# The Brothers Karamazov, In the Dark

Братья Карамазовы · Fyodor Dostoevsky · Book VIII — Mitya

Source: https://1732studios.com/books/karamazov/b8-c4. Data: https://1732studios.com/books/karamazov/b8-c4.json.


Куда побежал он?  
Where had he run off to?
> Perfective of single onset: «Побежал» is the perfective past of «бежать» (to run): the prefix по- marks the single, completed setting-off into motion — 'he set off running'. Against an imperfective «бежал» (was running), the perfective frames it as one decisive event, matching the abrupt question.
> Verb-before-subject inversion: Standard order would be «Куда он побежал?»; placing «он» after the verb throws the weight onto the action and gives the free, narrated-thought rhythm of Mitya's racing mind. Russian's case endings let word order serve emphasis rather than grammar.

Известно: «Где же она могла быть, как не у Федора Павловича?  
It was obvious: "And where could she be, if not at Fyodor Pavlovitch's?
> The particle «же» of insistence: The modal particle «же» after the question word adds exasperated insistence — 'and where on earth could she be?'. It renders in English only as stress; here it conveys Mitya's certainty that the answer is obvious.
> «у» + genitive for 'at someone's': «У Федора Павловича» uses the preposition «у» governing the genitive to mean 'at Fyodor Pavlovitch's place'. The construction «где, как не у…» ('where, if not at…') is a rhetorical 'where else but'.

От Самсонова прямо и побежала к нему, теперь-то уж это ясно.  
Straight from Samsonov's she had run to him—that much was clear now.
> «к» + dative of destination: The prefixed perfective «побежала» pairs with «к нему» — the preposition «к» governs the dative to mean motion 'toward him'. After the preposition the third-person pronoun takes the н- prefix («к нему»).
> Emphatic «-то» and «уж»: The clitic «-то» on «теперь» underscores the known topic ('now, of all moments'), while «уж» (a worn form of «уже») adds finality — 'now it's all too clear'. These stacked particles give the inner monologue its insistent, speech-like texture.

Вся интрига, весь обман теперь очевидны…»  
The whole intrigue, the whole deception, was now plain to see…"
> Short-form predicate adjective: «Очевидны» is the short (predicative) form of «очевидный» (obvious), agreeing in plural with the compound subject «интрига… обман». Short adjectives can only predicate, never attribute, and carry a bookish, categorical ring — the deception simply is plain.
> «интрига» — scheming plot: «Интрига», a French/Latinate loan, means a contrived scheme or intrigue rather than the English emotional 'intrigue'. Paired with «обман» (deception, deceit), it casts Grushenka's supposed movements as a deliberate conspiracy against Mitya.

Всё это летело, как вихрь, в голове его.  
All of this went whirling through his head like a gust of wind.
> Imperfective for ongoing swirl: «Летело» (was flying) is imperfective past, viewing the rush of thoughts as an ongoing process, not a single event. The neuter «летело» agrees with the neuter subject «всё это».
> «вихрь» — whirlwind: «Вихрь» is a whirlwind or swirling gust; «как вихрь» ('like a whirlwind') is a stock simile for a rush of thought or motion, here capturing the dizzying spin of Mitya's mind.

На двор к Марье Кондратьевне он не забежал: «Туда не надо, отнюдь не надо… чтобы ни малейшей тревоги… тотчас передадут и предадут… Марья Кондратьевна, очевидно, в заговоре, Смердяков тоже, тоже, все подкуплены!»  
Into Marya Kondratyevna's yard he did not run: "Not there, on no account there… not the slightest alarm must be raised… they would report me at once and betray me… Marya Kondratyevna is plainly in on the plot, and Smerdyakov too, yes, him too—they have all been bought!"
> Negated perfective of motion: «Забежал» is the perfective of a prefixed motion verb «забежать» (to drop in, run in briefly); the prefix за- gives the sense of 'turning aside into' a place. Negated with «не», it states the completed non-event: he did not run in.
> Genitive of negation with «ни»: «Ни малейшей тревоги» stands in the genitive — under the negative force of «ни» ('not the slightest'), the absent noun takes the genitive of negation. The clipped «чтобы ни малейшей тревоги» drops the verb in telegraphic inner speech: 'so that [there be] not the slightest alarm'.
> Perfective futures of foreboding: «Передадут» (they'll report) and «предадут» (they'll betray) are perfective futures — conjugated perfectives with future meaning — and the near-rhyme stages Mitya's paranoia: to pass on word is already to betray.
> «отнюдь» — by no means: «Отнюдь» is an emphatic 'by no means, not in the least', heightening the negation: 'not there, on no account there'. It is a bookish intensifier of «не», sharpening Mitya's resolve.

У него создалось другое намерение: он обежал большим крюком, чрез переулок, дом Федора Павловича, пробежал Дмитровскую улицу, перебежал потом мостик и прямо попал в уединенный переулок на задах, пустой и необитаемый, огороженный с одной стороны плетнем соседского огорода, а с другой — крепким высоким забором, обходившим кругом сада Федора Павловича.  
He had formed another plan: he ran a wide loop, by way of a side lane, around Fyodor Pavlovitch's house, ran the length of Dmitrovsky Street, crossed the little footbridge after that, and came out straight onto a secluded alley behind the houses—empty and uninhabited, fenced on one side by the wattle hedge of a neighbour's kitchen garden, and on the other by the stout, high fence that ran all the way around Fyodor Pavlovitch's garden.
> «-ся» middle: a plan 'formed itself': «Создалось» is the reflexive «создаться», a middle/intransitive use of «-ся»: the intention 'came to be, formed' of its own accord, with «у него» ('in him') as the dative-like experiencer rather than an active subject — Mitya does not so much decide as find a plan rising in him.
> Prefix chain on the run: A cascade of prefixed perfectives of motion choreographs the route: «обежал» (ran around), «пробежал» (ran the length of), «перебежал» (ran across), «попал» (landed, came out). Each prefix paints a distinct vector, a hallmark of Russian motion description.
> Participles condensing the description: The passive participle «огороженный» ('fenced') and the past active participle «обходившим» ('that ran around') compress two который-clauses into modifiers, agreeing with their nouns in case — the dense participial layering typical of literary Russian narration.
> «плетень» — wattle hedge: «Плетнём» (instrumental of «плетень») is a wattle fence of woven branches, the cheap rural enclosure of a kitchen garden («огород»), set against the «крепкий высокий забор» — the solid board fence of Fyodor Pavlovitch's grounds.
> Archaic «чрез» for «через»: «Чрез» is the bookish, contracted form of «через» (through, by way of) — a non-pleophonic shortening that gives the narration its 19th-century literary patina.

Тут он выбрал место и, кажется, то самое, где, по преданию, ему известному, Лизавета Смердящая перелезла когда-то забор.  
Here he chose a spot—the very one, it seemed, where, by a tale he knew, Stinking Lizaveta had once climbed over the fence.
> Postposed agreeing modifier in the dative: «Ему известному» ('known to him') is an adjective phrase trailing its noun «преданию», both in the dative after «по»; «известному» agrees in case while «ему» is the dative of the experiencer — a compact, bookish 'by a tale [that was] known to him'.
> Perfective with «когда-то»: «Перелезла» (perfective: climbed over) with «когда-то» ('once, at some time') sets a single completed past act in the distance of legend. The prefix пере- carries the sense of 'over, across'.

«Если уж та смогла перелезть, — бог знает почему мелькнуло в его голове, — то как же бы я-то не перелез?»  
"If she could get over it—" the thought flashed through his head, God knows why, "—then how should I fail to climb it?"
> Conditional «бы» with «я-то»: «Как же бы я… не перелез» is the subjunctive — past-form «перелез» plus the particle «бы» — voicing a rhetorical 'how should I fail to climb over?'. The clitic «-то» on «я» pits Mitya against Lizaveta ('I, of all people'), and «же» adds indignation.
> «мелькнуть» — to flash by: «Мелькнуло» is the perfective 'flashed (through his head)', the standard verb for a fleeting thought. With «бог знает почему» ('God knows why') it captures an involuntary, irrational flicker of mind.

И действительно, он подскочил и мигом сноровил схватиться рукой за верх забора, затем энергически приподнялся, разом влез и сел на заборе верхом.  
And in fact he sprang up and in an instant managed to grip the top of the fence with his hand, then with a vigorous heave pulled himself up, swung over all at once, and sat astride the fence.
> Perfective chain of the climb: A string of perfective verbs renders the climb as a sequence of distinct completed acts: «подскочил» (sprang up), «приподнялся» (raised himself a little), «влез» (clambered up), «сел» (sat). Perfective narration advances the action beat by beat.
> Reflexive «-ся» + instrumental of means: «Схватиться» ('to grab hold') takes «-ся» as a middle/self-directed grip, while «рукой» is the instrumental of means ('with his hand') and «за верх» the accusative of the thing grasped — three case mechanics packed into one gesture.
> «сноровить» — to manage deftly: «Сноровил» (colloquial perfective of «сноровить») means to contrive, manage, or pull off with a knack; related to «сноровка» ('skill, knack'). It lends a folksy, physical deftness to Mitya's scramble.

Тут вблизи в саду стояла банька, но с забора видны были и освещенные окна дома.  
Close by in the garden stood the little bathhouse, but from the fence the lit windows of the house were visible as well.
> Short-form participle as predicate: «Видны» is the short form of the passive participle «видный/видимый» ('visible'), predicating with «были»: 'the windows were visible'. «С забора» uses «с» + genitive for the vantage point ('from the fence').
> «банька» — little bathhouse: «Банька» is the affectionate diminutive of «баня», the Russian steam bathhouse — a small outbuilding standing apart in the garden. The -ка suffix gives the cozy, miniaturizing tone Dostoevsky favours for this nocturnal scene.

«Так и есть, у старика в спальне освещено, она там!» — и он спрыгнул с забора в сад.  
"So it is—there's a light in the old man's bedroom, she's in there!"—and he dropped down off the fence into the garden.
> Impersonal «освещено»: «Освещено» is a neuter short passive participle used impersonally — 'it is lit up (in the bedroom)' — with no nominative subject; «у старика в спальне» locates the state ('in the old man's bedroom'). A characteristically subjectless Russian construction.
> Prefix с- of downward motion: «Спрыгнул» (perfective: jumped down/off) uses с- for motion off a surface, governing «с забора» in the genitive ('off the fence'). The prefix and preposition echo each other, a tidy Russian pairing.

Хоть он и знал, что Григорий болен, а может быть, и Смердяков в самом деле болен и что услышать его некому, но инстинктивно притаился, замер на месте и стал прислушиваться.  
Though he knew that Grigory was ill, and that Smerdyakov too might really be ill, and that there was no one to hear him, all the same he instinctively held still, froze where he stood, and began to listen.
> Concessive «хоть… а/но»: «Хоть… (и)… а» is a concessive frame, 'though he knew…, all the same…'. The particle «и» after «хоть он» emphasises the concession, and the resumptive «но» (with «а» earlier) marks the contrastive turn to what he did regardless.
> Dative-subject «некому»: «Услышать его некому» is an impersonal negative-existential: 'there is no one to hear him'. «Некому» is the negative dative pronoun governing the infinitive «услышать», with no nominative subject — a quintessential Russian experiencer construction.
> «притаиться», «замереть» — to freeze still: «Притаился» ('hid, kept still in hiding') and «замер» ('froze, went rigid') are perfectives of stealth and arrested motion; both -ся-less here, they stack to render Mitya's instinctive, breath-held stillness.

