic-tracking that lets Russian reorder freely. «укусивший» is the past active participle 'who had bitten', agreeing with «школьник».
> «давешний» — the earlier one (colloquial-archaic): «давешний» is a colloquial 19th-century adjective meaning 'of a little while ago, the aforementioned recent one'. It points back to the boy from the earlier scene; modern Russian would paraphrase with «тот, что недавно».
> Embedded indirect question with «чем»: «чем он его обидел» is an indirect question — 'how (with what) he had wronged him' — where «чем» is the instrumental of «что» expressing the means of the offense. The appositive «он, Алеша» clarifies the antecedent across a tangle of pronouns.

Теперь уж Алеша был почти уверен в этом, сам не зная еще почему.  
By now Alyosha was almost certain of it, without himself yet knowing why.
> Short adjective «уверен» + particle «уж»: «уверен» is the predicative short form of «уверенный» ('certain'), agreeing masculine singular and governing «в этом» (prepositional). The particle «уж» (a worn form of «уже») adds an emphatic 'by now, already'.
> Negated gerund «не зная»: «не зная» is the present gerund of «знать» with negation — 'without yet knowing' — sharing Alyosha's subject and describing the manner of his certainty. The intensifier «сам» ('himself') stresses that even he didn't know why.

Таким образом, увлекшись посторонними соображениями, он развлекся и решил не «думать» о сейчас наделанной им «беде», не мучить себя раскаянием, а делать дело, а там что будет, то и выйдет.  
In this way, caught up in extraneous considerations, he distracted himself and resolved not to "think" about the "harm" he had just done, not to torment himself with remorse, but to get on with the task at hand — and whatever came of it, would come.
> Perfective past gerund «увлекшись»: «увлекшись» is the perfective past gerund of «увлечься» (reflexive 'to get carried away'), in «-вшись», expressing a prior completed circumstance — 'having become caught up in…'. Its object «соображениями» is instrumental, governed by the «-ся» verb.
> Reflexive pronoun «себя» + instrumental: «себя» is the full reflexive object pronoun ('oneself'), distinct from the verbal «-ся»; «раскаянием» is the instrumental of means — 'to torment oneself with remorse'. Contrast with «-ся» verbs elsewhere in the passage.
> «что будет, то и выйдет» — come what may: A folk-flavored fatalist tag — 'whatever will be, will come out so' — built on the correlative «что…, то…». The little «и» before «выйдет» adds 'exactly that', and «а там» means 'and then, after that'. It captures Alyosha's resolve to stop fretting.

На этой мысли он окончательно ободрился.  
On this thought he was finally heartened.
> Perfective change of state in «-ся»: «ободрился» is perfective and reflexive — 'cheered up, took heart' — the «-ся» here marking a change of inner state rather than a true reflexive action. «окончательно» ('finally, decisively') seals it as a completed turn of mood.

Кстати, завернув в переулок к брату Дмитрию и чувствуя голод, он вынул из кармана взятую у отца булку и съел дорогой.  
By the way, having turned into the lane toward his brother Dmitri and feeling hungry, he drew from his pocket the roll he had taken at his father's and ate it on the way.
> Paired gerunds, perfective + imperfective: Two gerunds set the scene before the main verb: perfective «завернув» ('having turned') marks a completed prior act, while imperfective «чувствуя» ('feeling') marks a simultaneous state. The contrast of the two gerund types is exactly the аspectual distinction in miniature.
> Past passive participle as modifier: «взятую» is the past passive participle of «взять» ('taken'), in the long form declined to agree with «булку» (feminine accusative) — 'the roll [that had been] taken at his father's'. The agent-source is marked with «у отца».
> «дорогой» — on the way (adverbial instrumental): Here «дорогой» is not 'dear' but the frozen instrumental of «дорога» ('road') used adverbially: 'along the way, en route'. The instrumental of route/path lies behind this common set adverb.

Это подкрепило его силы.  
It restored his strength.
> Perfective result + accusative object: «подкрепило» (perfective, 'reinforced, fortified') reports a single completed effect; the neuter past agrees with the subject «это». Its object «силы» ('strength', lit. 'forces') is accusative plural.

Дмитрия дома не оказалось.  
Dmitri turned out not to be at home.
> Genitive of negation with «не оказалось»: Under negation of existence/presence the subject goes genitive: «Дмитрия … не оказалось» — literally 'of Dmitri there turned out to be none [at home]'. The verb is fixed neuter «оказалось», and «дома» is the adverbial 'at home'.

Хозяева домишка — старик столяр, его сын и старушка, жена его, — даже подозрительно посмотрели на Алешу.  
The owners of the little house — an old carpenter, his son, and his old wife — even eyed Alyosha with suspicion.
> «домишко» — a wretched little house: The suffix «-ишк-» is pejorative, not merely diminutive: «домишко» is a poor, ramshackle little house, dismissively small. It quietly conveys the poverty of Dmitri's lodgings before any description is given. (The genitive «домишка» here.)
> «старушка» — affectionate 'little old woman': «старушка», with the endearing «-ушк-» suffix, is a warm, gentle word for an old woman — the opposite emotional charge to the pejorative «-ишк-» of «домишко» in the same sentence. The mix of suffixes colours the narrator's eye over the household.
> Perfective glance + word order weight: «посмотрели» (perfective, 'gave a look') names a single completed glance; the adverb «подозрительно» and the emphatic «даже» ('even') are front-loaded so the suspicious manner lands before the act, a small piece of topic-comment shaping.

«Уж третий день как не ночует, может, куда и выбыл», — ответил старик на усиленные вопросы Алеши.  
"It's the third day now he hasn't slept here; maybe he's gone off somewhere" — the old man answered Alyosha's insistent questions.
> Imperfective present of an ongoing situation: Colloquial idiom: «уж третий день, как не ночует» = 'it's the third day now that he hasn't been spending the night'. The imperfective present «ночует» under «не» describes an ongoing non-occurrence, and «уж» adds the impatient 'already'.
> Indefinite «куда» + perfective «выбыл»: «куда» here is indefinite ('somewhere'), softened by «может» ('maybe') and «и' ('even'); «выбыл» is a perfective ('departed, went off') with bureaucratic-colloquial flavour. The whole is the old man's evasive guesswork.

Алеша понял, что он отвечает по данной инструкции.  
Alyosha understood that the man was answering according to instructions he had been given.
> Reported clause «что» + present passive participle: «что» introduces the reported content after «понял» ('understood'). «по данной инструкции» means 'according to the instructions given', where «данной» is the past passive participle of «дать» in the dative after «по».

На вопрос его: «Не у Грушеньки ли он, и не у Фомы ли опять прячется» (Алеша нарочно пустил в ход эти откровенности), все хозяева даже пугливо на него посмотрели.  
At his question — "Isn't he at Grushenka's, isn't he hiding again at Foma's?" (Alyosha deliberately threw out these confidences) — all the owners even looked at him with alarm.
> Double «ли» yes/no question: Two parallel «ли»-questions probe alternatives — 'Isn't he at Grushenka's? Isn't he hiding at Foma's?'. The fronted phrase plus enclitic «ли» gives the deliberate, literary interrogative; «прячется» carries reflexive «-ся».
> Grushenka, the diminutive name: «Грушенька» is the affectionate diminutive of «Аграфена», the woman over whom Dmitri and his father Fyodor are rivals — central to the novel's plot. The endearing «-еньк-» form is how she is universally known, even by those who fear her power.
> Perfective reaction-glance: «посмотрели» (perfective) marks the single startled look the household gives in reaction; the adverb «пугливо» ('with fright') is the comment, set before the verb for emphasis.

«Любят его, стало быть, руку его держат, — подумал Алеша, — это хорошо».  
"They love him, then, they stand by him — thought Alyosha — that's good."
> «стало быть» — therefore, so then: A fixed parenthetical meaning 'so then, consequently' — a fossilised verbal phrase, not to be parsed literally. It marks Alyosha drawing an inference from the household's fright.
> Idiom «держать руку (чью)» — to take someone's side: «держать чью-либо руку» is an idiom meaning 'to stand by, take the part of' someone — not literally to hold a hand. Alyosha reads the family's protectiveness as loyalty to Dmitri.

Наконец он разыскал в Озерной улице дом мещанки Калмыковой, ветхий домишко, перекосившийся, всего в три окна на улицу, с грязным двором, посреди которого уединенно стояла корова.  
At last, on Lake Street, he found the house of the townswoman Kalmykova, a decrepit little house, lopsided, with only three windows giving onto the street, and a dirty yard in the middle of which a cow stood all alone.
> Past active participle in «-ся»: «перекосившийся» is the past active participle of the reflexive «перекоситься» ('to go lopsided'), agreeing with «домишко» — 'a little house that had gone crooked'. The «-ся» rides along inside the participle.
> «в + accusative» of measure: «в три окна» uses «в» with the accusative to specify extent/measure — 'a house of just three windows onto the street'. After «три» the noun «окна» stands in the genitive singular, as numerals 2–4 require.
> Relative «который» governed by a preposition: «посреди которого» — 'in the middle of which' — shows «который» taking the genitive demanded by «посреди», while agreeing in gender/number (masc. sg.) with «двор». The imperfective «стояла» paints the lone cow as a standing tableau.

Вход был со двора в сени; налево из сеней жила старая хозяйка со старухою дочерью, и, кажется, обе глухие.  
The entrance was from the yard into a passageway; to the left off the passage lived the old landlady with her aged daughter, and both, it seemed, were deaf.
> «сени» — the cold entry passage: The «сени» was the unheated entrance passage of a traditional Russian house, a buffer between the yard and the warm living room (изба). Plural-only in form, it is the threshold space Alyosha must cross to reach the lodgers.
> Numeral «обе» (fem. 'both') + short-ish predicate: «обе» is the feminine form of «оба» ('both'), agreeing with the two women; «глухие» is the predicate adjective 'deaf'. Note the parenthetical «кажется» ('it seems') softening the narrator's claim.

На вопрос его о штабс-капитане, несколько раз повторенный, одна из них, поняв наконец, что спрашивают жильцов, ткнула ему пальцем чрез сени, указывая на дверь в чистую избу.  
To his question about the captain, repeated several times, one of them, grasping at last that he was asking after the lodgers, poked her finger across the passage, pointing to a door into the clean part of the cottage.
> Past passive participle agreeing with «вопрос»: «повторенный» is the past passive participle of «повторить» ('repeated'), long form agreeing with «вопрос» (masc. accusative here) — 'his question, repeated several times'. It compresses a whole relative clause into one adjective.
> Perfective gerund + impersonal 3rd-plural: «поняв» is the perfective past gerund 'having grasped'; the embedded «спрашивают жильцов» uses the subjectless 3rd-person plural for 'one is asking after the lodgers'. «жильцов» is animate accusative = genitive plural.
> Archaic «чрез» for «через»: «чрез» is the bookish/poetic contraction of «через» ('across, through'), governing the accusative «сени». Dostoevsky uses it freely as a period-elevated variant; it recurs throughout this chapter («чрез порог», «чрез веревку»).

Квартира штабс-капитана действительно оказалась только простою избой.  
The captain's lodgings did indeed prove to be nothing but a plain peasant room.
> Instrumental predicate after «оказаться»: «оказаться» ('to turn out to be') takes its predicate in the instrumental, like «быть/стать»: «простою избой» ('to be merely a plain cottage'). Note the archaic instrumental ending «-ою» on «простою» for modern «-ой».
> «изба» — the peasant log house: An «изба» is the traditional Russian peasant log house — really its single warm main room. That the captain's family lives in a mere «изба» rented inside a townswoman's house underlines their genteel poverty: a former officer reduced to a peasant room.

Алеша взялся было рукой за железную скобу, чтоб отворить дверь, как вдруг необыкновенная тишина за дверями поразила его.  
Alyosha had just laid his hand on the iron latch to open the door when suddenly an extraordinary stillness behind it struck him.
> The particle «было» of a checked action: «взялся было» uses the unique particle «было» (unchanging) to mark an action just begun but then interrupted — 'had just started to take hold' before the stillness stops him. «взялся за … скобу» is the reflexive 'grasped the latch'.
> Purpose «чтоб» + infinitive: «чтоб» is the colloquial-short form of «чтобы», here purpose with same subject, so a bare infinitive «отворить» follows — 'in order to open the door'. «отворить» is a slightly bookish synonym of «открыть».
> Narrative «как вдруг» + perfective shock: «как вдруг» ('when suddenly') is the classic device for an abrupt interruption of an ongoing action; the perfective «поразила» ('struck') delivers the single jolt. Word order puts the long subject «необыкновенная тишина за дверями» before the verb for suspense.

Он знал, однако, со слов Катерины Ивановны, что отставной штабс-капитан человек семейный: «Или спят все они, или, может быть, услыхали, что я пришел, и ждут, пока я отворю; лучше я снова постучусь к ним», — и он постучал.  
He knew, however, from Katerina Ivanovna's account, that the retired captain was a family man: "Either they are all asleep, or perhaps they have heard me come and are waiting for me to open; better that I knock again" — and he knocked.
> Aspect contrast: imperfective state vs perfective event: Alyosha's reasoning sets imperfective states/processes («спят», «ждут» — are asleep, are waiting) against the perfective «услыхали» ('have heard', a completed event). The «или … или …» frames the alternatives.
> Perfective future + reflexive «постучаться»: «постучусь» is the perfective (simple) future — a perfective verb conjugated like a present yields future meaning: 'I'll knock'. The «-ся» here is a soft 'knock to be let in'. «лучше» functions as 'better that I…'.
> «услыхать» — colloquial for «услышать»: «услыхали» is a colloquial/old variant of the perfective «услышали» ('heard'). Dostoevsky favours such «-ыхать» forms in inner speech, lending Alyosha's monologue a plain, spoken texture.

Ответ послышался, но не сейчас, а секунд даже, может быть, десять спустя.  
An answer came, but not at once — perhaps even some ten seconds later.
> Approximate quantity by inversion: Putting the noun before the numeral — «секунд … десять» instead of «десять секунд» — signals approximation: 'some ten seconds or so'. After 5+ the noun is genitive plural «секунд», and «спустя» ('later') governs it.
> Perfective «-ся» of onset: «послышался» (perfective, reflexive) means 'came to be heard, sounded' — the «-ся» marks the sound's coming-into-being rather than a true reflexive. «но не сейчас» ('but not at once') withholds it for effect.

— Кто таков? — прокричал кто-то громким и усиленно сердитым голосом.  
— Who's there? — someone shouted in a loud and forcedly angry voice.
> «Кто таков?» — Who is it? (emphatic): «Кто таков?» is a brusque, slightly archaic-colloquial 'Who's there? / Who might you be?', more challenging than a plain «кто там?». «таков» is the short predicative form of «такой», agreeing masculine — a gruff demand suited to the captain's forced anger.
> Indefinite «кто-то» + instrumental of manner: «кто-то» is the indefinite pronoun for a specific-but-unidentified person ('someone'), built with the «-то» suffix. «громким … голосом» is the instrumental of manner — 'shouted in a loud voice'.

Алеша отворил тогда дверь и шагнул чрез порог.  
Alyosha then opened the door and stepped over the threshold.
> Chained perfectives of sequential action: Two perfectives in sequence — «отворил» ('opened') then «шагнул» ('took a step') — move the narrative forward event by event, the perfective's job against an imperfective background. Note again archaic «чрез» for «через».

Он очутился в избе, хотя и довольно просторной, но чрезвычайно загроможденной и людьми, и всяким домашним скарбом.  
He found himself in a cottage room which, though fairly spacious, was extraordinarily cluttered, both with people and with every kind of household belonging.
> Perfective «-ся» + prepositional of place: «очутился» ('found himself, ended up') is a perfective that exists only in the «-ся» form. «в избе» is prepositional after «в» for location (vs accusative for motion).
> Past passive participle + instrumental of means: «загроможденной» is the past passive participle 'cluttered up', agreeing with «избе» (prepositional). What it is cluttered with stands in the instrumental — «людьми … скарбом» — the standard case for the means/agent of the filling.
> «скарб» — household odds and ends: «скарб» is a slightly disdainful or homely word for one's accumulated household goods, chattels, junk. It paints the crowded room as cluttered with poor people's belongings rather than furniture.

Налево была большая русская печь.  
On the left stood a big Russian stove.
> Locative-first inversion: The sentence opens with the place adverb «налево» ('on the left'), pushing the new information — «большая русская печь» — to the stressed final position. This topic-first, comment-last flow drives the methodical sweep of the room's description.

От печи к левому окну чрез всю комнату была протянута веревка, на которой было развешено разное тряпье.  
From the stove to the left-hand window, across the whole room, a rope had been stretched, on which various rags hung drying.
> Two short-form passives stating a result: Both «была протянута» ('had been stretched') and «было развешено» ('had been hung out') are periphrastic passives: «была/было» plus a short past passive participle, agreeing with «веревка» (fem.) and «тряпье» (neut.). They state settled results — the scene as Alyosha finds it.
> «тряпьё» — rags, old cloth (collective): «тряпьё» is a collective noun in «-ьё» for rags and worn-out clothing taken as a mass. The collective suffix lumps it into one shabby heap, deepening the impression of squalor.

По обеим стенам налево и направо помещалось по кровати, покрытых вязаными одеялами.  
Against both walls, left and right, stood a bed apiece, covered with knitted blankets.
> Distributive «по» + dative/object: «по кровати» is the distributive «по» — 'a bed apiece, one bed to each [wall]'. With singular count nouns this construction governs the dative-like form and reads 'one each'.
> Passive participle + instrumental of covering: «покрытых» is the past passive participle 'covered', genitive plural agreeing with «кровати» (here gen. after the numeral logic) — the covering «вязаными одеялами» ('knitted blankets') is in the instrumental, as the means of covering.

На одной из них, на левой, была воздвигнута горка из четырех ситцевых подушек, одна другой меньше.  
On one of them, the left, a little tower had been raised of four chintz pillows, each smaller than the last.
> Elevated passive «воздвигнута»: «была воздвигнута» is a short-form passive whose verb «воздвигнуть» ('to erect, raise up') is markedly lofty — normally used of monuments. Applied to a stack of cheap pillows it is gently ironic, a 'little tower had been erected'.
> Comparative «меньше» + genitive of comparison: «одна другой меньше» is the idiom 'each smaller than the last', literally 'one [is] smaller than the other', with the standard of comparison «другой» in the genitive (genitive of comparison after the comparative «меньше», which is irregular but not suppletive).
> «ситец» — cheap printed cotton (chintz): «ситцевый» is the adjective from «ситец», an inexpensive printed cotton calico. Both the pillows here and the lady's dress (s42) are «ситцевый» — a quiet, recurring marker of the family's poverty straining after gentility.

На другой же кровати, справа, виднелась лишь одна очень маленькая подушечка.  
On the other bed, to the right, only a single, very small pillow could be seen.
> Imperfective «виднеться» of passive appearance: «виднелась» (imperfective, «-ся») means 'could be seen, was visible' — the «-ся» gives a middle/passive 'showed itself'. The contrastive «же» on «На другой же кровати» sets this bed against the pillow-piled one before it.
> «подушечка» — a little pillow (diminutive): «подушечка», the diminutive of «подушка» with «-ечк-», stresses smallness and a touch of pathos — the single 'tiny pillow' on the bare second bed, against the four-pillow tower opposite. The suffix does emotional work here, not just size.

Далее в переднем углу было небольшое место, отгороженное занавеской или простыней, тоже перекинутою чрез веревку, протянутую поперек угла.  
Beyond, in the front corner, there was a small space partitioned off by a curtain or a sheet, likewise thrown over a rope strung across the corner.
> Stacked passive participles: Two past passive participles modify the space: «отгороженное» ('partitioned off') agreeing neuter with «место», and «перекинутою» ('thrown over', archaic instr. «-ою») agreeing with «простыней». The means of partitioning — «занавеской», «простыней» — is instrumental.

За этою занавеской тоже примечалась сбоку устроенная на лавке и на приставленном к ней стуле постель.  
Behind this curtain one could also make out, off to the side, a bed laid out on a bench and on a chair drawn up against it.
> Imperfective «-ся» + embedded passive participle: «примечалась» (imperfective «-ся», 'could be made out') frames the appearance; inside, «устроенная» is a past passive participle 'made up, arranged', agreeing with «постель» (fem.) and built up from «на лавке и на … стуле».
> «лавка» — the fixed wall-bench: A «лавка» in a peasant izba was a long bench built into the wall, used for sitting, working, and sleeping. That a bed is improvised on a «лавка» and a drawn-up chair shows the family bedding down wherever the cramped room allows.

Простой деревянный четырехугольный мужицкий стол был отодвинут из переднего угла к серединному окошку.  
A plain wooden, four-cornered peasant table had been shoved out of the front corner toward the middle window.
> Short-form passive of a settled result: «был отодвинут» is the periphrastic passive — «был» plus short participle of «отодвинуть» ('moved aside') — stating the table's resulting position. Note «к … окошку» (dative after «к», motion toward).
> «мужицкий» — peasant-style, of a muzhik: «мужицкий» is the adjective from «мужик» ('peasant man'), here meaning a rough, plain, peasant-made table. The word carries a faint social condescension, befitting the narrator's eye and the captain's reduced circumstances.

Все три окна, каждое в четыре мелкие, зеленые, заплесневшие стекла, были очень тусклы и наглухо заперты, так что в комнате было довольно душно и не так светло.  
All three windows, each made of four small, green, mildewed panes, were very dim and shut fast, so that the room was rather close and not very light.
> Short adjective + short passive participle predicate: The window-panes are described with predicative short forms: «тусклы» (short of «тусклый», 'dim') and «заперты» (short passive participle of «запереть», 'shut fast'). Short forms are the bookish, predicative norm for such states in 19th-century prose.
> Impersonal predicatives «душно / светло»: «было … душно» and «не так светло» are impersonal: invariable predicatives with neuter «было» and no nominative subject — 'it was stuffy / not so light in the room'. The result clause «так что» links it to the sealed windows.

На столе стояла сковорода с остатками глазной яичницы, лежал надъеденный ломоть хлеба и, сверх того, находился полуштоф со слабыми остатками земных благ лишь на донушке.  
On the table stood a frying pan with the remains of a fried egg, a gnawed crust of bread lay beside it, and, on top of that, there was a half-bottle with the meager dregs of earthly goods left only at the very bottom.
> Three verbs of position, perfectly chosen: Russian fastidiously matches the verb to a thing's posture: «стояла» (the pan stands), «лежал» (the crust lies flat), «находился» (the bottle is located). All three are imperfective, painting the static still-life on the table.
> «полуштоф» — a half-shtof bottle of spirits: A «штоф» was an old measure of vodka (about 1.23 litres) and the squat bottle holding it; a «полуштоф» is the half-size bottle. The detail quietly tells us the captain drinks — the bottle nearly empty.
> Mock-solemn «земные блага» + diminutive «донушко»: «земные блага» ('earthly goods/blessings') is a lofty, almost scriptural phrase ironically applied to the dregs of vodka, while «на донушке» (diminutive of «дно», 'at the wee bottom') tenderly mocks how little is left. The clash of registers is Dostoevsky's bitter-comic touch.

Возле левой кровати на стуле помещалась женщина, похожая на даму, одетая в ситцевое платье.  
Beside the left-hand bed, on a chair, sat a woman who looked like a lady, dressed in a chintz gown.
> Imperfective «-ся» + short-form «похожая»: «помещалась» (imperfective «-ся») here just means 'was situated, sat'. «похожая на даму» — 'resembling a lady' — uses «похожий» governing «на» plus accusative, the fixed pattern for 'similar to'.
> «дама» vs «женщина» — a lady, not just a woman: The narrator pointedly calls her «женщина, похожая на даму» — a woman who only looks like a «дама», a lady of the cultivated classes. The careful distinction signals her clinging to a gentility her surroundings have stripped away.

Она была очень худа лицом, желтая; чрезвычайно впалые щеки ее свидетельствовали с первого раза о ее болезненном состоянии.  
Her face was very thin, yellow; her exceedingly sunken cheeks bore witness at the first glance to her sickly condition.
> Short adjective «худа» + instrumental of respect: «худа» is the predicative short form of «худой» ('thin'), and «лицом» is an instrumental of respect — 'thin in the face'. The bookish short adjective stresses a state; «желтая» reverts to the long form.
> Imperfective testimony + «о» + prepositional: «свидетельствовали» (imperfective, 'bore witness') governs «о» plus the prepositional «о … состоянии» ('to her condition'). The verb is bookish and faintly forensic, fitting the narrator's clinical gaze.

Но всего более поразил Алешу взгляд бедной дамы — взгляд чрезвычайно вопросительный и в то же время ужасно надменный.  
But what struck Alyosha most of all was the gaze of the poor lady — a gaze exceedingly questioning and at the same time terribly haughty.
> Object-first inversion for the comment: The sentence fronts «всего более поразил Алешу» ('most of all struck Alyosha') and delays the real subject «взгляд» ('the gaze') to the end, where the new, weighty information lands. Free word order lets the syntax build to the revelation.
> Superlative-of-degree with «чрезвычайно / ужасно»: The two long-form adjectives «вопросительный» ('questioning') and «надменный» ('haughty') are each amplified by an intensifying adverb («чрезвычайно», «ужасно» = 'terribly'). «ужасно' here is bleached to mere intensifier, not literal horror.

И до тех пор пока дама не заговорила сама и пока объяснялся Алеша с хозяином, она всё время так же надменно и вопросительно переводила свои большие карие глаза с одного говорившего на другого.  
And until the lady herself spoke, and while Alyosha was explaining himself to the master of the house, she kept turning her large brown eyes from one speaker to the other, just as haughtily and questioningly.
> Temporal «до тех пор пока … не» (until): «до тех пор, пока … не …» is the 'until' construction; the «не» is grammatical, not a true negation — 'until the lady herself spoke'. «заговорила» is perfective (the onset of speech), against the imperfective «объяснялся» ('was explaining himself', durative).
> Imperfective iterative + reflexive possessive «свои»: «переводила» (imperfective) renders the repeated, habitual shifting of her gaze 'all the while'. «свои» is the reflexive possessive — her own eyes — agreeing in accusative plural with «глаза».

Подле этой дамы у левого окошка стояла молодая девушка с довольно некрасивым лицом, с рыженькими жиденькими волосами, бедно, хотя и весьма опрятно одетая.  
Beside this lady, by the left-hand window, stood a young girl with a rather plain face, with thin reddish hair, poorly though very neatly dressed.
> Diminutive adjectives «рыженькие / жиденькие»: The «-еньк-» suffix on «рыженькие» ('reddish') and «жиденькие» ('thin, sparse') softens and belittles — thin wispy hair seen with a mix of pity and faint distaste. Diminutive adjectives carry feeling, not size, and pervade Dostoevsky's portraiture.
> Past passive participle + concessive adverbs: «одетая» is the past passive participle 'dressed', agreeing with «девушка»; the adverbs «бедно … хотя и … опрятно» ('poorly, though very neatly') modify it, the «хотя и» conceding the contrast — poverty kept tidy.

Она брезгливо осматривала вошедшего Алешу.  
She surveyed the newly entered Alyosha with disgust.
> Imperfective scrutiny + past active participle: «осматривала» (imperfective, 'was looking over') gives the lingering, contemptuous survey. «вошедшего» is the past active participle of «войти» ('having entered'), agreeing with «Алешу» in animate accusative — 'Alyosha, who had just come in'.
> «брезгливо» — with fastidious disgust: «брезгливо» conveys a squeamish, contemptuous disgust, as at something physically distasteful. Aimed at the gentle Alyosha, it marks Varvara's prickly, wounded pride — the family's «надрыв» (laceration) of the chapter title made visible.

Направо, тоже у постели, сидело и еще одно женское существо.  
To the right, also by the bed, sat yet another female creature.
> Neuter agreement with «существо»: The verb «сидело» is neuter to agree with «существо» ('being, creature'), a neuter noun, even though a young woman is meant. The «и еще» ('yet one more') and the distancing word «существо» foreshadow the pathos of the next sentence.

Это было очень жалкое создание, молодая тоже девушка, лет двадцати, но горбатая и безногая, с отсохшими, как сказали потом Алеше, ногами.  
It was a very pitiful being, also a young girl, about twenty, but hunchbacked and legless, with withered legs, as Alyosha was told afterward.
> Approximate age «лет двадцати»: «лет двадцати» means 'of about twenty years', a genitive-of-quantity phrase used for approximate age. «лет» is the suppletive genitive plural of «год» used after numerals, and the inversion (noun before number) gives the 'about' sense.
> Past active participle «отсохший»: «отсохшими» is the past active participle of «отсохнуть» ('to wither away'), instrumental plural after «с», agreeing with «ногами» — 'with withered legs'. The parenthetical «как сказали потом Алеше» flags the narrator's later knowledge.

Костыли ее стояли подле, в углу, между кроватью и стеной.  
Her crutches stood nearby, in the corner, between the bed and the wall.
> Possessive «её» + imperfective position: «её» is the invariable third-person possessive ('her'), a frozen genitive pronoun that never agrees — contrast the agreeing «свои» elsewhere. «стояли» (imperfective) sets the crutches standing in their corner as a fixed detail.