Но всюду было мертвое молчание и, как нарочно, полное затишье, ни малейшего ветерка.  
But everywhere there was a deathly silence and, as if on purpose, a perfect stillness, not the faintest breath of wind.
> Genitive of absence with «ни»: «Ни малейшего ветерка» stands in the genitive of negation, the verbless tail of the absence: 'not the faintest little breath of wind'. «Ветерка» is itself a diminutive of «ветер», softening the stillness.
> «как нарочно» — as if on purpose: The idiom «как нарочно» means 'as if deliberately, just my luck' — fate seeming to arrange things to spite the speaker. Here the dead calm conspires against Mitya, who fears any sound will betray him.

«„И только шепчет тишина“, — мелькнул почему-то этот стишок в голове его, — вот только не услышал бы кто, как я перескочил; кажется, нет».  
"„And only the stillness whispers,“—that scrap of verse flashed through his head for some reason—"if only no one heard me clamber over; it seems not."
> «бы» of anxious wish: «Не услышал бы кто» is the subjunctive used as an apprehensive wish — 'if only no one heard me'. The past-form «услышал» plus «бы» expresses a feared, hoped-against possibility; «кто» here is indefinite 'anyone'.
> «стишок» — scrap of verse: «Стишок» is the diminutive of «стих» (a verse/line of poetry), here slightly dismissive — a 'little snatch of verse' surfacing unbidden. The half-quoted «И только шепчет тишина» ('And only the stillness whispers') is the kind of poetic fragment Mitya's overwrought mind throws up.

Постояв минутку, он тихонько пошел по саду, по траве; обходя деревья и кусты, шел долго, скрадывая каждый шаг, к каждому шагу своему сам прислушиваясь.  
Having stood a minute, he went softly across the garden, over the grass; skirting the trees and bushes, he walked a long while, stealing each step, listening himself to every step he took.
> Gerunds of attendant manner: Three imperfective present gerunds — «обходя» (skirting), «скрадывая» (stealthing/muffling), «прислушиваясь» (listening) — pile up simultaneous attendant actions around the main verb «шёл», all sharing Mitya as subject. This gerund-chaining is a signature of Dostoevsky's stealthy narration.
> Reflexive possessive «свой» + «сам»: «Своему» ('his own') reflexively points back to Mitya as subject, and the intensifier «сам» ('himself') stresses that he listens to his own footstep — a tense, self-watching attention. «-ся» on «прислушиваясь» makes the listening self-directed.

Минут с пять добирался он до освещенного окна.  
It took him some five minutes to reach the lit window.
> Approximation by inversion + «с»: «Минут с пять» means 'about five minutes': inverting noun before numeral and adding «с» + accusative signals an approximate quantity. The plain «пять минут» would be exact; this loose order is colloquial 'some five minutes or so'.
> Imperfective of effortful process: «Добирался» (imperfective: was making his way) frames the five-minute approach as a drawn-out process of effort rather than a single arrival — the perfective «добрался» would name only the completed reaching.

Он помнил, что там под самыми окнами есть несколько больших, высоких, густых кустов бузины и калины.  
He remembered that right there, under the windows themselves, stood several large, tall, dense bushes of elder and guelder-rose.
> «несколько» + genitive plural: The quantifier «несколько» ('several') governs the genitive plural «кустов», and the strung adjectives «больших, высоких, густых» agree with it in that case — the quantity-word triggering genitive like a numeral above four.
> «бузина», «калина» — elder and guelder-rose: «Бузина» is elder, «калина» the guelder-rose (snowball tree), whose bright red berries figure a few lines later. «Калина» carries deep folk-song and bridal-symbolism resonance in Russian, lending an eerie lyric undertone to the murder scene.

Выходная дверь из дома в сад в левой стороне фасада была заперта, и он это нарочно и тщательно высмотрел проходя.  
The door leading from the house into the garden, on the left side of the façade, was locked, and he had checked this deliberately and carefully as he passed.
> Past passive: a stated result: «Была заперта» is the periphrastic passive — «быть» plus the short past passive participle «заперта» (от «запереть», to lock) — stating the door's resultant condition: it was (and stood) locked. The short participle agrees feminine with «дверь».
> Gerund of accompanying time: «Проходя» is an imperfective gerund ('while passing'), giving the moment at which the main perfective act «высмотрел» ('made out, spotted') occurred — he checked the door in the act of going by. «Нарочно» ('on purpose') underlines his deliberate scouting.

Наконец достиг и кустов и притаился за ними.  
At last he reached the bushes and hid himself behind them.
> «достичь» + genitive: «Достиг» (perfective: reached, attained) governs the genitive «кустов» — 'reached the bushes'; the verb «достигать/достичь» always takes its goal in the genitive. The «и» ('also, even') ties this to «притаился» as the climactic arrival.

Он не дышал.  
He did not breathe.
> Imperfective negation of state: «Не дышал» (imperfective past, negated) describes a sustained state of not breathing — 'he held his breath' — rather than a single act. The terse three-word sentence freezes the held moment.

«Переждать теперь надобно, — подумал он, — если они слышали мои шаги и теперь прислушиваются, то чтобы разуверились… как бы только не кашлянуть, не чихнуть…»  
"I must wait it out now," he thought, "so that, if they heard my steps and are listening now, they'll be reassured… if only I don't cough, don't sneeze…"
> Dative-subject necessity (verb omitted): «Надобно» (archaic for «надо», 'one must/it is necessary') governs the infinitive «переждать» in an impersonal necessity construction; the implied experiencer is dative. No nominative subject appears — the typical Russian 'one must wait it out now'.
> «чтобы» + past-form purpose: «Чтобы разуверились» uses «чтобы» with the past-form (irrealis) verb to express purpose — 'so that they would be reassured'. «Разуверились» ('cease to suspect', -ся middle) is what Mitya wills them to do.
> «как бы не» of apprehension: «Как бы… не кашлянуть, не чихнуть» is the apprehensive 'if only I don't cough, don't sneeze', with «бы» plus negated infinitives expressing a feared possibility. «Кашлянуть»/«чихнуть» are semelfactive perfectives — a single cough, a single sneeze.

Он переждал минуты две, но сердце его билось ужасно, и мгновениями он почти задыхался.  
He waited some two minutes, but his heart was pounding terribly, and at moments he was almost gasping for breath.
> Imperfective «билось» of ongoing throb: «Билось» is the imperfective reflexive «биться» ('to beat, pound'), the -ся here marking the inherent intransitive throb; the past imperfective renders the heart's continuous pounding against the perfective «переждал» that frames it.
> «мгновениями», «задыхаться»: «Мгновениями» is the instrumental of «мгновение» used adverbially, 'at moments, now and then'. «Задыхался» (imperfective) means 'was gasping/suffocating for breath' — recurrent catches of breath, fitting his panic.

«Нет, не пройдет сердцебиение, — подумал он, — не могу дольше ждать».  
"No, this pounding of the heart won't pass," he thought, "I can't wait any longer."
> Negated perfective future: «Не пройдёт» is the negated perfective future ('will not pass off'), predicting that the pounding won't subside. The subject «сердцебиение» follows the verb, throwing the new, dreaded fact to the end.
> Comparative adverb «дольше»: «Дольше» is the comparative of «долго» ('long [in time]'), here 'any longer'. Paired with the negated imperfective «не могу… ждать», it states the breaking of his resolve to keep waiting.

Он стоял за кустом в тени; передняя половина куста была освещена из окна.  
He stood behind the bush in shadow; the near half of the bush was lit from the window.
> Past passive of the lit half: «Была освещена» — «быть» plus the short past passive participle «освещена» (от «осветить») — states the result: the near half of the bush was lit. The participle agrees feminine with «половина», and «из окна» gives the source in the genitive.

«Калина, ягоды, какие красные!» — прошептал он, не зная зачем.  
"The guelder-rose, the berries, how red they are!"—he whispered, not knowing why.
> Exclamatory «какой»: «Какие красные!» uses the interrogative «какой» in its exclamatory sense — 'how red [they are]!' — agreeing plural with «ягоды». The short-form exclamation captures Mitya's startled, irrelevant sensory fixation on the berries.
> Gerund «не зная»: «Не зная зачем» ('not knowing why') is a negated imperfective gerund attached to «прошептал», the simultaneous mental state accompanying the whisper. It underscores the involuntary, dreamlike quality of his murmur.

Тихо, раздельными неслышными шагами подошел он к окну и поднялся на цыпочки.  
Quietly, with measured, noiseless steps, he came up to the window and rose onto the tips of his toes.
> Instrumental of manner: «Раздельными неслышными шагами» ('with measured, inaudible steps') is the instrumental of manner — how he approached. The adjectives agree with «шагами» in the instrumental plural, a compact adverbial of stealth.
> «на цыпочки» — on tiptoe: «На цыпочки» (accusative of direction) is the fixed phrase 'onto tiptoe'; «подняться на цыпочки» = to rise on the tips of one's toes. «Неслышными» ('inaudible') and tiptoeing seal the soundless approach to the window.

Вся спаленка Федора Павловича предстала пред ним как на ладони.  
The whole of Fyodor Pavlovitch's little bedroom stood before him as if on the palm of his hand.
> Archaic «пред» + instrumental: «Предстала пред ним» pairs the bookish perfective «предстать» ('to appear, present itself') with the archaic preposition «пред» (for «перед», 'before') governing the instrumental «ним» — an elevated 'stood before him', heightening the theatrical revelation.
> The idiom «как на ладони»: Literally 'as on the palm of the hand', this fixed idiom means in plain, complete view — laid out so clearly you could be holding it. Note also «спаленка», a double diminutive of «спальня» ('bedroom'); Dostoevsky favours such -ка/-очка diminutives (банька, ширмочки, рюмочка) to colour the cramped, intimate scene.

Это была небольшая комнатка, вся разделенная поперек красными ширмочками, «китайскими», как называл их Федор Павлович.  
It was a small room, divided crosswise by red folding screens, "Chinese," as Fyodor Pavlovitch called them.
> Participle + instrumental of means: «Разделённая» is a past passive participle ('divided') agreeing with «комнатка»; «красными ширмочками» is the instrumental naming the means of division ('by red folding screens'). The participle replaces a который-clause, condensing the description.
> «ширмочки» — little screens: «Ширмочки» is the diminutive plural of «ширма» (a folding screen). The petname suffix here is faintly mocking of Fyodor Pavlovitch's pretensions — his cheap «китайские» ('Chinese') screens dignified with a fond little name.