Замечательно прекрасные и добрые глаза бедной девушки с какою-то спокойною кротостью поглядели на Алешу.  
The poor girl's remarkably beautiful and kind eyes looked at Alyosha with a certain quiet gentleness.
> Indefinite «какой-то» + instrumental of manner: «какою-то» is the indefinite determiner 'some kind of', with «-то» marking a specific-but-undefined quality, in the archaic instrumental «-ою». The whole phrase «с … кротостью» is instrumental of manner — 'with a certain quiet gentleness'.
> «кротость» — meekness, gentle humility: «кротость» ('meekness, gentleness') is a quietly spiritual word in Dostoevsky's lexicon, the Gospel virtue of the 'meek' (кроткие). Set in the disfigured, suffering girl, it marks her as one of the novel's hidden bearers of grace.

За столом, кончая яичницу, сидел господин лет сорока пяти, невысокого роста, сухощавый, слабого сложения, рыжеватый, с рыженькою редкою бородкой, весьма похожею на растрепанную мочалку (это сравнение и особенно слово «мочалка» так и сверкнули почему-то с первого же взгляда в уме Алеши, он это потом припомнил).  
At the table, finishing the fried egg, sat a gentleman of about forty-five, short of stature, lean, of feeble build, sandy-haired, with a thin little reddish beard very much like a bedraggled wisp of bast (this comparison, and especially the word "wisp", somehow flashed into Alyosha's mind at the first glance — he recalled it afterward).
> Present gerund of attendant action: «кончая» is the present gerund of «кончать» ('finishing'), a simultaneous attendant action sharing the captain's subject — 'sat … finishing the fried egg'. The string of adjectives that follows characterises him in one breathless sweep.
> Approximate age with compound numeral: «лет сорока пяти» = 'of about forty-five years'; the whole numeral «сорока пяти» stands in the genitive (governed by the age-construction), and «лет» is the genitive plural counting-form of «год».
> «похожий на» + accusative simile: «похожею … на … мочалку» — 'similar to a … wisp of bast' — uses «похожий» governing «на» + accusative, the archaic instr. «-ою» agreeing with «бородкой». The diminutive «бородкой» (little beard) deepens the comic shabbiness.
> «мочалка» — a wisp of bast/tow: A «мочалка» is a loose, stringy washing-sponge made from the inner bark (bast) of a lime tree, frayed and shaggy. Comparing the captain's thin beard to a «мочалка» makes him look ragged and shabby — we render it 'a wisp of bast.' The word recurs as a running insult tied to Dmitri's earlier assault on the captain, when he dragged him by the beard.

Очевидно, этот самый господин и крикнул из-за двери: «кто таков», так как другого мужчины в комнате не было.  
Evidently it was this very gentleman who had shouted from behind the door, "Who's there", since there was no other man in the room.
> Causal «так как» + genitive of negation: «так как» ('since, because') opens the causal clause; inside it, the negated existential «не было» takes its subject in the genitive — «другого мужчины … не было» ('there was no other man'). This obligatory genitive with «не было» is among the case's most characteristic jobs.

Но когда Алеша вошел, он словно сорвался со скамьи, на которой сидел за столом, и, наскоро обтираясь дырявою салфеткой, подлетел к Алеше.  
But when Alyosha came in, he seemed to tear himself from the bench on which he had been sitting at the table, and, hastily wiping himself with a tattered napkin, darted up to Alyosha.
> Perfective lurch + prefixed motion verb: «сорвался» ('tore himself away', perfective «-ся») and «подлетел» ('darted up to') drive the captain's sudden movement. «подлетел» is a prefixed verb of motion: «под-» (approach) on «лететь», now an ordinary perfective taking «к Алеше» (dative).
> Present gerund «-ся» + instrumental tool: «обтираясь» is the present gerund of reflexive «обтираться» ('wiping oneself'), a simultaneous action; «дырявою салфеткой» (archaic instr. «-ою») is the instrument of wiping — 'with a tattered napkin'.

— Монах на монастырь просит, знал к кому прийти! — громко между тем проговорила стоявшая в левом углу девица.  
— A monk begging for the monastery; he knew whose door to come to! — the girl standing in the left corner said loudly in the meantime.
> Past active participle as attributive: «стоявшая» is the past active participle of «стоять» ('standing'), agreeing with «девица», condensing 'the girl who was standing in the left corner' into a single modifier placed before its noun — typical literary compression.

Но господин, подбежавший к Алеше, мигом повернулся к ней на каблуках и взволнованным срывающимся каким-то голосом ей ответил:  
But the gentleman who had run up to Alyosha spun round on his heels to her at once and answered her in an agitated, breaking sort of voice:
> Prefixed motion participle + perfective spin: «подбежавший» is the past active participle of the prefixed motion verb «подбежать» ('having run up to'), agreeing with «господин». The main verb «повернулся» (perfective «-ся», 'turned, spun round') governs «к ней» (dative).
> Participles as adjectives in the instrumental of manner: The manner phrase «… голосом» is instrumental; modifying «голосом» are two participles turned adjective — «взволнованным» (past passive, 'agitated') and «срывающимся» (present active «-ся», 'breaking') — agreeing in instrumental. Participles routinely lexicalise into descriptive adjectives.

— Нет-с, Варвара Николавна, это не то-с, не угадали-с!  
— No, sir, Varvara Nikolavna, that's not it, sir, you've guessed wrong, sir!
> The servile particle «-с» (slovoers): The clitic «-с», tacked onto words throughout the captain's speech («нет-с», «не то-с», «вас-с»), is the «словоерс» — a contraction of «сударь» ('sir') once used to mark deference. By Dostoevsky's day it signals obsequious, self-abasing servility; the captain's fawning «-с» is a key to his cringing wounded pride.

Позвольте спросить в свою очередь, — вдруг опять повернулся он к Алеше, — что побудило вас-с посетить… эти недра-с?  
Allow me to ask in my turn — he suddenly turned back to Alyosha — what has prompted you, sir, to visit… these depths, sir?
> Polite imperative «позвольте» + infinitive: «Позвольте спросить» ('Allow me to ask') is the polite plural imperative of «позволить» plus an infinitive — a formal request formula. «что побудило вас» then uses the perfective «побудило' ('prompted') with «вас» in the accusative.
> «недра» — depths, bowels (ironic): «недра» normally means the depths of the earth or its mineral 'bowels' — a grandiose word the captain wields ironically for his squalid room ('these depths, sir'). Capped with the cringing «-с», it shows him performing his own humiliation with bitter wit.

Алеша внимательно смотрел на него, он в первый раз этого человека видел.  
Alyosha looked at him attentively; he was seeing this man for the first time.
> Imperfective «видел» of a first-time experience: The imperfective «видел» ('was seeing / saw') states the general fact that Alyosha was setting eyes on the man for the first time. Note «этого человека» — animate masculine accusative borrowing the genitive form, and word order placing the object before the verb.

Было в нем что-то угловатое, спешащее и раздражительное.  
There was something angular about him, hurried and irritable.
> Existential «было … что-то» + neuter agreement: The sentence leads with the existential «было» and places the indefinite «что-то» ('something') as subject, all its modifiers («угловатое, спешащее, раздражительное») neuter to agree. «спешащее» is a present active participle ('hurrying') used adjectivally.

Хотя он очевидно сейчас выпил, но пьян не был.  
Though he had evidently just had a drink, he was not drunk.
> The concessive «хотя… но» pair: Russian often props a «хотя» ('although') clause with a resuming «но» in the main clause — a redundant pair by English logic, but standard here. The «но» is not 'but' so much as the hinge that closes the concession: 'though he had drunk, still he was not drunk.'
> Short adjective «пьян» and its word order: «пьян» is the predicative short form of «пьяный» (drunk), the form Russian uses with «быть» to state a passing condition. The order «пьян не был» (rather than «не был пьян») throws the weight onto «пьян» — drunk he was not.

Лицо его изображало какую-то крайнюю наглость и в то же время — странно это было — видимую трусость.  
His face wore a kind of extreme insolence and, at the same time — strange as it was — a visible cowardice.
> Indefinite «какой-то» softening the noun: The clitic «-то» on «какой» yields 'a kind of, some sort of' — a specific-but-unpinned quality. Dostoevsky leans on «какой-то» constantly to give descriptions an air of the not-quite-graspable; here it hedges 'a kind of extreme insolence.'
> Possessive after the noun: «лицо его»: The frozen genitive pronoun «его» ('his') normally precedes its noun, but the bookish post-nominal order «лицо его» ('his face') lends a faintly elevated, narratorial cadence common in 19th-century prose.
> «наглость» — brazen insolence: «наглость» is in-your-face effrontery, shamelessness — stronger than mere rudeness. Paired here with «трусость» (cowardice), it sketches the captain's whole jangled character in two abstract nouns.

Он похож был на человека, долгое время подчинявшегося и натерпевшегося, но который бы вдруг вскочил и захотел заявить себя.  
He looked like a man who had long submitted and endured much, but who might suddenly leap up and want to assert himself.
> Past active participles in apposition: «подчинявшегося» (who had been submitting) and «натерпевшегося» (who had endured much) are past active participles in the genitive, agreeing with «человека». They compress two whole «который»-clauses into adjectives — a hallmark of literary description.
> «который бы» — the hypothetical relative: Here the relative «который» carries the particle «бы», so the relative clause turns conditional: 'a man who might suddenly leap up.' «вскочил» and «захотел» are past-form perfectives made irrealis by «бы».
> «натерпеться» — to have suffered one's fill: The prefix «на-» plus reflexive «-ся» on «терпеть» (to endure) gives 'to have endured a great deal, had more than enough of it.' The form bundles long suffering into a single saturated verb.

Или, еще лучше, на человека, которому ужасно бы хотелось вас ударить, но который ужасно боится, что вы его ударите.  
Or, better still, like a man who would dearly love to strike you, but who is dreadfully afraid that you will strike him.
> Dative experiencer with «хотелось бы»: «хотеться» is impersonal: the wanter goes in the dative («которому») and the verb stays neuter. With «бы» it becomes 'would dearly love to.' No nominative subject does the wanting — the desire simply happens to him.
> Reflexive «бояться» plus a «что»-clause: «боится» is from «бояться», a verb existing only in the «-ся» form. Note that the feared future event «вы его ударите» (you will strike him) uses a plain «что»-clause, not «чтобы» — it reports a feared fact, not a wish.

В речах его и в интонации довольно пронзительного голоса слышался какой-то юродливый юмор, то злой, то робеющий, не выдерживающий тона и срывающийся.  
In his speech and in the intonation of his rather shrill voice there was a kind of crackpot humor, now spiteful, now timid, unable to hold its pitch and breaking off.
> Middle «-ся»: «слышался»: «слышался» (from «слышаться») is the middle-voice «-ся» form: the humor 'made itself heard / could be heard,' with no one doing the hearing named. The grammatical subject «юмор» follows the verb, the new information landing last.
> A chain of present active participles: «робеющий» (growing timid), «выдерживающий» (holding), «срывающийся» (breaking off) are present active participles agreeing with «юмор», stacked into one breathless modifier-chain. The «то… то…» correlative ('now… now…') swings the humor between moods.
> «юродливый» — holy-fool-ish, crackpot: From «юродивый», the Russian 'holy fool' (the Christ-mad beggar-prophet of Orthodox tradition), the adjective here means something like 'antic, half-cracked, clownishly off-key.' It tags the captain's humor as the unsettling laughter of a man not quite right.

Вопрос о «недрах» задал он как бы весь дрожа, выпучив глаза и подскочив к Алеше до того в упор, что тот машинально сделал шаг назад.  
He put the question about the "depths" as though trembling all over, his eyes bulging, having sprung up so close, right in Alyosha's face, that the latter mechanically took a step back.
> Gerunds of attendant circumstance: Three «деепричастия» pin the manner of his asking: imperfective «дрожа» (trembling, simultaneous) versus perfective «выпучив» (having bulged) and «подскочив» (having sprung up, prior/completed). All share the main subject 'he.' «как бы» ('as if') hedges the whole performance.
> «до того…, что» — degree result clause: «до того… что» sets up a 'so much that' result: he sprang up so close (in his face) that Alyosha stepped back. «в упор» means 'point-blank, right up against.'

Одет был этот господин в темное, весьма плохое, какое-то нанковое пальто, заштопанное и в пятнах.  
This gentleman was dressed in a dark, very poor sort of nankeen overcoat, darned and stained.
> Fronted short passive participle «одет»: «одет» is the short-form past passive participle of «одеть» (to dress), here the 'was dressed' of a periphrastic passive with «был». Putting it first — «Одет был…» — foregrounds his get-up before we even reach the man.
> «нанка» — nankeen cloth: «нанковое» is the adjective from «нанка», nankeen — a cheap yellowish cotton (named for Nanking) once used for summer wear. By Dostoevsky's day it signaled threadbare poverty and being years behind the fashion.
> Participle and prepositional phrase as predicate adjectives: «заштопанное» (darned) is a past passive participle agreeing with neuter «пальто»; «в пятнах» ('in spots/stains') is a bare prepositional phrase doing the same descriptive job. Russian freely pairs a participle with a preposition-phrase to qualify a noun.

Панталоны на нем были чрезвычайно какие-то светлые, такие, что никто давно и не носит, клетчатые и из очень тоненькой какой-то материи, смятые снизу и сбившиеся оттого наверх, точно он из них, как маленький мальчик, вырос.  
His trousers were of some extraordinarily light color, the kind no one had worn for ages, checked and of some very thin material, crumpled at the bottom and rucked up because of it, as if he, like a little boy, had outgrown them.
> Negative concord: «никто… не носит»: «никто… не носит» pairs the negative pronoun «никто» with the obligatory verbal «не» — Russian's double negation, where two negatives still mean one. The «и» here is the emphatic particle 'even/at all,' not 'and.'
> Participles, then a «точно»-comparison: «смятые» (crumpled) and «сбившиеся» (rucked up) are past participles modifying the trousers; «точно он… вырос» ('as if he had outgrown them') opens a comparison with the perfective past «вырос». «точно» here means 'just as if.'
> Diminutive «тоненький» — thin and flimsy: The «-еньк-» suffix on «тонкий» (thin) is expressive, not merely sizing: 'thin little, flimsy.' It colors the cloth with a note of pathos, of cheapness almost too delicate to last.

— Я… Алексей Карамазов… — проговорил было в ответ Алеша.  
— I… Alexei Karamazov… — Alyosha began to say in reply.
> The particle «было» — an action begun and broken off: «было» after a perfective past marks an action started but interrupted or undone: Alyosha 'began to say' and was cut short. This 'frustrated start' particle is distinct from the verb «быть» and is common in narrative.

— Отменно умею понимать-с, — тотчас же отрезал господин, давая знать, что ему и без того известно, кто он такой. — Штабс я капитан-с Снегирев-с, в свою очередь; но всё же желательно узнать, что именно побудило…  
— I understand that perfectly well, sir — the gentleman cut him off at once, giving him to know that he already knew well enough who he was. — Captain Snegiryov, sir, I in my turn; but all the same I should like to know what exactly has prompted…
> The deferential «-с» (словоерс): The tacked-on «-с» is the «словоерс», a 19th-century syllable of servility (contracted from «сударь», 'sir') glued onto words to flatter or self-abase. The captain sprays it everywhere; we render it as a trailing 'sir.'
> Dative + «известно»: 'it is known to him': «ему… известно» is an impersonal construction: the knower stands in the dative «ему», the predicate is the invariable «известно» ('known'). «и без того» means 'even without that, as it is'; «кто он такой» is the set phrase 'who he is.'

— Да я так только зашел.  
— I just dropped in, that's all.
> Discourse «да» and dismissive «так только»: Sentence-initial «да» here is not 'yes' but a soft conversational opener, 'oh, well.' «так только» means 'just, for no particular reason' — Alyosha downplaying his visit. «зашел» is the prefixed perfective 'dropped in.'

Мне, в сущности, от себя хотелось бы вам сказать одно слово… Если только позволите…  
There is, in fact, a single word I should like to say to you on my own account… If only you will permit it…
> Dative subject + conditional «хотелось бы»: Twice over a dative experiencer: «мне» (to me) wants, «вам» (to you) is the one addressed. «хотелось бы» softens the wish into a polite 'I should like to.' No nominative 'I' does the wanting — the longing is framed as happening to him.
> Elliptical conditional with «если только»: «если только» ('if only, provided that') opens a real conditional. «позволите» is a perfective present-form verb with future meaning ('you will permit'). The clause trails off, its main clause left unspoken — a courteous, hesitant fade.

— В таком случае вот и стул-с, извольте взять место-с.  
— In that case, here is a chair, sir; be so good as to take a seat, sir.
> «извольте» — be so good as to: «извольте» (imperative of «изволить») is an ornate, old-fashioned 'be so kind as to / kindly,' once the polite formula of servants and shopkeepers. Snegiryov's flowery «извольте взять место» ('please take a seat') is theatrically over-polite — and, as the next line says, lifted from old comedies.

Это в древних комедиях говорили: «Извольте взять место»… — и штабс-капитан быстрым жестом схватил порожний стул (простой мужицкий, весь деревянный и ничем не обитый) и поставил его чуть не посредине комнаты; затем, схватив другой такой же стул для себя, сел напротив Алеши, по-прежнему к нему в упор и так, что колени их почти соприкасались вместе.  
That is what they used to say in the old comedies: "Be so good as to take a seat"… — and with a quick gesture the captain seized an empty chair (a plain peasant one, all wood and quite unupholstered) and set it down almost in the middle of the room; then, seizing another such chair for himself, he sat down facing Alyosha, as close to him as before, so that their knees nearly touched.
> Perfective gerund chaining actions: «схватив… поставил»: «схватив» (having seized) is a perfective past gerund marking the action just before the main verb «поставил» (set down). The whole sentence runs on such gerund-plus-verb beats — «схватив… поставил… схватив… сел» — quick, sequential, cinematic.
> «порожний», «мужицкий» — empty, peasant-rough: «порожний» is a slightly bookish word for 'empty' (of a vessel or seat). «мужицкий» means 'peasant's, muzhik-style' — crude and plain; «ничем не обитый» ('upholstered with nothing') underscores the bare-wood poverty of the cottage.

— Николай Ильич Снегирев-с, русской пехоты бывший штабс-капитан-с, хоть и посрамленный своими пороками, но всё же штабс-капитан.  
— Nikolai Ilyich Snegiryov, sir, former captain of the Russian infantry, sir, disgraced though I am by my vices, yet a captain all the same.
> Concessive participle phrase «хоть и посрамленный»: «хоть и» ('though, albeit') plus the past passive participle «посрамленный» (disgraced) makes a concessive aside: 'disgraced though I am.' The agent of disgrace, «своими пороками» (by my own vices), stands in the instrumental — the standard agent-case of the passive.
> The patronymic «Ильич»: «Ильич» is the patronymic from «Илья» (Elijah), so the captain is 'Nikolai, son of Ilya.' Giving full name-and-patronymic is the formal, dignified mode of self-presentation — exactly the dignity he is trying to salvage.

Скорее бы надо сказать: штабс-капитан Словоерсов, а не Снегирев, ибо лишь со второй половины жизни стал говорить словоерсами.  
It would be truer to say: Captain Slovoyersov, and not Snegiryov, for it was only from the second half of my life that I began to speak with little 'sirs.'
> Impersonal «надо» softened by «бы»: «надо» ('one ought, it is necessary') is an impersonal predicate taking no nominative subject; «бы» tilts it into 'it would be truer to say.' «Скорее» here means 'rather, more accurately' (not 'sooner').
> The bookish conjunction «ибо»: «ибо» is an archaic, literary-elevated 'for, because' — far loftier than everyday «потому что». Snegiryov's reach for «ибо» betrays his pretension to fine speech even as he confesses his fall.
> «Словоерсов» — a coined surname: Snegiryov invents the surname «Словоерсов» from «словоерс», the name of the deferential «-с» tic (literally 'the letter slovo + the old letter-name yer-s'). 'Captain Little-Sir' would be the joke: he names himself after his own servility.

Словоерс приобретается в унижении.  
The little 'sir' is acquired through humiliation.
> Imperfective passive «-ся»: «приобретается»: «приобретается» is the «-ся» passive of «приобретать» (to acquire): 'is acquired,' with no agent named. The general, gnomic present makes it a maxim — the little 'sir' is acquired through humiliation.

— Это так точно, — усмехнулся Алеша, — только невольно приобретается или нарочно?  
— That is quite true — Alyosha smiled — only is it acquired against one's will, or on purpose?
> Adverbs of volition: «невольно» vs «нарочно»: Alyosha frames the whole moral question in two adverbs: «невольно» ('involuntarily, against one's will') against «нарочно» ('on purpose, deliberately'). The bare contrast, with the verb «приобретается» understood, sharpens the probe into whether the captain's servility is chosen.

— Видит бог, невольно.  
— God sees, against my will.

Всё не говорил, целую жизнь не говорил словоерсами, вдруг упал и встал с словоерсами.  
I never used it, my whole life I never spoke with little 'sirs,' then suddenly I fell, and got up speaking with them.
> Imperfective habit against perfective rupture: The repeated imperfective «не говорил» paints a lifelong habit ('I kept not using it, my whole life never used it'); then the perfectives «упал» (fell) and «встал» (rose) snap two completed events into place. Aspect carries the whole drama of a sudden break.
> Accusative of duration: «целую жизнь»: «целую жизнь» ('my whole life [long]') is a bare accusative marking duration — Russian needs no preposition for 'for the whole of a span.' «Всё» here is the adverbial 'all the time, constantly.'

Это делается высшею силой.  
That is done by a higher power.
> Passive «-ся» with instrumental agent: «делается» is the «-ся» passive 'is done/brought about,' and the agent «высшею силой» ('by a higher power') stands in the instrumental — the case that names the doer behind a passive. The archaic ending «-ею» (for modern «-ой») adds a solemn ring.

Вижу, что интересуетесь современными вопросами.  
I see that you take an interest in contemporary questions.
> Dropped subject + reflexive «интересоваться»: Both verbs run without pronouns — the endings carry person ('I see… you take an interest'). «интересуетесь» is a «-ся» verb governing the instrumental: one is interested *in* something (here «современными вопросами»), which would stand in the instrumental.

Чем, однако, мог возбудить столь любопытства, ибо живу в обстановке, невозможной для гостеприимства.  
But how could I have aroused such curiosity, since I live in surroundings impossible for hospitality.
> Instrumental of means «чем» + genitive «любопытства»: «чем» ('by what means') is the instrumental of «что». «столь» is a bookish 'so/such' (literary for «так»), and «любопытства» appears in the genitive after the quantity sense — 'so much curiosity.' The verb «мог» drops its subject 'I.'
> Archaic «ибо» and a postposed adjective: Again the lofty «ибо» ('for, because'). The adjective «невозможной» ('impossible') follows its noun «обстановке» (surroundings) and agrees with it in the prepositional case — a bookish, weight-shifting order.

— Я пришел… по тому самому делу…  
— I have come… about that very matter…
> «по тому самому делу» — 'about that very matter': The preposition «по» governs the dative «тому самому делу». «тот самый» ('that very, the selfsame') is a fixed intensified demonstrative; «по делу» idiomatically means 'on a matter, on business.'

— По тому самому делу? — нетерпеливо прервал штабс-капитан.  
— About that very matter? — the captain broke in impatiently.
> Perfective «прервал» for the sharp interruption: «прервал» (from «прервать», 'to break off, interrupt') is perfective — a single, abrupt completed act, the verb of choice for cutting someone short. The adverb «нетерпеливо» (impatiently) colors the manner.

— По поводу той встречи вашей с братом моим Дмитрием Федоровичем, — неловко отрезал Алеша.  
— Concerning that encounter of yours with my brother Dmitri Fyodorovich — Alyosha brought out awkwardly.
> Possessives after their nouns: Both «вашей» (your) and «моим» (my) trail their nouns — «встречи вашей», «братом моим» — a deliberately formal, old-fashioned order. The whole phrase sits in the cases «по поводу» (genitive) and «с» (instrumental) demand.
> Instrumental after «с»: name and patronymic in step: After «с» (with) everything goes instrumental, including the patronymic «Федоровичем» — proof that the patronymic declines like any masculine noun. Russian inflects the entire name-string, not just the first name.

— Какой же это встречи-с? Это уж не той ли самой-с? Значит, насчет мочалки, банной мочалки? — надвинулся он вдруг так, что в этот раз положительно стукнулся коленками в Алешу.  
— What encounter, sir? You don't mean that very one, sir? You mean about the wisp — the bathhouse wisp? — he suddenly bore down so close that this time he positively knocked his knees against Alyosha.
> Stacked particles «уж… не… ли»: A cluster of speech-particles: «уж» (emphatic 'surely, by now'), the «не… ли» frame that makes a leading question ('you don't mean…, do you?'), all over the genitive «той самой» (that very one). The little tags carry the captain's needling, insinuating tone.
> Reflexive «стукнуться» + diminutive «коленками»: «стукнулся» (from «стукнуться») is the «-ся» middle 'knocked himself / banged'; «коленками» is the instrumental of «коленки», an affectionate diminutive of «колени» (knees). The body comedy is built into the grammar.

Губы его как-то особенно сжались в ниточку.  
His lips somehow pressed together in a peculiar way, into a thin thread.
> Reflexive «сжались» of change of state: «сжались» (from «сжаться») is the intransitive «-ся» 'compressed themselves, drew tight' — a change of state with no outside agent. «в ниточку» ('into a little thread') uses the diminutive of «нить» for a vivid pinched image.

— Какая это мочалка? — пробормотал Алеша.  
— What wisp is this? — Alyosha mumbled.
> «пробормотать» — to mumble out: The prefix «про-» on «бормотать» (to mutter) gives a complete, perfective 'mumbled out, got out in a mutter.' Dostoevsky's dialogue tags are precise about *how* a thing is said — here Alyosha's bafflement is in the verb itself.

— Это он на меня тебе, папа, жаловаться пришел! — крикнул знакомый уже Алеше голосок давешнего мальчика из-за занавески в углу. — Это я ему давеча палец укусил!  
— He's come to complain to you about me, Papa! — cried the voice, already familiar to Alyosha, of the boy from earlier, from behind the curtain in the corner. — I'm the one who bit his finger a while ago!
> Scrambled word order for emphasis: The boy's blurt reorders everything for heat: «Это он» (it's HE), «на меня» (about ME), «тебе» (to YOU), with the infinitive «жаловаться» (to complain) stranded before the verb «пришел». Free case-marking lets each charged word jump forward.
> «голосок», «давеча» — little voice, a while ago: «голосок» is the diminutive of «голос» (voice), tender for a child's piping. «давеча» is a folksy, now-archaic 'a while ago, earlier today' — colloquial color that recurs through this scene («давешнего» below).

Занавеска отдернулась, и Алеша увидел давешнего врага своего, в углу, под образами, на прилаженной на лавке и на стуле постельке.  
The curtain was pulled back, and Alyosha saw his enemy from earlier, in the corner, under the icons, on the little bed rigged up on a bench and a chair.
> Middle «-ся»: «отдернулась»: «отдернулась» (from «отдернуться») is the intransitive «-ся» form — the curtain 'drew itself back,' presented as if of its own accord, leaving the puller unnamed. Russian loves this agentless middle for sudden movements.
> Reflexive possessive «свой»: «своего» ('his own') is the reflexive possessive, pointing back to the clause's subject Alyosha — his own enemy. Russian prefers «свой» over «его» here precisely to keep the possession tied to the subject. «врага» is animate accusative (= genitive form).

Мальчик лежал накрытый своим пальтишком и еще стареньким ватным одеяльцем.  
The boy lay covered with his own little coat and an old quilted blanket besides.
> Diminutives «пальтишко», «одеяльце»: «пальтишко» (a poor little coat, with the slightly pitying «-ишк-») and «одеяльце» (a little blanket, tender «-ц-») saturate the line with affection and pity for the sick child's meager bedding. The suffixes do emotional work no English diminutive quite matches.
> Short-ish passive participle + reflexive «свой»: «накрытый» is the past passive participle of «накрыть» (to cover); the covering thing «своим пальтишком» stands in the instrumental, and «своим» ('his own') reflexively ties it to the boy. Instrumental of the covering means is standard here.

Очевидно, был нездоров и, судя по горящим глазам, в лихорадочном жару.  
He was evidently unwell and, judging by his burning eyes, in a feverish heat.
> Set gerund phrase «судя по»: «судя по» ('judging by') is a frozen gerund of «судить» governing the dative «горящим глазам» (his burning eyes). It has lexicalized into a connective meaning 'to judge from,' a common parenthetical hinge.
> Short adjective «нездоров»: «нездоров» is the predicative short form of «нездоровый» (unwell), the form used with «был» to state a passing physical state. Russian routinely picks the short adjective for health and condition («болен», «здоров», «нездоров»).

Он бесстрашно, не по-давешнему, глядел теперь на Алешу: «Дома, дескать, теперь не достанешь».  
Fearlessly, not as before, he now looked at Alyosha: "Here at home, he means, you can't get at me now."
> Generalized 2nd-person + genitive of negation: «не достанешь» is a 2nd-person singular used impersonally ('one can't get at me'), a common Russian way to generalize. Under negation the object effectively goes genitive; the whole defiant thought is the boy's, unmarked, slipped into the narration.
> «по-давешнему», «дескать»: «по-давешнему» means 'in the earlier way, as before'; «дескать» is a reportative particle flagging quoted or imagined speech ('so to say, he means'). Both are colloquial markers that let the narrator voice the boy's unspoken thought.