«Китайские, — пронеслось в уме Мити, — а за ширмами Грушенька».  
"Chinese," it shot through Mitya's mind, "and behind the screens is Grushenka."
> Reflexive «пронестись» of a darting thought: «Пронеслось» (perfective «пронестись», 'to rush/flash through') uses -ся for the self-propelled rush of the thought; the neuter form agrees with the implied 'it' (the word «китайские»). «В уме Мити» locates it 'in Mitya's mind'.
> Contrastive «а» and zero copula: The mild contrastive «а» ('and/but') hinges to the new thought, and there is no verb 'to be': «за ширмами Грушенька» = '[and] behind the screens [is] Grushenka', the present-tense zero copula leaving subject and locative bare.

Он стал разглядывать Федора Павловича.  
He began to study Fyodor Pavlovitch.
> «стать» + imperfective infinitive (inceptive): «Стал разглядывать» — «стать» plus an imperfective infinitive — is the inceptive 'began to study/scrutinise'. «Разглядывать» is imperfective (a prolonged looking-over), so «стал» supplies the onset of the ongoing act.

Тот был в своем новом полосатом шелковом халатике, которого никогда еще не видал у него Митя, подпоясанном шелковым же шнурком с кистями.  
The old man was wearing his new striped silk dressing gown, one Mitya had never yet seen on him, belted with a silken cord that ended in tassels.
> Demonstrative «тот» tracking the referent: «Тот» ('that one') here picks out Fyodor Pavlovitch as topic without naming him — the demonstrative does the discourse-tracking that free word order relies on. «В своём халатике» uses reflexive «свой» ('his own') and the prepositional of clothing-worn.
> Relative «который» in the genitive: «Которого… не видал» — the relative «который» takes the genitive of negation as object of the negated «видал» ('had never seen [it]'). It agrees masculine-singular with «халатике» but draws its case from its own clause; note inverted «не видал у него Митя».
> «халатик» — dandyish little dressing gown: «Халатик», diminutive of «халат» (dressing gown/robe), with «шёлковый же шнурок с кистями» ('a silk cord too, with tassels'), paints Fyodor Pavlovitch's vain, lecherous primping. The «же» on «шёлковым» stresses 'silk as well', piling on the finery.

Из-под ворота халата выглядывало чистое щегольское белье, тонкая голландская рубашка с золотыми запонками.  
From under the collar of the gown peeped clean, dandyish linen, a fine Holland shirt with gold studs.
> Subject-final word order: The neuter «выглядывало» ('peeped out') precedes its subject «бельё», which arrives last as the new information; the compound preposition «из-под» governs the genitive «ворота» ('from under the collar'). Free order weights the reveal.
> «щегольской», «голландская рубашка»: «Щегольское» means 'dandyish, foppish' (от «щёголь», a dandy). A «голландская рубашка» ('Holland shirt') was one of fine Dutch linen — a mark of expensive taste; with «золотыми запонками» ('gold studs') it completes the portrait of the old voluptuary dressed to seduce.

На голове у Федора Павловича была та же красная повязка, которую видел на нем Алеша.  
On Fyodor Pavlovitch's head was that same red bandage Alyosha had seen on him.
> «тот же» + relative «которую»: «Та же… повязка» ('that same bandage') uses «тот же» for identity with a known referent; the relative «которую» takes the accusative as object of «видел», agreeing feminine with «повязка». A neat instance of который drawing its own case.

«Разоделся», — подумал Митя.  
"All dressed up," thought Mitya.
> «разодеться» — to be all dressed up: «Разоделся» (perfective «разодеться») means to have dressed up showily, decked oneself out; the prefix раз- intensifies and the -ся makes it self-directed. Mitya's one-word verdict drips contempt at the old man's preening.

Федор Павлович стоял близ окна, по-видимому, в задумчивости, вдруг он вздернул голову, чуть-чуть прислушался и, ничего не услыхав, подошел к столу, налил из графина полрюмочки коньячку и выпил.  
Fyodor Pavlovitch was standing near the window, apparently lost in thought; suddenly he jerked up his head, listened a moment, and, hearing nothing, went to the table, poured half a small glass of brandy from the decanter, and drank it.
> Perfective sequence of discrete acts: A run of perfectives stages the old man's actions one after another — «вздёрнул» (jerked up), «прислушался» (listened a moment), «подошёл» (went up to), «налил» (poured), «выпил» (drank up). Each prefixed perfective is a self-contained, completed beat.
> Perfective gerund of prior action: «Ничего не услыхав» ('having heard nothing') is a perfective past gerund (от «услыхать») marking the completed action just before the main verb, with negative concord «ничего… не». It bridges his listening and his moving to the table.
> Partitive genitive «коньячку»: «Коньячку» is a special partitive genitive in -у (an old second genitive) of «коньяк» — 'some brandy', a measured portion. «Полрюмочки» ('half a little glass') with its double diminutive adds to the petty, furtive intimacy of the gesture.

Затем вздохнул всею грудью, опять постоял, рассеянно подошел к зеркалу в простенке, правою рукой приподнял немного красную повязку со лба и стал разглядывать свои синяки и болячки, которые еще не прошли.  
Then he heaved a sigh with his whole chest, stood awhile again, walked absently to the mirror in the pier between the windows, lifted the red bandage a little off his forehead with his right hand, and began examining his bruises and sores, which had not yet healed.
> Instrumental of bodily means: «Всею грудью» ('with his whole chest') is the instrumental of means modifying «вздохнул» ('heaved a sigh'). «Всею» is the archaic/poetic instrumental of «весь» (modern «всей»), lending the gesture a heavy, full-bodied weight.
> Relative «которые» + negated perfective: «Которые ещё не прошли» ('which had not yet healed/passed') is a relative clause; «который» agrees plural with «синяки и болячки» and is the subject of the negated perfective «прошли». «Ещё не» marks an expected result not yet reached.
> «простенок» — the pier between windows: «Простенок» is the strip of wall between two windows (or a window and a door) — the architectural 'pier' where the mirror hangs. The detail places the mirror, and so Fyodor Pavlovitch, in the line of Mitya's gaze.

«Он один, — подумал Митя, — по всем вероятностям один».  
"He's alone," thought Mitya, "by all appearances, alone."
> «по» + dative of judgement: «По всем вероятностям» ('by all probabilities, in all likelihood') uses «по» governing the dative plural — the dative of basis/judgement. The short, repeated «один» frames Mitya's anxious, self-persuading deduction.

Федор Павлович отошел от зеркала, вдруг повернулся к окну и глянул в него.  
Fyodor Pavlovitch stepped back from the mirror, suddenly turned to the window, and looked out of it.
> Perfective turn and glance: «Повернулся» (turned, with -ся middle) and «глянул» (perfective: shot a glance) render two quick completed acts. «В него» (accusative of direction after «в») means 'into it [the window]' — a sudden look out, the moment of danger.

Митя мигом отскочил в тень.  
In an instant Mitya darted back into the shadow.
> Instrumental adverb «мигом»: «Мигом» ('in a flash, instantly') is the frozen instrumental of «миг» (a moment) used adverbially, intensifying the perfective «отскочил» ('darted/sprang back'). «В тень» is the accusative of motion into the shadow.

«Она, может быть, у него за ширмами, может быть уже спит», — кольнуло его в сердце.  
"She may be with him behind the screens, may already be asleep,"—it stung him to the heart.
> «может быть» as epistemic aside: «Может быть» ('maybe, perhaps') is a frozen modal phrase, set off from the clause, voicing Mitya's uncertainty. «Уже спит» pairs the imperfective present «спит» ('is asleep') with «уже» ('already') for a feared completed state.
> Impersonal verb of inner pang: «Кольнуло его в сердце» ('it stung him in the heart') is a subjectless impersonal: a neuter perfective with no nominative agent, the experiencer «его» in the accusative — a pang that simply happens to him. Such body-felt impersonals pervade Dostoevsky's inner life.

Федор Павлович от окна отошел.  
Fyodor Pavlovitch stepped away from the window.
> Fronted source for emphasis: Neutral order is «отошёл от окна»; fronting «от окна» before the verb foregrounds the movement away from the window — the very thing Mitya is anxiously watching. «Отошёл» is the perfective of stepping away, prefix от- = 'away from'.

«Это он в окошко ее высматривал, стало быть, ее нет: чего ему в темноту смотреть?.. нетерпение значит пожирает…»  
"He was watching for her at the window, which means she's not here: why else would he stare into the dark?.. so impatience is eating at him…"
> Dative subject + rhetorical genitive «чего»: «Чего ему… смотреть?» is an impersonal rhetorical question: the dative «ему» is the would-be doer and «чего» ('what for, why') governs the infinitive — 'why should he be looking into the dark?'. No nominative subject appears.
> Inferential connectives: «Стало быть» ('therefore, so then') and «значит» ('means, so') are colloquial inferential markers threading Mitya's deduction. «Ее нет» is the genitive-of-negation existential ('she is not [here]'), «нетерпение пожирает» a vivid 'impatience devours'.

Митя тотчас подскочил и опять стал глядеть в окно.  
Mitya at once sprang up and again began to peer into the window.
> Inceptive «стал» + imperfective: «Стал глядеть» ('began to peer') again uses «стать» plus an imperfective infinitive for the onset of an ongoing look. «Опять» ('again') and «тотчас» ('at once') mark the restless oscillation of his approach-and-retreat.

Старик уже сидел пред столиком, видимо пригорюнившись.  
The old man was already sitting before the little table, evidently in low spirits.
> Imperfective «сидел» of a posture held: «Сидел» (imperfective) describes the old man's settled posture 'was sitting', not an act of sitting down; «уже» ('already') notes the change Mitya registers on looking back. «Пред столиком» again uses archaic «пред» with the diminutive «столик».
> Perfective gerund of state: «Пригорюнившись» is a perfective past gerund of the folksy «пригорюниться» ('to grow wistful, sink into gloom', -ся). It names the completed onset of a mood now worn — 'having sunk into low spirits', evident on his face.

Наконец облокотился и приложил правую ладонь к щеке.  
At last he leaned on his elbow and pressed his right palm to his cheek.
> Reflexive + transitive pairing: «Облокотился» (leaned on his elbow, -ся middle) and «приложил» (pressed, transitive) are both perfectives advancing the gesture. «Правую ладонь к щеке» — accusative object plus «к» + dative destination ('palm to cheek').

Митя жадно вглядывался.  
Mitya gazed greedily.
> Imperfective of straining gaze: «Вглядывался» (imperfective of «вглядываться», 'to peer intently into') with «жадно» ('greedily, avidly') renders Mitya's prolonged, hungry staring. The в- prefix here means 'into', the gaze pressing in toward the lit room.

«Один, один! — твердил он опять. — Если б она была тут, у него было бы другое лицо».  
"Alone, alone!" he kept repeating. "If she were here, his face would be different."
> Contrary-to-fact conditional with «бы»: A full counterfactual: «если б [бы]… была» in the protasis and «было бы… лицо» in the apodosis, both past-form plus «бы». It means 'were she here, his face would be different' — present-time hypothetical, the irrealis carrying no separate tense.
> «твердить» — to keep repeating: «Твердил» (imperfective) means to say over and over, drum out insistently — perfect for Mitya's obsessive «Один, один!» ('Alone, alone!'). The verb implies dogged, anxious repetition rather than a single utterance.