— Какой такой палец укусил? — привскочил со стула штабс-капитан. — Это вам он палец укусил-с?  
— What finger did he bite? — the captain started up from his chair. — It was your finger he bit, sir?
> Prefix «при-» on a verb of motion: «привскочил» layers «при-» onto «вскочить» (to leap up) for a slight, sudden start — 'half-sprang up.' «со стула» ('off the chair') uses «с» + genitive for motion away from a surface.
> Dative of the possessor-affected: «вам палец»: «вам» is a dative of the affected possessor — literally 'did he bite the finger to/on you,' i.e. 'YOUR finger.' Russian routinely marks the person hurt with a dative rather than a possessive 'your.' Fronting «вам» stresses the shock that it was Alyosha.

— Да, мне.  
— Yes, mine.
> Bare dative «мне» as full answer: The whole reply is a single dative pronoun: «мне» ('to/on me'), answering «вам он палец укусил?» It works because the dative of the affected person was set up in the question — Russian can reply with just the case-marked word.

Давеча он на улице с мальчиками камнями перебрасывался; они в него шестеро кидают, а он один.  
A while ago he was throwing stones with the boys in the street; six of them were pelting him, and he was alone.
> Reciprocal «-ся» + instrumental of the thing thrown: «перебрасывался» (from «перебрасываться») is reciprocal «-ся»: 'was throwing back and forth (with others).' The stones, «камнями», take the instrumental — Russian throws *with* a thing, marking the missile in the instrumental.
> Contrastive «а» framing six against one: The mild contrastive «а» pivots the two pictures — 'six of them pelting, while he was alone' — without real opposition, just a shift of view. «шестеро» is a collective numeral for a group of people, and «кидают» is a vivid present amid the past narration.

Я подошел к нему, а он и в меня камень бросил, потом другой мне в голову.  
I went up to him, and he flung a stone at me too, then another at my head.
> Contrastive «а» plus emphatic «и»: «а» turns the corner of the story ('and then he…'); «и» here is the emphatic particle 'even, also' — 'he flung a stone at me TOO.' The two tiny words together give the narration its conversational, accumulating push.
> Prefixed motion verb «подойти к»: «подошел» (perfective of «подходить/подойти», 'to approach') is a prefixed verb of motion: «под-» + the motion root gives 'came up to.' It governs «к» + dative («к нему», 'up to him') — the standard frame for approaching someone.

Я спросил что я ему сделал?  
I asked what I had done to him.
> Embedded question with dative «ему»: An indirect question, 'I asked what I had done to him.' «ему» is the dative of the person affected — one does something *to* someone in the dative. The aspect «сделал» (perfective) frames it as a completed deed Alyosha is asking about.

Он вдруг бросился и больно укусил мне палец, не знаю за что.  
He suddenly threw himself at me and bit my finger painfully, I don't know what for.
> Reflexive «броситься» + dative «мне палец»: «бросился» (from «броситься», to hurl oneself) is a change-of-state «-ся» — he flung himself. Then «укусил мне палец» again marks the victim with a dative «мне» rather than a possessive: 'bit the finger on me.'
> «за что» — 'for what / why' after negation: «за что» (literally 'for what') is the idiomatic 'why / what for, for what offense.' Trailing «не знаю за что» ('I don't know what for') gives Alyosha's account its bewildered, guileless note.

— Сейчас высеку-с! Сею минутой высеку-с, — совсем уже вскочил со стула штабс-капитан.  
— I'll flog him this instant, sir! This very minute I'll flog him, sir — the captain had now jumped right up from his chair.
> Perfective future «высеку» for an instant threat: «высеку» is the perfective present-form of «высечь» (to flog) carrying future meaning — 'I'll flog [him completely].' The perfective fits a single, decisive future act; the repetition with «-с» builds the captain's manic overstatement.
> Archaic demonstrative «сей»: «сею минутой»: «сею» is the instrumental feminine of «сей» ('this'), a bookish-archaic demonstrative; «сею минутой» ('this very minute') is a fixed time phrase. The old «сей» lends the threat a stagey, antiquated flourish.

— Да я ведь вовсе не жалуюсь, я только рассказал.  
— But I am not complaining at all, I only told you about it.
> Particles «да… ведь» and intensifier «вовсе не»: «да» softens the opening ('but, oh'); «ведь» appeals to shared understanding ('after all, you see'). «вовсе не» is the emphatic 'not at all.' «жалуюсь» is the «-ся» verb «жаловаться» (to complain), which exists only in the reflexive.

Я вовсе не хочу, чтобы вы его высекли.  
I do not at all want you to flog him.
> «чтобы» + past form for a wished outcome: After a verb of wishing, Russian uses «чтобы» plus a past-form verb («высекли») to express the willed result: 'I don't want [it] that you flog him.' The past form here is irrealis, not past time — the «бы» is fused into «чтобы».

Да он, кажется, теперь и болен…  
And besides, he seems to be ill now…
> Short adjective «болен» + hedging particles: «болен» is the predicative short form of «больной» (ill) — the form used to say someone is sick. «да» (well, and besides), «кажется» (it seems), and emphatic «и» pile up the soft, hesitant qualifications typical of Alyosha's gentleness.

— А вы думали, я высеку-с?  
— And did you suppose I would flog him, sir?
> Imperfective «думали» vs perfective «высеку»: «думали» is imperfective past — the lingering state of supposing — while «высеку» is perfective future, the imagined finished act. The aspect contrast sets a drawn-out 'you thought' against a sharp 'I'd flog [him].' Initial «а» pivots to a stung retort.

Что я Илюшечку возьму да сейчас и высеку пред вами для вашего полного удовлетворения?  
That I would take my little Ilusha and flog him this instant, before your eyes, for your complete satisfaction?
> The «взять да (и)» construction of abrupt action: «возьму да и высеку» is the colloquial «взять да (и) + verb» idiom: not literally 'take,' but 'up and [do it] just like that.' It conveys a sudden, willful, almost capricious action — 'I'll just up and flog him.'
> Diminutive «Илюшечка»: From «Илья» → «Илюша» → «Илюшечка», a doubly affectionate diminutive of the boy's name (accusative «Илюшечку»). The captain's bitterness rides on the tenderest possible form of his son's name — the heart of the whole 'laceration.'

Скоро вам это надо-с? — проговорил штабс-капитан, вдруг повернувшись к Алеше с таким жестом, как будто хотел на него броситься.  
Do you need that soon, sir? — the captain brought out, suddenly turning to Alyosha with such a gesture as if he meant to fling himself upon him.
> Perfective gerund «повернувшись»: «повернувшись» (from «повернуться», to turn) is a perfective past gerund: 'having turned,' the completed motion just before the main verb «проговорил». The «-сь» is the reflexive «-ся» after a vowel, marking the intransitive turn.
> «как будто» — the unreal comparison: «как будто» ('as if, as though') opens a comparison that need not be true — 'as if he meant to fling himself on him.' «броситься» is the reflexive 'hurl oneself.' Such 'as-if' framing keeps the captain's threats theatrically suspended.

— Жалею, сударь, о вашем пальчике, но не хотите ли я, прежде чем Илюшечку сечь, свои четыре пальца, сейчас же на ваших глазах, для вашего справедливого удовлетворения, вот этим самым ножом оттяпаю.  
— I am sorry, sir, about your little finger, but wouldn't you rather I, before flogging little Ilusha, lop off my own four fingers, this very moment and before your eyes, for your just satisfaction, with this very knife.
> Polite offer with «не хотите ли»: «не хотите ли…?» ('wouldn't you like…?') is a courteous offer built on the «не… ли» question frame — politeness through negation plus the particle «ли». It clashes grotesquely with what is offered: chopping off his own fingers.
> «пальчик» and the brutal «оттяпать»: «пальчик» is the tender diminutive 'little finger,' while «оттяпать» is a coarse, violent colloquialism 'to hack/lop off.' The captain's whiplash from doting diminutive to butcher's verb is the whole texture of his «надрыв» (laceration).
> «сударь» — sir (the full form): «сударь» is the full polite 'sir' from which the clipped «-с» («словоерс») was contracted. Here the captain uses the whole word, ironically courteous, the very ancestor of the servile tic he keeps tacking onto everything.

Четырех-то пальцев, я думаю, вам будет довольно-с для утоления жажды мщения-с, пятого не потребуете?.. — Он вдруг остановился и как бы задохся.  
Four fingers, I think, will be enough for you, sir, to slake your thirst for vengeance, sir — you won't demand the fifth?.. — He suddenly stopped and seemed to be gasping for breath.
> Genitive of quantity + dative «вам» with «довольно»: «довольно» ('enough') governs the genitive of what is enough — «четырех пальцев» (four fingers) — and a dative for whom: «вам». The «-то» on «четырех» is the emphatic topic clitic, 'four fingers, now THOSE will do.'
> Genitive of negation: «пятого не потребуете»: Under the negated future «не потребуете» (you won't demand), the object «пятого» (a fifth one) drops into the genitive — the genitive of negation at work. «потребуете» is perfective future ('you will demand').
> Bookish «утоление жажды мщения»: A stack of lofty abstract nouns in the genitive: «утоление» (slaking) of the «жажда» (thirst) of «мщение» (vengeance). The elevated, almost Biblical diction is the captain's pretension, mocking Alyosha's errand with grandiose mock-tragedy.

Каждая черточка на его лице ходила и дергалась, глядел же с чрезвычайным вызовом.  
Every little feature of his face was working and twitching, and he looked on with an extraordinary defiance.
> Imperfective pair painting twitching motion: «ходила» (was moving) and «дергалась» (was twitching, «-ся») are imperfective past — ongoing, repeated motion held in view. The aspect keeps the face perpetually working, not finished; «дергалась» is the «-ся» intransitive 'jerked of itself.'
> The particle «же» marking the turn: «же» here is not 'but'; it lightly contrasts and resumes — 'and yet he looked on…'. «с… вызовом» ('with defiance') uses «с» + instrumental of manner. «черточка» (little feature) above carries an affectionate-pitying diminutive.

Он был как бы в исступлении.  
He was as though beside himself.
> «как бы» hedging a state: «как бы» ('as it were, as though') softens the assertion — 'he was, as it were, beside himself.' Dostoevsky uses «как бы» constantly to keep his characters' states just shy of definite. «в исступлении» is the prepositional of place-as-state.
> «исступление» — frenzy, transport: «исступление» is a strong, bookish word for ecstatic frenzy, being beside oneself — used of religious rapture and of rage alike. It marks the captain's emotional pitch as something near pathological, a key Dostoevskian register.

— Я, кажется, теперь всё понял, — тихо и грустно ответил Алеша, продолжая сидеть. — Значит, ваш мальчик — добрый мальчик, любит отца и бросился на меня как на брата вашего обидчика… Это я теперь понимаю, — повторил он раздумывая.  
— I think I understand it all now — Alyosha answered quietly and sadly, remaining seated. — So your boy is a good boy, he loves his father and threw himself at me as at the brother of the man who wronged you… I understand that now — he repeated, musing.
> Imperfective gerund «продолжая»: «продолжая» (from «продолжать», to continue) is a present imperfective gerund — a simultaneous attendant action: 'continuing to sit, while still seated.' It quietly underlines Alyosha's stillness against the captain's frenzy.
> Parallel «как на…»: brother of the wronger: «как на брата» ('as at the brother') mirrors «на меня» — Alyosha read as a stand-in for Dmitri. «вашего обидчика» ('of the man who wronged you') is a genitive of the «обидчик», the offender. «бросился» is again reflexive 'flung himself.'
> Bare imperfective gerund «раздумывая»: «раздумывая» ('musing, pondering') is a present gerund tacked to «повторил», sharing the subject — 'he repeated, musing.' Dropping any comma in this set tag is a common 19th-c. light usage; the gerund colors the manner of repetition.

— Но брат мой Дмитрий Федорович раскаивается в своем поступке, я знаю это, и если только ему возможно будет прийти к вам или, всего лучше, свидеться с вами опять в том самом месте, то он попросит у вас при всех прощения… если вы пожелаете.  
— But my brother Dmitri Fyodorovich repents of his act, I know this, and if only it should be possible for him to come to you or, best of all, to meet with you again in that very same place, he will beg your pardon before everyone… if you wish it.
> Reflexive «раскаиваться в» + prepositional: «раскаивается» (from «раскаиваться», to repent) is a «-ся» verb governing «в» + prepositional: one repents *of* something («в своем поступке», of one's deed). «своем» reflexively ties the deed to Dmitri, its subject.
> Dative subject with «возможно» + future: Impersonal again: «ему… возможно будет» ('it will be possible for him'), the person in the dative «ему», the predicate the invariable «возможно» with future «будет». «прийти» is the perfective infinitive of the prefixed motion verb 'to come.'
> Resuming «то» and «попросить у + genitive»: After a long «если»-clause, «то» ('then') resumes the main clause — a standard Russian conditional bracket. «попросит… прощения у вас»: «просить/попросить» takes the thing asked in the genitive («прощения») and the person in «у» + genitive («у вас»).

— То есть вырвал бороденку и попросил извинения… Всё, дескать, закончил и удовлетворил, так ли-с?  
— That is, after tearing out my little beard, he'll beg forgiveness… All settled and satisfied, he means, is that it, sir?
> Pejorative diminutive «бороденка»: «бороденка» is «борода» (beard) with the contemptuous-pitying «-енк-» suffix — 'wretched little beard.' The captain belittles his own humiliated beard, the very one Dmitri yanked; the suffix drips self-mockery and shame.
> Reportative «дескать» + tag question «так ли»: «дескать» flags sarcastically imagined speech ('all settled, he means'). «так ли?» is a tag question with «ли» — 'is that it?' — here barbed with the servile «-с». The perfectives «закончил, удовлетворил» frame the supposed wrong as neatly 'completed.'

— О нет, напротив, он сделает всё, что вам будет угодно и как вам будет угодно!  
— Oh no, on the contrary, he will do everything that you wish and in whatever way you wish!
> Dative + «угодно»: 'as you please': «вам будет угодно» is the courteous impersonal 'as it will please you' — dative experiencer «вам», invariable predicate «угодно», future «будет». The doubled «что… и как…» ('whatever and however') heaps deference on Alyosha's reassurance.

— Так что если б я попросил его светлость стать на коленки предо мной в этом самом трактире-с — «Столичный город» ему наименование — или на площади-с, так он и стал бы?  
— So that if I were to ask his lordship to get down on his knees before me in that very tavern, sir — 'Metropolis' is the name it goes by — or in the public square, sir, then he would do it?
> Full conditional «если б… так… бы»: A complete irrealis conditional: «если б… попросил» (if I were to ask) in the protasis, «так он и стал бы» (then he would do it) in the apodosis, both past-form verbs with «бы». «б» is just the clipped «бы». The resuming «так» and emphatic «и» knit the two halves.
> «его светлость» — sarcastic 'his lordship': «светлость» ('Serene Highness, lordship') is a grand aristocratic title the captain throws at Dmitri in bitter sarcasm. «стать на коленки» (the diminutive «коленки» again) — to go down on his knees — turns the would-be apology into a humiliating spectacle.