Странное дело: в его сердце вдруг закипела какая-то бессмысленная и чудная досада на то, что ее тут нет.  
A strange thing: there suddenly boiled up in his heart some senseless and peculiar vexation that she was not there.
> Subject-final «закипела… досада»: «Закипела… досада» fronts the locative «в его сердце» and the verb, leaving the subject «досада» ('vexation') for last as the surprising new thing. «Закипела» (inceptive perfective, за- = 'began to') means 'boiled up' — a sudden welling of feeling.
> «досада», «чудный»: «Досада» is vexation, peevish annoyance mixed with chagrin. «Чудная» here is 'strange, odd' (от «чудо», marvel/oddity) rather than 'lovely'—a false-friend trap; with «бессмысленная» ('senseless') it names the irrational pique that she is not there.

«Не на то, что ее тут нет, — осмыслил и сам ответил Митя себе тотчас же, — а на то, что никак наверно узнать не могу, тут она или нет».  
"Not that she isn't here," Mitya reasoned, and answered himself at once, "but that there's simply no way I can know for certain whether she's in there or not."
> Reflexive «себе» + intensifier «сам»: «Сам ответил… себе» — Mitya 'himself' («сам») answers 'to himself' (dative «себе», the reflexive pronoun pointing back to the subject). The doubling stages his mind splitting into question and reply.
> Negative concord «никак… не»: «Никак… не могу» ('I simply cannot, by no means can') shows negative concord: the ни-word «никак» co-occurs with the verb's «не», two negatives one meaning. «Тут она или нет» is the embedded yes/no question ('whether she's here or not').

Митя припоминал потом сам, что ум его был в ту минуту ясен необыкновенно и соображал всё до последней подробности, схватывал каждую черточку.  
Mitya recalled afterwards himself that his mind was at that moment extraordinarily clear and took in everything down to the last detail, seizing on every smallest trait.
> Short adjective «ясен»: «Ясен» is the short (predicative) form of «ясный» ('clear'), agreeing masculine with «ум»: 'his mind was clear'. The short form, with «необыкновенно» ('extraordinarily'), gives the bookish, categorical statement of his lucidity.
> Imperfective of continuous apprehension: «Соображал» ('was taking in, working out') and «схватывал» ('was seizing/grasping') are imperfectives picturing the mind's ongoing, simultaneous registering of every detail — process verbs against the imperfective framing verb «припоминал».

Но тоска, тоска неведения и нерешимости нарастала в сердце его с быстротой непомерною.  
But the toska—the toska of not knowing and not deciding—was mounting in his heart with an immeasurable swiftness.
> Chain of genitives: «Тоска неведения и нерешимости» strings genitives of definition onto «тоска»: 'the toska of not-knowing and of indecision'. The repeated genitive specifies the anguish's source, while «нарастала» (imperfective) shows it mounting.
> Postposed long adjective «непомерною»: «С быстротой непомерною» ('with immeasurable swiftness') trails the adjective after its noun in the instrumental, the archaic -ою ending («непомерною» for «непомерной») adding solemn, period weight to the surge of feeling.
> The word «тоска»: «Тоска» is a famously untranslatable Russian word for a deep ache of the soul—anguish, yearning, dread, and weariness at once. We keep the Russian word here; the repetition («тоска, тоска неведения…») intensifies it, a spiritual anguish rooted in «неведение» (not-knowing) and «нерешимость» (indecision).

«Здесь она, наконец, или не здесь?» — злобно закипело у него в сердце.  
"Is she here, in the end, or not?"—it boiled up spitefully in his heart.
> Disjunctive question: «Здесь… или не здесь?» is an either/or question, the alternatives bared without a verb (zero copula). «Злобно закипело у него в сердце» repeats the impersonal 'it boiled up in his heart', a subjectless welling of spite.

И он вдруг решился, протянул руку и потихоньку постучал в раму окна.  
And he suddenly made up his mind, stretched out his hand, and softly tapped on the window frame.
> Decisive perfective triple: Three perfectives mark the turning point: «решился» (made up his mind, -ся), «протянул» (stretched out), «постучал» (gave a knock). Against the long imperfective hesitation before, this brisk perfective chain enacts the irrevocable decision.

Он простучал условный знак старика со Смердяковым: два первые раза потише, а потом три раза поскорее: тук-тук-тук — знак, обозначавший, что «Грушенька пришла».  
He tapped out the old man's signal agreed upon with Smerdyakov: the first two times more softly, and then three times more quickly—tap-tap-tap—the signal that meant "Grushenka has come."
> «с» + instrumental of joint arrangement: «Со Смердяковым» uses «с» + instrumental ('with Smerdyakov') for the party with whom the signal was agreed; «со» is the form of «с» before consonant clusters. «Условный знак» = 'an agreed-upon, prearranged signal'.
> Past active participle for который: «Обозначавший» is a past active participle ('that meant/signified'), agreeing with «знак» and condensing a который-clause; it then takes a «что»-clause reporting the signal's meaning. «Грушенька пришла» = perfective 'Grushenka has come'.
> Attenuative comparatives in по-: «Потише» ('a bit softer') and «поскорее» ('a bit quicker') are comparatives with the softening prefix по-, meaning 'somewhat more'. They precisely choreograph the coded knock — two soft, then three quick.

Старик вздрогнул, вздернул голову, быстро вскочил и бросился к окну.  
The old man started, jerked up his head, leaped up quickly, and rushed to the window.
> Perfective rush to the window: Four perfectives fire in sequence — «вздрогнул» (started), «вздёрнул» (jerked up), «вскочил» (leaped up), «бросился» (flung himself, -ся) — staging the old man's eager lunge. «Бросился к окну» takes «к» + dative for the goal of motion.

Митя отскочил в тень.  
Mitya darted back into the shadow.
> Perfective recoil (echo): «Отскочил в тень» ('darted back into the shadow') repeats the earlier perfective recoil verbatim, the prefix от- = 'back/away'. The clipped, recurring sentence underscores the reflexive choreography of stalker and watched.

Федор Павлович отпер окно и высунул всю свою голову.  
Fyodor Pavlovitch unlatched the window and thrust out his whole head.
> Reflexive «свой» + intensive «весь»: «Всю свою голову» pairs «весь» ('whole') with reflexive «свой» ('his own'): he thrust out his whole head, both modifiers agreeing accusative-feminine with «голову». «Высунул» (perfective, вы- = 'out') is the decisive protrusion.

— Грушенька, ты? Ты, что ли? — проговорил он каким-то дрожащим полушепотом. — Где ты, маточка, ангелочек, где ты? — Он был в страшном волнении, он задыхался.  
"Grushenka, is that you? Is it you?" he said in a kind of trembling half-whisper. "Where are you, little mother, little angel, where are you?" He was in dreadful agitation, gasping for breath.
> Tentative «что ли»: «Что ли» is a colloquial tag of hesitant supposition — 'is it really you?, you or what?'. It softens the question into anxious uncertainty, the trembling old man unsure whom he addresses.
> Present active participle in the instrumental: «Дрожащим» is a present active participle ('trembling') agreeing with «полушёпотом» in the instrumental of manner ('in a trembling half-whisper'). «Каким-то» (indefinite «какой-то») adds 'some kind of', a vague, eerie quaver.
> Diminutives of endearment: «Маточка» and «ангелочек» are caressing diminutives the old man coos at Grushenka. «Ангелочек» is 'little angel'; «маточка», an affectionate term for a woman (root «мать», 'mother'), has no neat English equivalent—we render it 'little mother'. The -очка/-очек suffixes signal tenderness while exposing Fyodor Pavlovitch's lechery.

«Один!» — решил Митя.  
"Alone!" Mitya decided.
> Verbless verdict + «решить»: «Один!» stands as a complete one-word judgement (zero copula, 'He's alone!'), and «решил» here means 'decided, concluded' rather than 'solved'. The terse exclamation seals Mitya's fatal certainty as the chapter ends.

— Где же ты? — крикнул опять старик и высунул еще больше голову, высунул ее с плечами, озираясь на все стороны, направо и налево, — иди сюда; я гостинчику приготовил, иди, покажу!..  
"Well, where are you?" the old man cried again, thrusting his head out farther still, thrusting it out shoulders and all, looking about on every side, to the right and to the left. "Come here; I've got a little present ready for you, come, I'll show you!.."
> Insistent «же»: The particle «же» adds an impatient, insistent edge to the question — «but where ARE you?» rather than a plain «where are you?». It tints Fyodor Pavlovich's eager, fretful calling into the dark.
> Gerund «озираясь»: «Озираясь» is an imperfective gerund («деепричастие») — 'looking about' as an action simultaneous with the main verb «высунул». It shares the old man's subject and packs the attendant gesture into one adverbial form, a hallmark of literary narration.
> Coaxing diminutive «гостинчик»: «Гостинец» is a little gift or treat brought for someone; «гостинчику» adds an endearing diminutive and stands in the partitive genitive («приготовил гостинчику»). The wheedling, sing-song tone is exactly how one lures a child or a coveted woman.
> Imperative and perfective future: «Иди» is the imperative of «идти» ('come!'), and «покажу» is a perfective verb in present-form conjugation, which yields future meaning ('I'll show'). The bare conjugated future without any auxiliary is the perfective's signature.

«Это он про пакет с тремя тысячами», — мелькнуло у Мити.  
"He means the packet with the three thousand," flashed through Mitya's mind.
> Impersonal «мелькнуло»: The neuter past «мелькнуло» ('flashed') has no nominative subject — the thought itself is unstated, and «у Мити» ('at/with Mitya') locates whose mind it crossed. This subjectless flicker mirrors a thought arriving unbidden.

— Да где же?.. Али у дверей? Сейчас отворю…  
"But where are you?.. At the door, perhaps? I'll open it at once…"
> Colloquial «али»: «Али» is a folksy, archaic variant of «или» ('or') or «разве» ('is it that…?'), marking Fyodor Pavlovich's lapse into low, homely speech. It belongs to peasant and old-fashioned registers Dostoevsky uses to colour a voice.
> Perfective future «отворю»: «Отворю» ('I'll open') is the perfective «отворить» conjugated like a present, so it means a single completed future act. «Сейчас» ('right now') reinforces the imminent, finished quality the perfective lends.

И старик чуть не вылез из окна, заглядывая направо, в сторону, где была дверь в сад, и стараясь разглядеть в темноте.  
And the old man all but climbed out of the window, peering to the right, toward where the door into the garden was, straining to make something out in the dark.
> Idiom «чуть не»: «Чуть не» plus a perfective past means 'all but / nearly did' — an action on the very brink of happening but not completed. Here the old man 'nearly climbed out of the window' in his eagerness.
> Paired gerunds: Two imperfective gerunds, «заглядывая» ('peering') and «стараясь» ('straining'), hang attendant circumstances off the main verb «вылез». Chaining gerunds this way to layer simultaneous gestures is characteristic of Dostoevsky's dense descriptive sentences.

Чрез секунду он непременно побежал бы отпирать двери, не дождавшись ответа Грушеньки.  
In another second he would certainly have run to unlock the door, without waiting for Grushenka's answer.
> Conditional «побежал бы»: Past-tense verb plus the particle «бы» builds the irrealis: 'he would (certainly) have run'. It frames a counterfactual — what was about to happen but was forestalled — heightening the suspense of the averted moment.
> Negated gerund + genitive of negation: «Не дождавшись» is a perfective gerund ('without having waited for'), and its object «ответа» stands in the genitive — partly the genitive that «дождаться» governs, partly reinforced by the negation. The gerund compresses a whole 'before he could…' clause.
> Bookish «чрез»: «Чрез» is the elevated, non-pleophonic doublet of «через» ('through, after'), a Church-Slavonic-flavoured contraction common in 19th-century prose. It lends a faint solemnity even to a plain phrase like 'in another second'.

Митя смотрел сбоку и не шевелился.  
Mitya watched from the side and did not stir.
> Reflexive «шевелиться» in the imperfective: «Шевелиться» ('to stir, move') is a -ся verb here in middle/intransitive sense; the imperfective past «не шевелился» pictures a sustained state of stillness, not a single act. It sets Mitya frozen against the old man's busy movement.

Весь столь противный ему профиль старика, весь отвисший кадык его, нос крючком, улыбающийся в сладостном ожидании, губы его, всё это ярко было освещено косым светом лампы слева из комнаты.  
The old man's profile, so loathsome to him, his whole sagging Adam's apple, his hooked nose, smiling in sweet anticipation, his very lips—all of it was brightly lit by the lamp's slanting light from the room on the left.
> Passive participle + instrumental of means: «Освещено» is the short-form past passive participle of «осветить», joined with «было» to state a result ('was lit up'). The light doing the illuminating, «косым светом», stands in the instrumental as the means.
> Dative «ему» of feeling + bookish «столь»: «Противный ему» means 'loathsome to him', with the experiencer in the dative — the person to whom something is repugnant. «Столь» ('so') is a bookish intensifier favoured in literary prose over the everyday «так».
> «Кадык» — Adam's apple: «Кадык» is the Adam's apple; «отвисший кадык» ('sagging Adam's apple') fixes on the physical decrepitude of the old man's throat. The repeated cataloguing of his features builds the visceral, bodily revulsion Mitya feels.
> Present active participle «улыбающийся»: «Улыбающийся» ('smiling') is a present active participle from imperfective «улыбаться», agreeing like an adjective with «нос» and condensing a «который»-clause into one modifier. Its ongoing sense freezes the smile in the lamplight.

Страшная, неистовая злоба закипела вдруг в сердце Мити: «Вот он, его соперник, его мучитель, мучитель его жизни!»  
A dreadful, frenzied hatred suddenly boiled up in Mitya's heart: "There he is, his rival, his tormentor, the tormentor of his life!"
> Inverted, weight-bearing word order: The long subject «страшная, неистовая злоба» opens the clause and the verb «закипела» follows, then «в сердце Мити' lands the new information last. Topic-first, comment-last ordering lets the hatred mount before we learn where it boils up.
> Anaphora of «мучитель»: «Мучитель» ('tormentor') is repeated with rising intensity — «его мучитель, мучитель его жизни» — the rhetorical anaphora typical of Mitya's overheated inner exclamations.

Это был прилив той самой внезапной, мстительной и неистовой злобы, про которую, как бы предчувствуя ее, возвестил он Алеше в разговоре с ним в беседке четыре дня назад, когда ответил на вопрос Алеши: «Как можешь ты говорить, что убьешь отца?»  
It was a surge of that very sudden, vengeful, frenzied hatred which, as though he had foreseen it, he had foretold to Alyosha in their talk in the arbour four days before, when he answered Alyosha's question: "How can you say you'll kill your father?"
> Relative «которую» across the clause: «Которую» agrees with its antecedent «злобы» in gender and number but takes the case its own clause demands — accusative after «про» ('about which'). The relative pronoun threads a long, looping subordinate sentence back to the hatred.
> Gerund softened by «как бы»: «Предчувствуя» is an imperfective gerund ('foreseeing'), and «как бы» ('as though') hedges it into the unreal — he foretold the rage 'as if foreseeing it'. «Как бы» is a constant Dostoevskian qualifier blurring the line between knowing and merely sensing.
> Elevated «возвестить»: «Возвестить» ('to proclaim, announce') is a lofty, almost prophetic verb — far weightier than plain «сказать». Applying it to Mitya's tavern confession to Alyosha lends his earlier words the gravity of a foretold doom.

«Я ведь не знаю, не знаю, — сказал он тогда, — может, не убью, а может, убью.  
"I don't know, I don't know," he had said then, "maybe I won't kill him, and maybe I will.
> Appealing particle «ведь»: «Ведь» appeals to shared knowledge — 'you know', 'after all' — softening and confiding the admission. It is one of the small particles that give Dostoevsky's dialogue its pleading, intimate texture.
> Aspect and the contrastive «а»: Both «убью» forms are the perfective future of «убить» ('I will kill [him]'), naming a single finished act. The hinge «а» sets the two possibilities lightly against each other — 'maybe not, and maybe yes' — the untranslatable contrastive 'and/but'.

Боюсь, что ненавистен он вдруг мне станет ''своим лицом в ту самую минуту.''  
I'm afraid he'll suddenly become hateful to me ''by his very face, at that very moment.''
> Short adjective as predicate: «Ненавистен» is the short (predicative) form of «ненавистный» ('hateful'), used with «станет» to assert a state — 'he will become hateful'. The short form is bookish and stresses an absolute, momentary condition, fitting the sudden onset Mitya dreads.
> Instrumental of means «своим лицом»: «Своим лицом» ('by his very face') is an instrumental naming the means by which he becomes hateful, with the reflexive possessive «свой' pointing back to the subject 'he'. The instrumental pins the loathing precisely on the man's own physiognomy.

Ненавижу я его кадык, его нос, его глаза, его бесстыжую насмешку.  
I hate that Adam's apple of his, his nose, his eyes, his shameless sneer.
> Verb-first emphasis: Fronting the verb «ненавижу' ('I hate') before the pronoun «я» throws the weight onto the emotion itself. The accusative objects then pile up — «кадык, нос, глаза, насмешку» — in a breathless catalogue of revulsion.
> «Бесстыжий» — shameless: «Бесстыжий» ('shameless, brazen', literally 'without shame') is a coarse, expressive epithet, and «насмешка» is a mocking sneer. Together they paint Fyodor Pavlovich's leer as insolent and obscene.

Личное омерзение чувствую.  
I feel a personal disgust.
> «Омерзение» — loathing: «Омерзение' is a strong, bookish word for physical loathing or disgust — stronger than «отвращение». Mitya's choice of so visceral a noun underscores that his hatred is bodily and immediate, not reasoned.

Вот этого боюсь, вот и не удержусь…»  
That is what I'm afraid of—that I won't be able to hold myself back…"
> «Бояться» + genitive: «Бояться» ('to fear') is a -ся verb that governs the genitive: «этого боюсь» ('this is what I fear'). The fronted demonstrative «вот этого» points emphatically at the dread itself.
> Reflexive perfective future «не удержусь»: «Удержусь» is the perfective future of «удержаться» ('to hold/restrain oneself'), with -ся giving the reflexive sense; negated, it means 'I won't be able to hold back'. The perfective casts the failure as a single, decisive lapse.

Личное омерзение нарастало нестерпимо.  
The personal disgust was growing unbearable.
> Imperfective «нарастало» of mounting feeling: The imperfective past «нарастало» ('was growing') views the disgust as an unfolding process, not a finished event — it swells unbearably as we watch. The imperfective is precisely the aspect for this kind of rising background pressure.

Митя уже не помнил себя и вдруг выхватил медный пестик из кармана…  
Mitya was no longer himself, and suddenly he snatched the brass pestle out of his pocket…
> Idiom «не помнить себя»: «Не помнить себя» ('not to remember oneself') is the set phrase for being beside oneself, out of one's mind with emotion. The reflexive «себя» carries the literal sense; the phrase recurs through this chapter to mark Mitya's loss of control.
> The brass pestle: «Пестик» is a pestle, the heavy brass tool for grinding in a mortar; Mitya had snatched it up earlier from Grushenka's table. As the murder weapon-that-wasn't, it becomes a crucial, ironic piece of physical evidence at his trial.

«Бог, — как сам Митя говорил потом, — сторожил меня тогда»: как раз в то самое время проснулся на одре своем больной Григорий Васильевич.  
"God," as Mitya himself put it afterwards, "was watching over me then": at that very moment Grigory Vasilyevitch, who lay ill on his bed, woke up.
> «Сторожить» — to watch over: «Сторожить» means to guard or keep watch over; Mitya's saying 'God was watching over me then' frames his providential failure to strike as divine intervention. The verb usually applies to a sentry guarding property — here applied to God guarding Mitya from himself.
> Archaic «одр»: «Одр» is an archaic, elevated word for a bed — especially a sickbed or deathbed («на одре болезни»). «На одре своем» lends Grigory's pallet a solemn, almost liturgical colour befitting the providential turn.

К вечеру того же дня он совершил над собою известное лечение, о котором Смердяков рассказывал Ивану Федоровичу, то есть вытерся весь с помощию супруги водкой с каким-то секретным крепчайшим настоем, а остальное выпил с «некоторою молитвой», прошептанною над ним супругой, и залег спать.  
Toward evening of that same day he had carried out on himself the well-known treatment Smerdyakov had described to Ivan Fyodorovitch—that is, with his wife's help he had rubbed his whole body with vodka steeped in some secret, exceedingly strong infusion, drunk what was left with "a certain prayer" that his wife whispered over him, and lain down to sleep.
> Idiom and instrumental «водкой»: «Вытереться» (-ся, reflexive) means to rub oneself down; «водкой с… настоем» is the instrumental of means — 'rubbed himself all over WITH vodka steeped in an infusion'. This is the folk remedy Smerdyakov later mentions.
> Past passive participle + instrumental agent: «Прошептанною» is a past passive participle ('whispered'), here in archaic instrumental-feminine -ою, modifying «молитвой»; the one doing the whispering, «супругой», stands in the instrumental as the agent. The participle compresses 'a prayer that his wife whispered'.
> Archaic ending «с помощию»: «С помощию» is the older, bookish instrumental of «помощь» ('with the help of'), where modern Russian writes «с помощью». The retained -ию is a 19th-century literary spelling that flavours the narration.
> «Залечь» — to bed down: «Залечь» ('to lie down [for a long stretch], bed down') is more colloquial and emphatic than «лечь», suggesting settling in to sleep heavily. It suits the picture of the old man drugged by his potent vodka cure.