— Да, он станет и на колени.  
— Yes, he will even go down on his knees.
> Perfective future «станет» + emphatic «и»: «станет» is the perfective future of «стать» ('he will [even] go down'). The particle «и» means 'even, also' — 'he will even kneel.' Alyosha answers the captain's mocking conditional with a flat, earnest future.

— Пронзили-с. Прослезили меня и пронзили-с.  
— You have pierced me, sir. You have moved me to tears and pierced me, sir.
> Subjectless perfectives with dropped «вы»: «пронзили» (you have pierced) and «прослезили» (you have moved to tears) are perfective pasts with the polite 'you' dropped — the plural ending carries it. The «про-» prefix marks completed, thorough action; the repetition, capped with «-с», stages his sudden melting.

Слишком наклонен чувствовать.  
Too inclined to feeling.
> Short adjective «наклонен» + infinitive: «наклонен» is the predicative short form of «наклонный/склонный» ('inclined, prone'), taking a bare infinitive «чувствовать» (to feel). The whole clause drops its subject 'I' — clipped, confessional: '[I am] too inclined to feeling.'

Позвольте же отрекомендоваться вполне: моя семья, мои две дочери и мой сын — мой помет-с.  
Allow me, then, to introduce myself in full: my family, my two daughters and my son — my litter, sir.
> Imperative «позвольте» + insistent «же»: «позвольте» (allow, permit) is the polite plural imperative; «же» here urges and warms the request ('do allow me, then'). «отрекомендоваться» is a bookish, slightly antiquated reflexive 'to introduce/present oneself.'
> «помёт» — a litter (of animals): «помёт» is the word for an animal's litter — a brood of pups or kittens. Calling his own family «мой помёт» ('my litter, sir') is shockingly self-degrading, the captain's bitter clowning turned against his own children. The «-с» twists the knife of servility.

Умру я, кто-то их возлюбит-с?  
When I die, sir, who will go on loving them?
> Conditional 'when' without a conjunction: Both verbs are perfective futures («умру» — I shall die, «возлюбит» — will come to love), and the bare juxtaposition reads as 'once I die, who will…'. Russian often drops a «когда» or «если» and lets the two perfective futures carry the conditional-temporal force on their own.
> «кто-то» — somebody specific yet unknown: The clitic «-то» marks a specific but unidentified person ('someone or other'), as against «-нибудь» ('anyone at all'). Here it carries a wistful, rhetorical colour — 'who is there that will love them?'
> The deferential «-с» (slovoers): The little «-с», tacked onto «возлюбит-с», is the «словоерс» — a contraction of «сударь» ('sir') once added for politeness or servility. The captain sprinkles it through his speech, and it stamps every line with his cringing, clownish deference.
> «возлюбить» — to love, in a biblical key: «возлюбить» is the elevated, Scriptural verb for 'to love' (as in «возлюби ближнего твоего» — love thy neighbour), loftier than plain «полюбить». The captain's reaching for it lends his self-pity a mock-solemn, sermon-like tone.

А пока живу я, кто-то меня, скверненького, кроме них, возлюбит?  
And while I am alive, who will love me, wretched little thing that I am, save them?
> «скверненький» — wretched little me: From «скверный» ('vile, nasty'), softened by the diminutive «-еньк-» suffix into a self-pitying 'wretched little thing'. The diminutive turns the harsh adjective into an almost tender self-abasement.
> Accusative of an animate object: «меня» is the direct object of «возлюбит», and the apposed adjective «скверненького» takes the matching animate accusative ending «-ого» — looking like a genitive, as animate masculine forms always do. The aside drops the captain himself, in the object slot, into the sentence as the pitiable thing to be loved.

Великое это дело устроил господь для каждого человека в моем роде-с.  
The Lord has arranged a great thing, sir, for every man of my sort.
> Fronting for emphasis: The neutral order would be «Господь устроил это великое дело»; here the object phrase «великое это дело» is thrown to the front as the topic, with the subject «господь» trailing after the verb. The inversion gives the sentence a weighty, declamatory rhythm.
> «в моём роде» — locative of category: «роде» is the prepositional (locative) of «род» ('sort, kind, lineage') after «в». The phrase means 'of my sort, of my kind' — the captain's recurring formula for his own lowly type of man.

Ибо надобно, чтоб и человека в моем роде мог хоть кто-нибудь возлюбить-с…  
For it is needful, sir, that even a man of my sort be loved by at least somebody…
> «Ибо» — bookish 'for': «Ибо» ('for, because') is an archaic, scriptural conjunction, far loftier than everyday «потому что». It belongs to sermon and Scripture, and the captain wields it to inflate his self-justification.
> «чтоб» + past/irrealis after necessity: The impersonal «надобно» ('it is needful') governs a «чтоб»-clause whose verb «мог» stands in the past form — the irrealis pattern Russian uses for willed or required outcomes. «чтоб» is the colloquially clipped form of «чтобы».
> «кто-нибудь» — anybody at all: Here «-нибудь» marks a non-specific 'anyone at all', reinforced by «хоть» ('even, at least'). The contrast with «кто-то» two sentences earlier is exact: there a specific (if unknown) someone, here merely any soul whatever.

— Ах, это совершенная правда! — воскликнул Алеша.  
— Ah, that is the perfect truth! — Alyosha exclaimed.
> Perfective verb of speech in narration: «воскликнул» (perfective, 'exclaimed') frames Alyosha's outburst as a single completed act that advances the scene, the workhorse pattern for dialogue tags in Russian narrative prose.

— Да полноте наконец паясничать; какой-нибудь дурак придет, а вы срамите! — вскрикнула неожиданно девушка у окна, обращаясь к отцу с брезгливою и презрительною миной.  
— Do stop your buffoonery at last; some fool comes along, and you put us to shame! — the girl by the window suddenly cried out, turning to her father with a look of disgust and scorn.
> «полно(те)» + «паясничать» — 'do stop clowning': «полноте» is a fixed imperative-like check meaning 'enough!, do stop!' (lit. 'be full'), with the polite «-те». «паясничать» means 'to play the buffoon, clown about', from «паяц» ('clown, harlequin') — the very charge the captain keeps inviting.
> Contrastive «а» pivoting the clause: «а» here is the mild adversative 'and/while' that swivels from one subject to another ('some fool comes, and you go shaming us'). It marks a shift of topic with gentle reproach rather than flat opposition — a hinge English can only render with stress.
> «обращаясь» — present gerund of attendant action: «обращаясь» ('turning, addressing') is an imperfective present gerund (деепричастие): it names a simultaneous action sharing the main subject (the girl), folding 'as she turned to her father' into the narrative clause. The dative «к отцу» follows «к».
> Archaic instrumental ending «-ою»: «брезгливою … презрительною» carry the older long-form feminine instrumental ending «-ою» (modern «-ой»), governed by «с». This «-ою» is a literary-archaic flavouring still common in 19th-century prose. «мина» here means 'facial expression, look'.

— Повремените немного, Варвара Николавна, позвольте выдержать направление, — крикнул ей отец, хотя и повелительным тоном, но, однако, весьма одобрительно смотря на нее. — Это уж у нас такой характер-с, — повернулся он опять к Алеше.  
— Wait a moment, Varvara Nikolavna, permit me to hold my course, — her father called to her, in a commanding tone, yet looking at her with the warmest approval. — That, sir, is simply the way she is, — he turned again to Alyosha.
> Polite plural imperatives: «Повремените» ('wait a moment') and «позвольте» ('permit, allow') are perfective imperatives with the polite/plural «-те». «позвольте» + infinitive is the stock formula of deferential request that the captain repeats throughout the scene.
> «смотря» — present gerund: «смотря» ('looking') is an imperfective present gerund describing how the father called out — simultaneously gazing at his daughter with approval. The accusative «на нее» follows «на» of direction of gaze.
> «выдержать направление» — to hold one's course: Literally 'to maintain the direction', a slightly grandiose, quasi-military turn of phrase ('let me see my line through'). It chimes with the captain's old soldier's idiom and his theatrical insistence on finishing his performance.

И ничего во всей природе
Благословить он не хотел.  
And in all of nature there was nothing
He was willing to bless.
> Genitive object under negation: «ничего» is the genitive of «ничто», the negated object of «благословить … не хотел». The negative pronoun forces negative concord (verb still takes «не»), and the object stands in the genitive — the regular pattern under negation.

То есть надо бы в женском роде: благословить она не хотела-с.  
That is, one ought to put it in the feminine, sir: she was not willing to bless.
> «надо бы» — softened necessity with «бы»: The particle «бы» joined to impersonal «надо» tones the necessity down to a tentative 'one ought really to…'. «бы» is the all-purpose irrealis particle, here lending the captain's literary aside a mock-hesitant politeness.
> «род» — grammatical gender: Here «род» means grammatical gender: 'in the feminine'. The joke turns on changing Pushkin's masculine «не хотел» into the feminine «не хотела» so the line fits his daughter — a wink at the gendered past-tense -л form itself.

Но позвольте вас представить и моей супруге: вот-с Арина Петровна, дама без ног-с, лет сорока трех, ноги ходят, да немножко-с.  
But allow me to present you to my wife as well: here, sir, is Arina Petrovna, a lady with no legs, sir, some forty-three years of age — her legs do walk, but only a little, sir.
> Accusative object, dative goal: «вас» is the accusative person presented; «моей супруге» the dative person presented-to ('to my wife'). «представить кого кому» neatly splits the two roles across accusative and dative.
> «супруга» — wife, in formal register: «супруга» is the elevated, ceremonious word for 'wife' (cf. plain «жена»). Applied to his crippled, simple-born wife amid this squalid scene, the genteel term is part of the captain's grotesque mock-courtliness.
> Genitive of approximate age: Inverting the numeral and noun («лет сорока трёх» rather than «сорок три года») signals approximation — 'some forty-three or so'. The whole phrase sits in the genitive, and the numeral itself declines.

Из простых-с.  
Of humble stock, sir.
> «из простых» — of common stock: An elliptical social formula: «из простых [людей]» means 'from the simple/common folk', i.e. low-born, not gentry. The genitive plural «простых» follows «из». The captain repeats it like an apology for his wife's origins — and his own.

Арина Петровна, разгладьте черты ваши: вот Алексей Федорович Карамазов.  
Arina Petrovna, smooth out your features: here is Alexey Fyodorovich Karamazov.
> Imperative with possessive after the noun: «разгладьте» is a polite imperative ('smooth out!'). The possessive «ваши» follows its noun «черты» rather than preceding it — a literary inversion that throws faint emphasis onto 'your features'.

Встаньте, Алексей Федорович, — он взял его за руку и с силой, которой даже нельзя было ожидать от него, вдруг его приподнял. — Вы даме представляетесь, надо встать-с.  
Get up, Alexey Fyodorovich, — he took him by the arm and, with a strength one could never have expected of him, suddenly raised him to his feet. — You are being presented to a lady, sir, you must stand.
> Relative «которой» in the genitive: «которой» agrees with its antecedent «сила» in gender and number but takes the genitive its own clause demands: «ожидать чего» (to expect) governs the genitive. The relative clause condenses 'a strength one could not have expected'.
> Impersonal «нельзя было»: A subjectless impersonal construction: «нельзя» ('it is impossible/one cannot') plus past «было» and an infinitive, with the experiencer left unstated ('one could not'). This is the dative-experiencer family of subjectless predicates, here with no person named.
> Reflexive «-ся» as passive: «представляетесь» is the «-ся» form of «представлять»: 'you are being presented'. The «-ся» here carries a passive/middle sense — the action falls on the subject — rather than true reflexivity.

Не тот-с Карамазов, маменька, который… гм и так далее, а брат его, блистающий смиренными добродетелями.  
Not that Karamazov, mama, the one who… hm, and so forth, but his brother, the one resplendent in meek virtues.
> Correlative «тот … который»: «тот» ('that one') sets up a correlative with the relative «который» ('the one who…'), the standard frame for singling out a referent. Here the captain breaks off the relative clause with «гм и так далее», archly declining to name Dmitri's scandal.
> «маменька» — affectionate 'mama': A tender diminutive of «мама», old-fashioned and cosseting ('dear mama, mamenka'). The captain's lavish use of it underlines the cloying, theatrical tenderness he heaps on his witless wife.
> Present active participle + instrumental: «блистающий» ('shining, resplendent') is a present active participle from «блистать», agreeing with «брат». «блистать чем» governs the instrumental, so «смиренными добродетелями» ('with meek virtues') stands in the instrumental of means. The bookish participle mock-elevates Alyosha.

Позвольте, Арина Петровна, позвольте, маменька, позвольте вашу ручку предварительно поцеловать.  
Permit me, Arina Petrovna, permit me, mama, permit me first to kiss your little hand.
> Threefold imperative of entreaty: The triple «позвольте … позвольте … позвольте» plus infinitive ('permit me to…') piles up the same deferential imperative for rhetorical, fawning effect — the captain's signature mode of mock-humble request.
> «ручка» — dear little hand: Diminutive of «рука» ('hand'), affectionate here: 'your little hand'. The diminutive turns the gallant hand-kiss into something doting and exaggeratedly tender.
> «предварительно» — beforehand: A formal adverb meaning 'first, in advance, preliminarily', the language of officialdom. Slipped into a hand-kissing flourish, it adds to the captain's grotesquely bureaucratic courtliness.

И он почтительно, нежно даже поцеловал у супруги ручку.  
And he kissed his wife's hand respectfully, even tenderly.
> «поцеловать у кого что» — kissed the hand of: The construction «целовать у кого-то руку» literally 'kissed at someone the hand', with «у супруги» in the genitive after «у», is the idiomatic way to say one kissed a part of someone's body. «ручку» is the accusative object.

Девица у окна с негодованием повернулась к сцене спиной, надменно вопросительное лицо супруги вдруг выразило необыкновенную ласковость.  
The girl at the window turned her back on the scene in indignation, while the wife's haughtily questioning face suddenly took on an extraordinary sweetness.
> Reflexive verb + instrumental of body part: «повернулась» (reflexive «-ся», 'turned [herself]') pairs with «спиной» in the instrumental — 'turned with her back', i.e. turned her back. The instrumental names the body part presented by the turning.
> Adjective-heavy nominative subject: The long modifier «надменно вопросительное» ('haughtily questioning') agrees with the nominative subject «лицо» (neuter), and the verb «выразило» takes the neuter past ending to match. The accumulation of qualifiers before the noun is typical of Dostoevsky's portrait phrasing.
> «с» + instrumental of manner: «с негодованием» ('with indignation') is the instrumental after «с», expressing the manner of the action. This adverbial use of «с» + instrumental is the ordinary way to say 'indignantly, scornfully', and so on.

— Здравствуйте, садитесь, господин Черномазов, — проговорила она.  
— Good day, do sit down, Mister Chernomazov, — she said.
> Polite imperatives of greeting: «Здравствуйте» (lit. 'be well') is the polite-plural greeting frozen as an imperative; «садитесь» ('do sit down') is the imperfective imperative, which in invitations sounds warmer and more welcoming than its perfective counterpart «сядьте».