Марфа Игнатьевна вкусила тоже и, как непьющая, заснула подле супруга мертвым сном.  
Marfa Ignatyevna had partaken too, and, being a non-drinker, had fallen asleep beside her husband in a dead sleep.
> Elevated «вкусить»: «Вкусить» ('to taste, partake of') is a solemn, Church-Slavonic-tinged verb — the language of communion and Scripture — applied half-ironically to Marfa's nip of the medicinal vodka. The lofty word over so humble an act is gently comic.
> Active participle as noun «непьющая»: «Непьющая» is a present active participle of «пить» ('drinking') with negative «не-», substantivized to mean 'a non-drinker, a teetotaller'. «Как непьющая» ('being a non-drinker') gives the reason she dropped so heavily asleep.
> Idiom «мертвым сном»: «Заснуть мертвым сном» ('to fall into a dead sleep') is a fixed expressive phrase for sleeping like the dead — utterly insensible. The instrumental «мертвым сном» names the manner of sleeping; the deathly image quietly foreshadows the night's violence.

Но вот совсем неожиданно Григорий вдруг проснулся в ночи, сообразил минутку и хоть тотчас же опять почувствовал жгучую боль в пояснице, но поднялся на постели.  
But then, quite unexpectedly, Grigory suddenly woke in the night, considered for a moment, and, though he at once felt again the burning pain in the small of his back, raised himself on the bed.
> A chain of perfectives: The string «проснулся, сообразил, почувствовал, поднялся» is all perfective past, moving the action forward event by event — woke, considered, felt, raised himself. This is the perfective's narrative job: discrete completed steps against the imperfective background.
> «Поясница» — the small of the back: «Поясница» is the lower back or loins; Grigory's «жгучая боль в пояснице» (burning pain there) is the lumbago that should have kept him abed. The recurring detail makes his rising to investigate all the more dogged and fateful.

Затем опять что-то обдумал, встал и наскоро оделся.  
Then he turned something over in his mind again, got up, and dressed in haste.
> Indefinite «что-то»: «Что-то» ('something') is built from interrogative «что» plus the clitic «-то», marking a specific but unspecified thing — he turned over some particular thought we are not told. The vagueness keeps Grigory's inner reasoning half-hidden.
> «Наскоро» — hastily: «Наскоро» means 'hurriedly, in a rush, anyhow' — dressing quickly and carelessly. It conveys the old man's urgency despite his pain, rising in the dead of night to do his duty.

Может быть, угрызение совести кольнуло его за то, что он спит, а дом без сторожа «в такое опасное время».  
Perhaps a pang of conscience stung him for sleeping while the house was without a watchman "at such a dangerous time."
> Idiom «угрызение совести»: «Угрызение совести» ('gnawing of conscience', a pang of remorse) is a set phrase; «угрызение» literally is a 'gnawing bite'. The verb «кольнуло» ('pricked, stung') keeps the bodily metaphor alive — conscience as something that physically jabs.
> «За то, что» — causal subordination: «За то, что» ('for the fact that') introduces the reason the conscience stung him; «что» opens a reported-fact clause. The correlative «то» plus «что» is the standard way to nominalize a whole clause as the object of a preposition.

Разбитый падучею Смердяков лежал в другой каморке без движения.  
Smerdyakov, prostrated by his falling sickness, lay motionless in the other little room.
> «Падучая» — the falling sickness: «Падучая (болезнь)» is the old folk name for epilepsy, the 'falling sickness'; «разбитый падучею» means 'prostrated by his epileptic fit'. Smerdyakov's seizures — real or feigned — are central to the murder's mechanics. The instrumental «падучею» (archaic -ею) names the cause.
> Diminutive «каморка»: «Каморка» is a tiny, cramped little room or closet — a diminutive-flavoured word stressing meanness of space. It places Smerdyakov in the household's lowliest quarters.

Марфа Игнатьевна не шевелилась.  
Marfa Ignatyevna did not stir.
> Imperfective stillness, echoed: «Не шевелилась» ('did not stir') repeats the reflexive «шевелиться» from Mitya's scene, now of the drugged Marfa. The imperfective past again paints a continuing motionless state, and the verbal echo binds the two sleepers into the night's eerie stillness.

«Ослабела баба», — подумал, глянув на нее, Григорий Васильевич и кряхтя вышел на крылечко.  
"The woman's worn out," thought Grigory Vasilyevitch, glancing at her, and, grunting, he stepped out onto the little porch.
> «Баба» — peasant 'woman': «Баба» is a homely, low-register word for a (married, peasant) woman — affectionate or dismissive depending on tone. In Grigory's gruff inner comment ('the woman's worn out') it captures his blunt, old-servant speech.
> Perfective and imperfective gerunds together: «Глянув» is a perfective gerund (a prior, completed glance) while «кряхтя» is an imperfective gerund (a groaning that accompanies the going-out). The pair distinguishes a finished action from a simultaneous one within a single sentence.
> Diminutive «крылечко»: «Крылечко» is the affectionate diminutive of «крыльцо» (a porch or front steps). Russian sprinkles such diminutives over homely objects; the cosy little word sits oddly against the grim errand that follows.

Конечно, он хотел только глянуть с крылечка, потому что ходить был не в силах, боль в пояснице и в правой ноге была нестерпимая.  
Of course, he only meant to glance out from the porch, for he was in no state to walk—the pain in the small of his back and in his right leg was unbearable.
> Idiom «не в силах» + multidirectional «ходить»: «Не в силах» ('not up to it, in no state to') is a fixed predicate of inability. It takes «ходить», the multidirectional motion verb for walking about in general, rather than «идти» for a single trip — he simply couldn't walk at all.
> Long-form predicate adjective: «Нестерпимая» ('unbearable') is the full (long) adjective used predicatively after «была», agreeing with «боль» in feminine. The long form here ascribes the pain as a settled quality rather than a momentary state.

Но как раз вдруг припомнил, что калитку в сад он с вечера на замок не запер.  
But just then he suddenly recalled that he had not locked the gate into the garden that evening.
> Object word order under negation: The object «калитку» (accusative, animate-inanimate aside) is fronted as the topic, with the negated verb «не запер' ('had not locked') landing at the end for emphasis. Here the concrete, specific gate stays accusative rather than shifting to the genitive of negation.
> «Калитка» — the wicket gate: «Калитка' is a small gate — a wicket — set within or beside a larger gate, for foot traffic. This unlocked little garden gate is the hinge on which the whole night's fate turns.

Это был человек аккуратнейший и точнейший, человек раз установившегося порядка и многолетних привычек.  
He was a most punctilious and exact man, a man of long-settled order and many years' habits.
> Superlative suffix «-ейший»: «Аккуратнейший» and «точнейший» are bookish superlatives in «-ейший» ('most punctilious', 'most exact'), formed by suffix rather than with «самый». Their elevated ring, plus the postposed position after «человек», gives the characterization a formal, summing-up weight.
> Past active participle «установившегося»: «Установившегося» is a past active participle from reflexive «установиться» ('to become established'), in the genitive agreeing with «порядка»: 'of an order once settled'. The participle packs 'an order that had set itself once and for all' into a single modifier.

Хромая и корчась от боли, сошел он с крылечка и направился к саду.  
Limping and writhing with pain, he came down from the porch and made his way toward the garden.
> Opening gerund pair: «Хромая» ('limping') and «корчась» ('writhing') are imperfective gerunds fronted before the main verb «сошел», setting the attendant manner of his descent. Leading with gerunds is a favourite Dostoevskian rhythm, painting the body's struggle before the act.
> «К» + dative of direction: «Направился к саду» ('made his way toward the garden') uses «к» governing the dative «саду» to express motion toward. The reflexive «направиться» (-ся) means to set off in a direction.

Так и есть, калитка совсем настежь.  
Just as he thought: the gate stood wide open.
> Idiom «так и есть»: «Так и есть» ('just so', 'sure enough', 'just as I thought') is a fixed confirming exclamation. It marks the moment a suspicion is borne out — here, that the gate was indeed left open.
> «Настежь» — wide open: «Настежь» is an adverb meaning 'wide open' (of doors, gates, windows) — flung fully ajar. «Совсем настежь» ('all the way open') drives home the careless, ominous state of the gate.

Машинально ступил он в сад: может быть, ему что померещилось, может, услыхал какой-нибудь звук, но, глянув налево, увидал отворенное окно у барина, пустое уже окошко, никто уже из него не выглядывал.  
Mechanically he stepped into the garden: perhaps something had seemed to flit before him, perhaps he had heard some sound, but, glancing to the left, he saw the master's window standing open—an empty window now, with no one looking out of it any longer.
> Dative experiencer «ему»: «Ему… померещилось» ('something seemed to flit before him') is an impersonal construction: no nominative subject, the experiencer in the dative «ему», the verb neuter. «Что» here is colloquial for «что-то» ('something'). The dative-experiencer frame is exactly how Russian renders a half-glimpsed impression.
> «Барин» — the master: «Барин» is the master of the house, the gentleman an servant serves; «окно у барина» is 'the master's window'. The word carries the whole social world of master and household servant that orders Grigory's loyalties.
> Diminutive «окошко»: Within one breath Dostoevsky shifts from «окно» to its diminutive «окошко» ('little window'). The softening diminutive lends the now-empty window a touch of forlorn intimacy — the master gone from it, the scene suddenly hushed.

«Почему отворено, теперь не лето!» — подумал Григорий, и вдруг, как раз в то самое мгновение прямо пред ним в саду замелькало что-то необычайное.  
"Why is it open? It's not summer now!" thought Grigory, and suddenly, at that very instant, right before him in the garden something extraordinary went flickering.
> Zero copula + negation: «Теперь не лето» ('it's not summer now') has no verb 'to be' — the present copula is simply absent, and «не» negates the predicate noun «лето». This zero-copula present is the bedrock of Russian nominal sentences.
> Inceptive perfective «замелькало»: The prefix «за-» on «мелькать» makes «замелькало' inceptive — 'began to flicker, started flashing'. The neuter agrees with «что-то необычайное» ('something extraordinary'), and the verb-first placement makes the apparition burst onto the scene.

Шагах в сорока пред ним как бы пробегал в темноте человек, очень быстро двигалась какая-то тень.  
Some forty paces ahead of him a man seemed to be running through the dark; a shape of some kind was moving very fast.
> Approximation by inversion + numeral case: Reversing noun and numeral — «шагах в сорока» instead of «в сорока шагах» — signals approximation: 'some forty paces off'. The numeral «сорока» and noun «шагах» both stand in the prepositional after «в», governed together.
> Hedged imperfective «как бы пробегал»: «Как бы» ('as if, seemingly') hedges the imperfective past «пробегал», rendering the uncertain glimpse — a man 'seemed to be running'. The imperfective captures the motion in progress as Grigory strains to make it out.

«Господи!» — проговорил Григорий и, не помня себя, забыв про свою боль в пояснице, пустился наперерез бегущему.  
"Lord!" cried Grigory, and, beside himself, forgetting the pain in the small of his back, he set off to head off the runner.
> Imperfective and perfective gerunds contrasted: «Не помня» is imperfective ('not [in the act of] remembering himself') and «забыв» perfective ('having forgotten his pain') — a simultaneous state set beside a completed one. Both share Grigory's subject as he flings himself after the figure.
> «Пуститься наперерез»: «Пуститься» means to dash off, set off at a run; «наперерез» (бегущему) is 'to cut across / head off' the runner. The pair vividly stages the old man's lunge to intercept the fleeing shape.

Он взял короче, сад был ему, видимо, знакомее, чем бегущему; тот же направлялся к бане, пробежал за баню, бросился к стене…  
He took a shorter line; the garden was plainly more familiar to him than to the runner; the latter was making for the bathhouse, ran behind it, flung himself at the wall…
> Comparative «знакомее» + dative of the one who knows: «Знакомее» is the predicative comparative ('more familiar'), and the persons to whom the garden is familiar stand in the dative — «ему… чем бегущему» ('to him than to the runner'). «Знаком кому-то' regularly takes the dative.
> Demonstrative «тот» with «же»: «Тот же» here means 'the latter / that same one' — «тот» picks out the runner as the referent, and «же» links back contrastively. «Тот» as a tracking demonstrative is essential to following who-does-what when word order is loose.

Григорий следил его, не теряя из виду, и бежал не помня себя.  
Grigory tracked him, not losing sight of him, and ran beside himself.
> Negated imperfective gerund: «Не теряя из виду» ('not losing [him] from sight') is an imperfective gerund of attendant circumstance, simultaneous with «следил» and «бежал». «Терять из виду» is the set idiom for losing sight of someone.
> «Не помня себя», once more: The phrase «не помня себя» ('beside himself') now attaches to Grigory, having earlier marked Mitya — the narration spreads the same loss of self-possession across pursuer and pursued. The repetition binds the two in one frenzy.

Он добежал до забора как раз в ту минуту, когда беглец уже перелезал забор.  
He reached the fence just at the moment when the fugitive was already climbing over it.
> Imperfective «перелезал» of an action in progress: «Перелезал» is imperfective past ('was climbing over') — the fugitive caught mid-act, not yet over, just as Grigory reaches him. «Уже… перелезал' freezes the precise instant of overlap that lets the old man seize his leg.
> «Беглец» — the fugitive: «Беглец» ('fugitive, one who flees', from «бежать») recasts the running figure as a man in flight from a deed. The shift from neutral «бегущий» ('the runner') to «беглец» quietly loads the scene with guilt.

Вне себя завопил Григорий, кинулся и вцепился обеими руками в его ногу.  
Beside himself, Grigory let out a howl, lunged, and clutched his leg with both hands.
> Inversion for dramatic onset: The clause opens with «вне себя» ('beside himself') and the verb «завопил' before the subject — fronting the emotion and the cry for shock effect. The «за-» prefix makes «завопить' inceptive: he 'let out a howl'.
> Instrumental of means «обеими руками»: «Вцепиться» ('to clutch, dig into') takes «в» + accusative for what is gripped, and «обеими руками» ('with both hands') stands in the instrumental of means. The numeral «обеими» governs the noun in this plural instrumental.

Так и есть, предчувствие не обмануло его; он узнал его, это был он, «изверг-отцеубивец»!  
Just as he had thought: his foreboding had not deceived him; he recognized him, it was he, the "monster, the parricide"!
> Negated perfective «не обмануло»: «Не обмануло его» ('did not deceive him') is the negated perfective past; the object «его' remains accusative — a definite, specific 'him' resists the genitive of negation. The grim confirmation lands as a single completed fact.
> «Изверг-отцеубивец» — monster-parricide: «Изверг» is a monster, a fiend; «отцеубивец» ('father-killer, parricide') is a heavy, archaic-flavoured compound. Grigory's branding of the figure as a 'monster-parricide' — before any blow is even certain — anticipates the false charge that will hound Mitya.

— Отцеубивец! — прокричал старик на всю окрестность, но только это и успел прокричать; он вдруг упал как пораженный громом.  
"Parricide!" the old man yelled out for the whole neighbourhood to hear, but that was all he managed to yell; he suddenly dropped as if struck by thunder.
> Emphatic «только… и»: The frame «только это и успел» ('that was all he managed to') uses «и' as an emphatic restrictive particle — 'only this and nothing more'. «Успеть» + perfective infinitive «прокричать» means to manage to do it in time before collapse.
> Simile «как пораженный громом»: «Пораженный громом» ('struck by thunder', the past passive participle of «поразить») is a stock simile for sudden, felling shock — like 'thunderstruck'. The biblical force of the image marks the instant Grigory drops.

Митя соскочил опять в сад и нагнулся над поверженным.  
Mitya jumped back down into the garden and bent over the fallen man.
> Prefixed perfective «соскочил»: «Соскочить» ('to jump down/off') is a perfective with the prefix «с-» giving downward direction, a single completed leap. «Опять» ('again') notes that Mitya, having half-cleared the fence, drops back down on the garden side.
> Participle as noun «поверженный»: «Поверженный» is a past passive participle ('the felled/stricken one') substantivized into a noun — 'the fallen man'. The elevated, almost epic word («повергнуть' = to lay low) dignifies the prostrate old servant.

В руках Мити был медный пестик, и он машинально отбросил его в траву.  
In Mitya's hand was the brass pestle, and he mechanically flung it into the grass.
> «Машинально» — mechanically: «Машинально» ('mechanically, automatically') recurs through this scene to mark Mitya's actions as unwilled, done in a daze. The repeated word insists he is not in command of himself — crucial to the question of his guilt.
> Perfective «отбросил» + «в» of motion: «Отбросить» ('to fling away') is perfective, a single tossing-off, and «в траву» ('into the grass') uses «в» + accusative for motion toward. This careless throw — its exact landing-place fatefully wrong — is set up by the next sentence.

Пестик упал в двух шагах от Григория, но не в траву, а на тропинку, на самое видное место.  
The pestle fell two paces from Grigory, but not into the grass—onto the path, in the most conspicuous spot.
> Corrective «не… а…»: «Не в траву, а на тропинку» ('not into the grass, but onto the path') is the corrective construction with contrastive «а» — denying one and asserting its replacement. The structure sharpens the cruel irony: the pestle lands exactly where it will be found.
> Numeral «два» + genitive singular: «В двух шагах» ('two paces away') shows the numeral two governing the noun — here both in the prepositional after «в». In the base count «два шага» the noun would be genitive singular «шага'; numbers 2–4 always take that form.

Несколько секунд рассматривал он лежащего пред ним.  
For several seconds he examined the man lying before him.
> Imperfective duration + participle object: The imperfective «рассматривал» ('examined, kept looking at') over «несколько секунд' draws out the gazing as a process. Its object «лежащего' is a present active participle ('the one lying [there]') used as a noun, in the animate accusative.

Голова старика была вся в крови; Митя протянул руку и стал ее ощупывать.  
The old man's head was all covered in blood; Mitya stretched out his hand and began feeling it.
> Inceptive «стал» + imperfective infinitive: «Стал… ощупывать» ('began to feel/grope at it') pairs perfective «стать» with an imperfective infinitive to mark the onset of an ongoing action. Russian regularly expresses 'began doing' this way rather than with a single verb.
> «Весь» intensifier + «в» of state: «Вся в крови» ('all [covered] in blood') uses «весь» as an intensifier and «в крови' (prepositional) for the state of being smeared with something. The construction «в + prepositional' for 'covered in' is idiomatic.

Он припомнил потом ясно, что ему ужасно захотелось в ту минуту «вполне убедиться», проломил он череп старику или только «огорошил» его пестиком по темени?  
He remembered clearly afterwards that he had felt a terrible craving at that moment "to make quite sure" whether he had cracked the old man's skull or had only "stunned" him on the crown with the pestle.
> Dative-subject «захотелось»: «Ему захотелось» ('he was seized by a craving to') is a classic impersonal, dative-experiencer construction: no nominative, the person in the dative «ему», the -ся verb neuter. It frames the urge as something that came over Mitya rather than something he chose.
> Embedded yes/no question without «ли»: The indirect question 'whether he had cracked the skull or only stunned him' is built as two perfective alternatives, «проломил… или… огорошил», the inversion «проломил он» marking the interrogative. Both perfectives ask which single completed result occurred.
> Colloquial «огорошить»: «Огорошить» normally means to dumbfound or take aback; in Mitya's mouth, in quotation marks, it is wrenched to mean 'stunned [with a blow]'. The slangy, almost flippant word over so grave an act marks his dazed, unreal state.

Но кровь лилась, лилась ужасно и мигом облила горячею струей дрожащие пальцы Мити.  
But the blood flowed, flowed terribly, and in an instant drenched Mitya's trembling fingers in a hot stream.
> Imperfective repetition for flow: The doubled imperfective «лилась, лилась» ('flowed, flowed') iconically prolongs the gushing — the imperfective views the bleeding as unbroken process, and the repetition makes it relentless. The verb «литься' is a -ся middle ('to pour, flow').
> Perfective «облила» + instrumental: Against the flowing imperfective, perfective «облила» ('drenched [in one go]') marks the single completed soaking of his fingers, with «горячею струей» ('in a hot stream', archaic instrumental -ею) as the means. The aspect switch turns sustained flow into a sudden result.

Он помнил, что выхватил из кармана свой белый новый платок, которым запасся, идя к Хохлаковой, и приложил к голове старика, бессмысленно стараясь оттереть кровь со лба и с лица.  
He remembered snatching from his pocket the clean new white handkerchief he had stocked up with on his way to Madame Hohlakov's, and pressing it to the old man's head, senselessly trying to wipe the blood from his forehead and face.
> Relative «которым» in the instrumental: «Запастись» ('to stock up on, provide oneself with') governs the instrumental, so the relative «которым» appears in the instrumental, agreeing with «платок' in gender/number but taking its own case. The clause tucks in the telling backstory of the clean handkerchief.
> Gerund of motion «идя»: «Идя» is the imperfective gerund of «идти» ('while going, on his way'), with «к Хохлаковой' (dative after «к») giving the destination. The gerund neatly times the earlier provisioning to his walk to Madame Hohlakov's.
> «Бессмысленно» — senselessly: «Бессмысленно стараясь» ('senselessly trying') again paints Mitya's actions as futile and unwilled. The handkerchief he tries to clean the blood with becomes, soaked, one of the trial's most damning material clues.

Но и платок мигом весь намок кровью.  
But the handkerchief, too, was at once soaked through with blood.
> Emphatic «и» + perfective «намок»: Here «и» means 'too, even' — 'the handkerchief, too, soaked through'. «Намок» is perfective ('became soaked', a completed change of state), and «мигом» ('in an instant') compresses the soaking to a single moment.

«Господи, да для чего это я? — очнулся вдруг Митя, — коли уж проломил, то как теперь узнать… Да и не всё ли теперь равно! — прибавил он вдруг безнадежно, — убил так убил… Попался старик и лежи!» — громко проговорил он и вдруг кинулся на забор, перепрыгнул в переулок и пустился бежать.  
"Lord, why ever am I doing this?" Mitya suddenly came to himself. "If I've cracked it open, how can I find out now… And anyway, isn't it all the same now!" he added suddenly, in despair. "If I've killed him, I've killed him… You're done for, old man, so lie there!" he said aloud, and suddenly flung himself at the fence, vaulted over into the lane, and set off running.
> Particle «да» + elliptical verb: «Да» here is an emphatic, exclamatory opener ('Lord, why ever…'), not 'yes'. The verb is omitted — «для чего это я [делаю]?» — leaving a startled, broken cry; «для чего» ('what for, to what end') asks the purpose.
> Colloquial conditional «коли»: «Коли» is a folksy, archaic «если» ('if'), with «то» marking the apodosis. «Как теперь узнать» ('how to find out now') uses a bare infinitive for a deliberative question — 'how is one to know?' — the dative experiencer left unspoken.
> Resigned «X так X» construction: «Убил так убил» ('killed, then killed — so be it') is the fatalistic «сделал так сделал» pattern: repeat the verb to mean 'if it's done, it's done, no use grieving'. It captures Mitya's flat, despairing acceptance.
> Imperative «лежи!»: «Лежи!» is the imperative of «лежать» ('lie there!'), flung at the fallen old man, and «попался» ('you're caught / done for') is a perfective past used as a verdict. The brutal command-to-a-corpse shows Mitya's reckless bravado in the moment.