— Карамазов, маменька, Карамазов (мы из простых-с), — подшепнул он снова.  
— Karamazov, mama, Karamazov (we are of humble stock, sir), — he whispered to her again.
> «подшепнуть» — to whisper aside: The prefix «под-» on «шепнуть» ('to whisper') adds a furtive, sidelong sense — to murmur a quiet correction under one's breath. It paints the captain leaning in to fix his wife's blunder without a scene.
> Zero-copula present: «мы из простых» has no verb 'to be': the present-tense copula is simply absent in Russian. The bare 'we [are] of common stock' is the normal way to predicate in the present.

— Ну Карамазов или как там, а я всегда Черномазов… Садитесь же, и зачем он вас поднял?  
— Well, Karamazov or whatever it is, but I always say Chernomazov… Do sit down, then; and why did he pull you up?
> Insistent particle «же»: «же» attached to the imperative «Садитесь» adds urging impatience — 'do sit down, will you'. It is one of Russian's tiny modal particles that English can render only with stress or 'do/then'.
> Perfective past 'pulled up': «поднял» (perfective, 'raised, pulled up') views the act as a single completed event. The accusative «вас» is its object; the wife querulously asks why her husband hauled the guest to his feet.

Дама без ног, он говорит, ноги-то есть, да распухли, как ведра, а сама я высохла.  
A lady with no legs, he says — legs I have, but they have swollen up like buckets, while I myself have wasted away to nothing.
> Topic-marking clitic «-то»: The hyphenated «-то» on «ноги» is not the indefinite suffix but the emphatic topic clitic: 'legs, now — those I do have'. It picks up and contests the captain's phrase 'a lady with no legs', stressing the known topic.
> Perfective result + folk simile: «распухли» (perfective, 'have swollen up') states a resulting condition. The earthy simile «как вёдра» ('like buckets') is pure peasant speech, matching the wife's plain origins.
> Intensive «сама» + contrastive «а»: «сама» ('I myself') intensifies the subject, and «а» pivots contrastively from her swollen legs to her wasted body. «высохла» (perfective, 'have dried up, wasted away') again names a completed change of state.

Прежде-то я куды была толстая, а теперь вон словно иглу проглотила…  
Once I was ever so stout, and now it's as though I'd swallowed a needle…
> Dialectal «куды» and topic «-то»: «куды» is a folk/dialectal variant of «куда», used here as an intensifier 'ever so' ('куды толстая' — ever so fat). With the topic-clitic «-то» on «прежде» ('formerly'), the line is thick with colloquial peasant colour.
> «словно» + perfective for a vivid simile: «словно» ('as if, as though') introduces the comparison, and the perfective «проглотила» ('[I'd] swallowed') gives the image its sharp, completed force — 'as though I'd swallowed a needle', so thin has she grown.

— Мы из простых-с, из простых-с, — подсказал еще раз капитан.  
— We are of humble stock, sir, of humble stock, sir, — the captain prompted once more.
> «капитан» — the captain: Snegiryov is a «штабс-капитан» (staff-captain), a junior officer rank; the narrator clips it to «капитан». The military title, set against the family's destitution, sharpens the pathos of a once-serving man now reduced to clowning for visitors.
> Perfective of repeated prompting: «подсказал» (perfective, 'prompted, prompted in') with «ещё раз» frames yet another single instance of the captain quietly feeding his wife the right word — comic repetition built from a punctual perfective.

— Папа, ах папа! — проговорила вдруг горбатая девушка, доселе молчавшая на своем стуле, и вдруг закрыла глаза платком.  
— Papa, ah, papa! — the hunchbacked girl, who had been silent all this while in her chair, suddenly said, and all at once covered her eyes with her handkerchief.
> Past active participle 'who had been silent': «молчавшая» is a past active participle (imperfective stem) agreeing with «девушка»: 'who had been silent'. The bookish participial phrase compresses a «которая молчала»-clause; «доселе» ('hitherto, till then') is an archaic adverb heightening the literary register.
> Reflexive possessive «свой»: «своём» ('her own') refers back to the clause's subject, the girl — 'in her own chair'. Russian uses «свой» rather than «её» precisely because the possessor is the subject; «её» would imply someone else's chair.

— Шут! — брякнула девица у окна.  
— Buffoon! — the girl at the window snapped.
> «Шут!» — buffoon, fool: «шут» is the court jester / buffoon, hurled as an insult: 'clown, fool'. It names the captain's whole self-degrading performance and echoes «паяц» / «паясничать» from earlier in the scene.
> «брякнуть» — to blurt out: An expressive perfective meaning to say something abruptly, with a blunt clatter ('snapped, blurted'). The verb's onomatopoeic ring (cf. «бряк» — clatter) captures the girl's curt, contemptuous tone.

— Видите, у нас какие известия, — расставила руки мамаша, указывая на дочерей, — точно облака идут; пройдут облака, и опять наша музыка.  
— You see what tidings we have here, — the mother spread her arms, gesturing toward her daughters, — it is just like clouds passing over; the clouds go by, and then we have our music again.
> «известия» — tidings, news: «известия» means 'news, tidings' — here ironic, gesturing at her quarrelsome daughters as the 'news of the house'. The slightly formal plural lends her resigned remark a mock-grand air.
> Imperfective process vs perfective completion: «идут» (imperfective present, 'are passing') paints the clouds in process; «пройдут» (perfective future, 'will pass / go by') then names their completed passing. The aspect switch is the very engine of her little parable — the storm passes, the music returns.
> «мамаша» — homely 'mother': Here the narrator calls the wife «мамаша», a familiar, slightly common word for 'mother/mum'. It sits in the same affectionate-domestic register as the captain's «маменька» and signals her plain, lower-class warmth.

Прежде, когда мы военными были, к нам много приходило таких гостей.  
Before, when we were military folk, a great many such guests used to come to us.
> Instrumental of the past predicate: After past «были» the predicate «военными» ('military folk') takes the instrumental, not the nominative — the standard rule with «быть» in the past: 'when we were military people'. The instrumental frames the role as a bygone, temporary state.
> Imperfective of habit + genitive after «много»: «приходило» (imperfective past) names a repeated, habitual coming ('used to come'). «много» governs the genitive plural «таких гостей» ('many such guests'), and the verb stays neuter singular to agree with the quantity-word.

Я, батюшка, это к делу не приравниваю.  
I, my dear sir, am not drawing any comparison.
> «батюшка» — 'my dear sir / father': «батюшка» (lit. 'little father') is a warm, deferential form of address to a man, 'my dear sir, good father'. It can also mean a parish priest, but here it is the wife's homely, coaxing way of addressing the visitor.
> «приравнивать к делу» — to draw a comparison: «приравнивать к чему-то» means 'to equate/liken to'; «к делу» here is colloquial for 'to the matter, to the present case'. Her muddled idiom means roughly 'I'm not putting one against the other' — her speech is full of such half-grasped formulas.

Кто любит кого, тот и люби того.  
Whoever loves someone, let him love that one.
> Correlative «кто … тот» with a hortative imperative: The proverb-like sentence pairs the relative «кто» ('whoever') with the correlative «тот» ('that one'). «люби» is a 3rd-person hortative use of the imperative — 'let him love' — a folk-gnomic construction. «и» here is the emphatic 'just, then'.

Дьяконица тогда приходит и говорит: «Александр Александрович превосходнейшей души человек, а Настасья, говорит, Петровна, это исчадие ада».  
The deacon's wife comes by then and says: "Alexander Alexandrovich is a man of the most excellent soul, but Nastasya," she says, "Petrovna, she is a fiend out of hell."
> Historic present in narration: «приходит … говорит» are imperfective presents used to narrate a past anecdote vividly ('comes by and says'). This 'historic present' brings the remembered quarrel into the immediate now, a hallmark of lively oral storytelling.
> «исчадие ада» — a fiend out of hell: A fixed bookish-biblical curse: «исчадие» ('spawn, offspring', archaic) of «ад» ('hell') — 'spawn of hell, a very fiend'. The lofty Slavonic phrasing clashes comically with the petty domestic squabble it adorns.

— «Ну, отвечаю, это как кто кого обожает, а ты и мала куча, да вонюча».  
— "Well," I answer, "that depends on who dotes on whom — and you, small heap though you be, still stink."
> Two interrogatives 'who … whom': «кто кого» stacks the nominative «кто» (who, subject) against the accusative/genitive «кого» (whom, object) — the animate accusative borrows the genitive form. Russian's case-marking lets both interrogatives sit side by side: 'who dotes on whom'.
> Folk rhyme with short adjectives: «мала … вонюча» are short-form predicate adjectives ('is small … is stinking'), and the jingle «куча … вонюча» is a coarse rustic rhyme — 'a small heap, but it stinks'. «да» is the folksy 'but/and'. The short adjectives give the taunt its terse proverbial snap.

— «А тебя, говорит, надо в повиновении держать».  
— "And you," she says, "ought to be kept in subjection."
> Impersonal «надо» + infinitive: «надо … держать» is the subjectless necessity construction ('one ought to keep'), with «тебя» as the accusative object. «в повиновении» is the prepositional after «в» of state — 'in obedience/subjection'.

— «Ах ты, черная ты, — говорю ей, — шпага, ну и кого ты учить пришла?»  
— "Oh, you black blade, you," I say to her, "and just whom have you come to teach?"
> «чёрная шпага» — 'black blade': «шпага» is a light rapier or sword; calling the dark-clad deacon's wife a 'black blade' is the captain's wife's improvised insult — sharp, thin, and severe. The metaphor is pure folk invective.
> Fronted object + perfective of arrival: «кого» (animate accusative 'whom') is fronted for indignant emphasis. «пришла» (perfective past of a prefixed motion verb, 'have come/arrived') frames the deacon's wife's arrival to lecture as a completed act: 'and just whom did you come to teach?'

— «Я, — говорит она, — воздух чистый впускаю, а ты нечистый».  
— "I," she says, "let in clean air, and you let in foul."
> Ellipsis pivoted on «а»: The contrastive «а» pits 'I' against 'you', and the second clause drops the repeated verb «впускаешь» — 'and you [let in] foul [air]'. Such gapping after «а» is natural in Russian because the contrast itself carries the missing verb.
> Postposed attributive adjective: «воздух чистый» places the adjective after its noun (vs the neutral «чистый воздух»), throwing weight onto 'clean' and giving the line a folk-rhetorical lilt — 'air that's clean' set against 'foul'.

— «А спроси, — отвечаю ей, — всех господ офицеров, нечистый ли во мне воздух али другой какой?»  
— "Then go and ask," I answer her, "every one of the officer gentlemen whether the air in me is foul or some other sort."
> Imperative + animate accusative: «спроси» is a familiar singular imperative ('ask!'). Its object «всех господ офицеров» is animate plural and so takes the genitive-shaped accusative («-ов … -ов»), the way Russian keeps animate objects distinct.
> Embedded «ли» — 'whether': The enclitic «ли» follows the fronted focus word «нечистый» to build an indirect yes/no question — 'whether the air in me is foul'. Inside «спроси … ли … али другой какой» it sets up the alternatives she invites the officers to judge.
> «али» — folk 'or': «али» is a colloquial, dialectal variant of «или» ('or'), marking the wife's rustic, unschooled speech. It recurs in this monologue and helps fix her firmly among 'the simple folk'.

И так это у меня с того самого времени на душе сидит, что намеднись сижу я вот здесь, как теперь, и вижу, тот самый генерал вошел, что на святую сюда приезжал: «Что, — говорю ему, — ваше превосходительство, можно ли благородной даме воздух свободный впускать?»  
And so it has weighed on my heart ever since that day, that the other day I was sitting right here, as I am now, and I see that very same general come in, the one who had come here at Eastertime: "Tell me," I say to him, "Your Excellency, may a wellborn lady be allowed to let in the open air?"
> Locative «на душе» — weighing on the soul: «на душе» is the prepositional after «на» ('on the soul'), the idiom for an emotional state weighing within one. «сидит» (imperfective present, 'sits') keeps the grievance lodged there, lingering — an ongoing inner condition.
> «намеднись» — the other day: A folk-colloquial adverb for 'the other day, recently' (cf. literary «намедни»). Like «куды» and «али», it stamps the wife's speech as homely peasant Russian.

— «Да, отвечает, надо бы у вас форточку али дверь отворить, по тому самому, что у вас воздух несвежий».  
— "Yes," he answers, "you ought to open a little window or a door, for the very reason that the air in your room is stale."
> «надо бы» — softened advice: «надо бы» with the irrealis «бы» turns blunt necessity into polite counsel — 'you really ought to open'. The general's deferential phrasing contrasts with the wife's vehemence.
> «форточка» — the little vent-window: A «форточка» is the small hinged pane set within a Russian double-glazed window, opened for ventilation in winter without losing all the heat — a fixture of the Russian home, here proposed as a remedy for the stale cottage air.

Ну и все-то так!  
Well, and they are all like that!
> Emphatic «-то» on «все»: The clitic «-то» on «все» ('they all') gives an aggrieved, generalizing stress — 'every last one of them is like that!'. «Ну и» opens the exclamation with a resigned 'well, and so…'.

А и что им мой воздух дался?  
And what is it about my air that they have got hold of?
> «дался» — colloquial 'why fixate on': «дался» (reflexive «-ся», perfective) in the idiom «что тебе/им дался…» means 'why have you/they got so fixated on…'. The dative «им» is the experiencer ('to them') and «мой воздух» the nominative subject — 'what is it about my air that they've seized on?'

От мертвых и того хуже пахнет.  
The dead smell worse still.
> Impersonal «пахнет» + genitive source: «пахнет» ('it smells') is impersonal, with no nominative subject. «От мёртвых» ('from the dead') is the genitive plural after «от» naming the source of the smell; «того хуже» ('worse than that') is the comparative. A bleak, blunt aphorism from the muddled old woman.

«Я, говорю, воздуху вашего не порчу, а башмаки закажу и уйду».  
"I," I say, "do not spoil your air; I'll order myself some shoes and go away."
> Genitive object under negation: Under the negated «не порчу» ('I don't spoil') the object shifts from accusative to genitive: «воздуху» (an old genitive in «-у») rather than «воздух». This genitive of negation, with the archaic «-у» ending, is doubly period-flavoured.
> Two perfective futures: «закажу» ('I'll order') and «уйду» ('I'll go away', prefixed perfective of motion) are both perfective futures, naming two single completed acts to come. The pairing gives her threat its clipped finality: order shoes, then leave.

Батюшки, голубчики, не попрекайте мать родную!  
My dear ones, my darlings, do not reproach your own mother!
> «голубчики» — 'my little doves': «голубчик» (diminutive of «голубь», 'dove') is a tender endearment, 'my dear, my darling'; the plural «голубчики» here addresses her children fondly. «Батюшки!» is the exclamatory 'oh dear, good heavens!'. The clustered diminutives swell the pathos of her plea.
> Negated imperfective imperative: «не попрекайте» is a negated imperfective imperative ('don't reproach'), the regular pairing — Russian prefers the imperfective imperative under negation for a general prohibition. «мать родную» ('your own mother') is the accusative object.

Николай Ильич, батюшка, я ль тебе не угодила, только ведь у меня и есть, что Илюшечка из класса придет и любит.  
Nikolai Ilyich, dear husband, how have I not pleased you — when all I have is that my little Ilyusha comes home from his lessons and loves me.
> Clipped «ль» in a rhetorical question: «ль» is the reduced enclitic «ли», making an emotional rhetorical question — 'have I not pleased you?'. The dative «тебе» is the person pleased; «угодить кому» ('to please, satisfy someone') governs the dative.
> «Илюшечка» — little Ilyusha: A doubly affectionate diminutive of «Илья» (Ilya): «Илюша» → «Илюшечка», 'darling little Ilyusha'. The tender suffix-ladder on her son's name carries all the mother's love amid her lament.
> Appealing particle «ведь»: «ведь» appeals to shared knowledge — 'after all, you know'. The idiom «у меня и есть, что…» means 'the only thing I have is that…'. Together they color the line with confiding, plaintive insistence.

Вчера яблочко принес.  
Yesterday he brought me a little apple.
> «яблочко» — a little apple: Diminutive of «яблоко» ('apple'): 'a little apple'. The tender diminutive makes the boy's small gift the more touching — the whole of the mother's recounted joy resting on this one humble offering.
> Perfective past with dropped subject: «принёс» (perfective past, 'brought') names a single completed act; the subject «он» (Ilyusha) is dropped, recoverable from context, as Russian freely allows. The whole little sentence is object-first and clipped, like remembered speech.

Простите, батюшки, простите, голубчики, мать родную, простите меня, совсем одинокую, а и чего вам мой воздух противен стал!  
Forgive me, my dear ones, forgive me, my darlings, your own mother — forgive me, all alone as I am, and however did my air come to be so loathsome to you!
> Imperative of pleading: The triple perfective imperative «Простите» ('forgive!', polite-plural) builds the incantatory rhythm of her plea. «меня … мать родную» are the accusative objects begging forgiveness for herself.
> Dative experiencer + «стал» + predicate: «вам» is the dative of the one to whom the air became loathsome; «противен» is a short-form predicate adjective ('repugnant'), and «стал» ('became') is its linking verb. The whole frames the offence as something that happened to them, the dative-experiencer pattern. «чего» is colloquial for «почему».

И бедная вдруг разрыдалась, слезы брызнули ручьем.  
And the poor woman suddenly burst into sobs, the tears streaming down in a flood.
> Inceptive perfectives: «разрыдалась» (reflexive «-ся», perfective with the inceptive prefix «раз-», 'burst into sobs') and «брызнули» ('gushed, spurted') both seize the sudden onset of weeping as a single completed burst — the perfective's gift for catching an action's threshold.
> Instrumental of manner «ручьём»: «ручьём» ('in a stream') is the instrumental of «ручей», used adverbially to describe how the tears flowed — 'streaming down like a brook'. The instrumental of manner is a vivid, compact alternative to a prepositional phrase.

Штабс-капитан стремительно подскочил к ней.  
The staff captain rushed headlong to her side.
> Perfective of motion + dative goal: «подскочил» (perfective, prefix «под-» of approach, 'sprang up to') names a single darting movement; «к ней» is the dative after «к» marking the goal. The prefixed motion verb pins down both completion and direction at once.

— Маменька, маменька, голубчик, полно, полно! Не одинокая ты.  
— Mama, mama, my darling, that's enough, that's enough! You are not alone.
> «полно» — there, there; enough: «полно» (lit. 'it is full') is a soothing check meaning 'enough now, there, there', used to calm or hush someone. Doubled, it is the captain's tender attempt to still his wife's sobbing.
> Negation fronted for emphasis: The neutral order would be «Ты не одинокая»; throwing «Не одинокая» to the front stresses the denial — 'not alone, you're not'. The reordering, possible because the long adjective and pronoun are unambiguous, weights the comfort he offers.

Все-то тебя любят, все обожают! — и он начал опять целовать у нее обе руки и нежно стал гладить по ее лицу своими ладонями; схватив же салфетку, начал вдруг обтирать с лица ее слезы Алеше показалось даже, что у него и у самого засверкали слезы.  
Everyone loves you, everyone adores you! — and he began once more to kiss both her hands and tenderly to stroke her face with his palms; then, snatching up a napkin, he suddenly began to wipe the tears from her face. It seemed to Alyosha that tears had even started to glisten in his own eyes.
> Emphatic «-то» on «все»: The clitic «-то» on «все» intensifies the sweeping claim — 'every single one of them loves you'. The dropped contrast and the topic-marking «-то» give his reassurance a warm, overflowing insistence.
> Perfective gerund «схватив»: «схватив» ('having snatched up') is a perfective past gerund (деепричастие) expressing a prior, completed action sharing the main subject — he snatched the napkin, then began wiping. The «же» here is a light narrative connective ('and then').
> Intensive «у самого» — 'in his own eyes too': «у самого» ('in his very own [eyes]') intensifies the possessor — even he himself. «засверкали» (perfective, inceptive prefix «за-», 'began to glisten') seizes the moment the tears welled up. The construction «у него … слёзы» expresses 'he had tears' via «у» + genitive.

— Ну-с, видели-с? Слышали-с? — как-то вдруг яростно обернулся он к нему, показывая рукой на бедную слабоумную.  
— Well, sir, you have seen it, sir? You have heard it, sir? — he turned to him all at once, somehow furiously, pointing with his hand at the poor feeble-minded woman.
> Perfective past as a curt question: «видели … слышали» (perfective past, polite-plural) frame the seeing and hearing as completed wholes — 'you've seen it? you've heard it?'. The «-с» on each keeps up the servile politeness even in his sudden fury.
> Present gerund «показывая»: «показывая» ('pointing') is an imperfective present gerund of simultaneous action: he turned while pointing. The instrumental «рукой» ('with his hand') names the instrument of the gesture.
> «слабоумная» — the feeble-minded woman: «слабоумный» (from «слабый» 'weak' + «ум» 'mind') means 'feeble-minded, simple'. Substantivized in the feminine accusative «слабоумную», it bluntly names the wife's condition — the captain pointing at 'the poor feeble-minded one'.

— Вижу и слышу, — пробормотал Алеша  
— I see and I hear, — Alyosha murmured.
> Imperfective present of ongoing perception: «вижу … слышу» are imperfective presents of verbs of perception, naming a state rather than an event — 'I see and I hear [it]'. Perception verbs live by nature in the imperfective. Alyosha's bare answer drops the pronoun «я», the ending alone marking first person.

— Папа, папа! Неужели ты с ним… Брось ты его, папа! — крикнул вдруг мальчик, привстав на своей постельке и горящим взглядом смотря на отца.  
— Papa, papa! Surely you won't with him… Leave him be, papa! — the boy suddenly cried out, rising up on his little bed and gazing at his father with burning eyes.
> Incredulous particle «неужели»: «неужели» is the particle of astonished disbelief — 'surely not?, can it really be that…'. The boy breaks off, leaving the verb unspoken; the particle alone conveys his anguished 'you can't really side with him!'
> Imperative with intrusive «ты»: «Брось» ('drop, leave!') is a perfective imperative; the inserted «ты» between verb and object is an emphatic, emotional colloquialism — 'oh leave him, you!'. «его» is the animate accusative object.
> Two gerunds: perfective then imperfective: «привстав» is a perfective past gerund ('having half-risen', prior completed act); «смотря» an imperfective present gerund ('gazing', simultaneous). The pair stacks a finished movement and an ongoing one onto the single subject — the boy.

— Да полноте вы, наконец, паясничать, ваши выверты глупые показывать, которые ни к чему никогда не ведут! — совсем уже озлившись, крикнула всё из того угла Варвара Николаевна, даже ногой топнула.  
— Do stop your buffoonery at last, putting on your stupid antics that never lead anywhere! — Varvara Nikolaevna, now thoroughly enraged, cried out from that same corner, and even stamped her foot.
> Relative clause with negative concord: «которые» (relative, nominative plural, agreeing with «выверты») heads a clause piling up negatives: «ни к чему никогда не ведут» — 'lead to nothing, ever'. Russian negative concord stacks «ни … никогда … не» as one emphatic negation.
> Perfective gerund «озлившись»: «озлившись» ('having grown enraged', reflexive «-ся», perfective past gerund) marks the completed shift into anger that precedes and frames her outburst. «совсем уже» ('now utterly') stresses how far her temper has risen.

— Совершенно справедливо на этот раз изволите из себя выходить, Варвара Николавна, и я вас стремительно удовлетворю.  
— This time you are entirely right to fly into a temper, Varvara Nikolavna, and I shall satisfy you at once.
> «изволите» + «выходить из себя»: «изволите» is an obsequious auxiliary ('you are pleased to, you deign to'), mock-deferential here. «выходить из себя» is the idiom 'to lose one's temper, fly into a rage' (lit. 'to go out of oneself'). Together: the captain's grovelling way of saying 'you're quite right to be furious'.
> Perfective future of a single promise: «удовлетворю» (perfective future, 'I shall satisfy') frames the promised act as one completed thing to come. «вас» is the accusative object; «стремительно» ('headlong, at once') is comically grandiose for so small a concession.

Шапочку вашу наденьте, Алексей Федорович, а я вот картуз возьму — и пойдемте-с.  
Put on your little cap, Alexey Fyodorovich, and I'll take my own cap — and let us be off, sir.
> Imperative paired with perfective future: «наденьте» (polite imperative, 'put on') directs Alyosha; «возьму» (perfective future, 'I'll take') states the captain's own next act. The two clauses split the action between 'you do this' and 'I'll do that'.
> «шапочка» vs «картуз»: «шапочка» is the diminutive of «шапка» ('little cap'), a courteous touch for the guest's hat; «картуз» is a man's peaked cloth cap, plain and lower-class — the captain's own. The two words quietly mark the social gap between guest and host.
> «пойдёмте» — let's go (polite): «пойдёмте» is the 1st-person-plural exhortation ('let us go'), the «-те» making it polite/plural, with the deferential «-с» appended. It is the perfective unidirectional motion verb «пойти» pressed into a 'let's set off' summons.

Надобно вам одно серьезное словечко сказать, только вне этих стен.  
I have one serious little word to say to you, only outside these walls.
> Impersonal «надобно» + infinitive: «надобно» is the bookish, slightly archaic variant of «надо» ('it is needful'), governing the infinitive «сказать». The unstated experiencer ('I need to') keeps the construction impersonal, in the dative-subject family.
> «словечко» — a little word: Diminutive of «слово» ('word'): 'a little word'. The diminutive softens and intimates — he has just one small, serious word for Alyosha's ear, and the affectionate suffix coaxes him to come along.

Эта вот сидящая девица — это дочка моя-с, Нина Николаевна-с, забыл я вам ее представить — ангел божий во плоти… к смертным слетевший… если можете только это понять…  
This girl sitting here — this is my daughter, sir, Nina Nikolaevna, sir; I forgot to present her to you — an angel of God in the flesh… come down among mortals… if only you can grasp that…
> Present active participle «сидящая»: «сидящая» ('sitting') is a present active participle agreeing with «девица», compressing 'the girl who is sitting' into one attributive word — a bookish economy. «вот» deictically points her out.
> Dative + accusative with «представить»: «представить» splits its objects: «вам» (dative, to-whom) and «её» (accusative, whom). «забыл … представить» ('I forgot to present') frames the omission. The pronoun «я» trails after the verb, an emotional inversion.
> «ангел божий во плоти» — an angel in the flesh: An elevated, churchly phrase: «ангел божий» ('angel of God') «во плоти» ('in the flesh', with the Slavonic preposition form «во» and the archaic «плоть'). The captain raises his crippled daughter to a heavenly being — pathos pitched in sacred register.

— Весь ведь так и сотрясается, словно судорогой его сводит, — продолжала в негодовании Варвара Николаевна.  
— Why, he is simply shaking all over, as though a convulsion had him in its grip, — Varvara Nikolaevna went on indignantly.
> Reflexive «-ся» + emphatic «так и»: «сотрясается» (reflexive «-ся», 'is shaking, convulsing') is a middle/intransitive — the trembling happens to him. The idiom «так и» ('simply, just') intensifies the ongoing imperfective: 'he is positively shaking all over'.
> Impersonal «сводит» + instrumental cause: «сводит» here is impersonal ('it cramps/convulses [him]'), with «его» as accusative object and «судорогой» in the instrumental naming the cause/means — 'as if a convulsion were cramping him'. Such subjectless 'it grips him with X' constructions are very Russian.

— А эта, вот что теперь на меня ножкой топает и паяцем меня давеча обличила, — это тоже ангел божий во плоти-с и справедливо меня обозвала-с.  
— And this one here, the one who now stamps her little foot at me and called me a buffoon just now — she too is an angel of God in the flesh, sir, and she named me rightly, sir.
> Relative «что» + instrumental of body part: Colloquial «что» stands in for «которая» as the relative ('the one who…'). «ножкой топает» — «топать чем» governs the instrumental, and «ножкой» is the diminutive 'little foot'; 'who stamps her little foot at me'.
> Instrumental of the name called: «обозвать кого кем» and the like put the epithet in the instrumental: «паяцем» ('as a buffoon') is the name she flung at him. Both «обличила» ('exposed, denounced') and «обозвала» ('named, called') are perfective pasts of completed acts.
> «давеча» — just now, a while ago: A colloquial-archaic adverb meaning 'a little while ago, just now'. It belongs to the same homely, old-fashioned speech-layer the captain and his wife share, and dates the daughter's insult to moments past.

Пойдемте же, Алексей Федорович, покончить надо-с…  
Let us be off, then, Alexey Fyodorovich, there's an end to be made, sir…
> Exhortation + impersonal necessity: «Пойдёмте» ('let's go') with insistent «же» urges departure; «покончить надо» ('there's an end to be made') is the impersonal necessity construction with the infinitive. «покончить» (perfective) frames the finishing as one decisive act.

И, схватив Алешу за руку, он вывел его из комнаты прямо на улицу.  
And, seizing Alyosha by the arm, he led him out of the room straight into the street.
> Perfective gerund + «за руку» idiom: «схватив» ('having seized', perfective past gerund) marks the completed grasp preceding the leading-out. «схватить кого за руку» — 'to seize someone by the arm' — puts the person in the accusative and the body part after «за» in the accusative: «за руку».
> Prefixed motion verb «вывел»: «вывел» (perfective, prefix «вы-» 'out', from «вести') means 'led out'. The prefix supplies both direction and completion; «на улицу» is the accusative of motion-toward after «на» — out of the room and straight into the street.
---

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.