Намокший кровью платок был скомкан у него в правом кулаке, и он на бегу сунул его в задний карман сюртука.  
The blood-soaked handkerchief was crumpled in his right fist, and as he ran he stuffed it into the back pocket of his frock coat.
> Past active participle «намокший»: «Намокший» is a past active participle from «намокнуть» ('having become soaked'), modifying «платок» as a fronted adjective, with «кровью' (instrumental) for what soaked it. The participle compresses 'the handkerchief that had soaked through with blood' into one modifier.
> «Сюртук» — the frock coat: «Сюртук» is a 19th-century man's frock coat, a knee-length formal coat. Its «задний карман» ('back pocket') — where Mitya stuffs the bloody handkerchief — fixes a precise detail that the investigation will later seize on.

Он бежал сломя голову, и несколько редких прохожих, повстречавшихся ему в темноте, на улицах города, запомнили потом, как встретили они в ту ночь неистово бегущего человека.  
He ran headlong, and the few rare passers-by who met him in the dark, on the town's streets, remembered afterwards how they had encountered that night a man running wildly.
> Idiom «сломя голову»: «Бежать сломя голову» ('to run headlong', literally 'having broken one's head') is a frozen idiom — «сломя' is an old perfective gerund surviving only in this phrase. It means to rush recklessly, at breakneck speed.
> Past active participle + dative: «Повстречавшихся ему» ('who had met him') is a past active participle of reflexive «повстречаться», in the genitive plural agreeing with «прохожих'; «ему' is the dative the verb governs. It replaces a «которые повстречались ему»-clause.
> Witnesses foreshadowed: The perfectives «запомнили… встретили» record that the passers-by 'remembered… how they had met' the running man — the narrator already planting the future witnesses whose testimony will weigh against Mitya. Aspect marks each as a completed, recallable event.

Летел он опять в дом Морозовой.  
He was flying again to Morozova's house.
> Unidirectional «лететь» + inversion: «Лететь» ('to fly, race') is the unidirectional motion verb, here imperfective for the headlong dash in progress, used figuratively of Mitya's running. Fronting the verb «летел' before «он' lends the line breathless momentum.

Давеча Феня, тотчас по уходе его, бросилась к старшему дворнику Назару Ивановичу и «Христом-богом» начала молить его, чтоб он «не впускал уж больше капитана ни сегодня, ни завтра».  
Earlier that day, the moment he had left, Fenya had rushed to the senior porter, Nazar Ivanovitch, and begun begging him "by Christ and God" not to "let the captain in again, today or tomorrow."
> Colloquial «давеча»: «Давеча» is a homely, dated adverb meaning 'a little while ago, earlier today'. It belongs to the servants' and townsfolk's speech and sets the flashback to Fenya's earlier plea.
> «Чтоб» + past-form irrealis: «Чтоб(ы)' introduces a willed, hypothetical outcome and demands the irrealis: the imperfective past «не впускал' ('not to let in'). The imperfective here stresses the standing prohibition — keep refusing him entry, 'today or tomorrow'.
> «Дворник» — the yard-keeper: «Дворник» is the porter or yard-keeper of a house — caretaker, gatekeeper, and often informal watchman. The «старший дворник» Nazar Ivanovitch controls who is let through the gate, which is why Fenya appeals to him.

Назар Иванович, выслушав, согласился, но на грех отлучился наверх к барыне, куда его внезапно позвали, и на ходу, встретив своего племянника, парня лет двадцати, недавно только прибывшего из деревни, приказал ему побыть на дворе, но забыл приказать о капитане.  
Nazar Ivanovitch, having heard her out, agreed, but as ill luck would have it he was called away upstairs to the mistress, where he was suddenly summoned, and on his way, meeting his nephew—a lad of about twenty, only lately come from the country—he told him to keep watch in the yard, but forgot to give any order about the captain.
> Perfective gerunds staging a sequence: «Выслушав» ('having heard out') and «встретив» ('having met') are perfective past gerunds marking prior completed acts that lead into the main verb «приказал» ('he ordered'). The chain compresses a whole train of events around the fateful forgotten instruction.
> Idiom «на грех»: «На грех» ('as ill luck would have it', literally 'to [one's] sin') is a fixed expression for an unlucky coincidence with a faint moral tinge — fate conspiring through a small lapse. It marks the porter's chance absence as the hinge that lets Mitya slip in.
> Approximative «лет двадцати»: «Лет двадцати» ('of about twenty years') is the genitive of approximate age, with «лет' (genitive plural of «год' after the numeral) before «двадцати' to signal 'roughly'. «Парень' ('lad, young fellow') is a colloquial term for a young man.
> «Барыня» — the mistress: «Барыня' is the lady of the house, the feminine of «барин' — the mistress to whom Nazar is summoned upstairs. The word fixes the household's hierarchy of masters and servants in a single noun.

Добежав до ворот, Митя постучался.  
Reaching the gate, Mitya knocked.
> Perfective gerund «добежав»: «Добежав до ворот» ('having run up to the gate') is a perfective past gerund; the prefix «до-' marks arrival at the goal, and «до ворот' takes the genitive after «до». It sets the completed approach before the main act «постучался' ('knocked').

Парень мигом узнал его: Митя не раз уже давал ему на чай.  
The lad recognized him in an instant: Mitya had more than once given him a tip already.
> Imperfective of repeated action: «Давал' is imperfective past with «не раз» ('more than once') — the imperfective is exactly the aspect for habitual, repeated action. «Давать на чай» ('to give for tea') is the set idiom for tipping.

Тотчас же отворил ему калитку, впустил и, весело улыбаясь, предупредительно поспешил уведомить, что «ведь Аграфены Александровны теперь дома-то и нет-с».  
He opened the gate to him at once, let him in, and, smiling cheerfully, obligingly hastened to inform him that "Agrafena Alexandrovna, you know, isn't home just now, sir."
> Gerund of manner «улыбаясь»: «Весело улыбаясь» ('smiling cheerfully') is an imperfective gerund of attendant manner, simultaneous with «поспешил уведомить» ('hastened to inform'). The cheerful smile, set against the news Mitya least wants, sharpens the dramatic irony.
> Topic «-то», negation, and servile «-с»: «Дома-то… нет» pairs the emphatic clitic «-то» (foregrounding the known topic) with the genitive-of-absence «нет' ('isn't [here]'). The tacked-on «-с» (from «сударь', 'sir') is the obsequious particle of deferential speech — the lad's servile politeness.

— Где же она, Прохор? — вдруг остановился Митя.  
"Where is she, then, Prohor?" Mitya stopped short suddenly.
> Urgent «же» again: «Где же она?» ('Where IS she, then?') carries the same insistent «же» that opened the chapter in Fyodor Pavlovich's mouth — now Mitya's, stopping short in alarm. The particle conveys anxious, pressing demand.
> Dialogue tag by inversion: «Вдруг остановился Митя' ('Mitya suddenly stopped short') puts verb before subject in the speech-tag — a constant device for attaching action to a line of dialogue. «Остановиться' is a perfective -ся verb for the abrupt halt.

— Давеча уехала, часа с два тому, с Тимофеем, в Мокрое.  
"She left earlier, some two hours ago, with Timofey, for Mokroe."
> Approximation «часа с два»: «Часа с два (тому назад)» means 'about two hours ago' — the preposition «с» + accusative numeral expresses approximate quantity, and the inverted «часа… два» softens it further. «Тому (назад)' is the set phrase for 'ago'.

— Зачем? — крикнул Митя.  
— What for? — cried Mitya.
> «Зачем» — to what end?: «Зачем» asks for purpose or aim — 'what for? to what end?' — as distinct from «почему» ('why?', asking for a cause). Mitya's one-word cry demands the reason behind the departure he has just been told of.
> Perfective past «крикнул»: «Крикнул» is the perfective of «кричать»/«крикнуть»; the «-ну-» stem marks a single, instantaneous burst — one shout, not a sustained cry. The perfective past drives the action forward as a discrete event, agreeing in masculine gender with «Митя» through the «-л» ending.

— Этого знать не могу-с, к офицеру какому-то, кто-то их позвал оттудова и лошадей прислали…  
— That I couldn't say, sir; to some officer or other, somebody called them out there and sent horses for them…
> The deferential «-с»: The clitic «-с» tacked onto «могу» (and on «знать не могу-с») is the «словоерс», a contraction of the old «сударь» ('sir'). It marks obsequious, deferential speech from a social inferior to a superior — here the coachman to the gentleman Mitya — and has no English equivalent beyond a peppering of 'sir'.
> Genitive «этого» under negation: The object of the negated «не могу [знать]» appears as genitive «этого» rather than accusative «это» — the genitive of negation, especially natural with an abstract, non-specific 'that'. Fronting it ('that, I cannot know') gives the topic-comment weight of a deferential brush-off.
> Dative after «к» + indefinite «-то»: «К» governs the dative, so 'to (some) officer' becomes «к офицеру». The trailing «какому-то» ('some… or other') carries the indefinite clitic «-то», marking a referent that is specific but unknown to the speaker, and itself agrees in the dative.
> Indefinite «кто-то» — somebody: «Кто-то» ('somebody', specific but unidentified) again uses the «-то» series; the coachman knows someone summoned them but not who. The object «их» ('them') is the plural personal pronoun in the accusative.
> Dialectal «оттудова»: «Оттудова» is a rustic, non-standard variant of «оттуда» ('from there'). The folksy ending is class-marking speech, placing the coachman among the common people — Dostoevsky lets the form do the characterisation.
> Genitive-plural animate object «лошадей»: «Лошадей» is the genitive/accusative plural of «лошадь» ('horse'); because horses are animate, the accusative borrows the genitive form. The subjectless «прислали» ('they sent') is an impersonal third-person plural, leaving the senders vague — 'horses were sent for them'.

Митя бросил его и как полоумный вбежал к Фене.  
Mitya dropped him and, half out of his wits, dashed in to Fenya.
> Perfective «бросил» — a single, sharp act: «Бросил» is the perfective past of «бросать»/«бросить» ('to throw, drop, abandon'); here Mitya lets go of the man he was gripping. The perfective frames it as one completed motion, and «его» is the accusative of «он».
> Prefixed motion «вбежал» + dative «к Фене»: «Вбежал» is the «в-» (into) prefix on «бежать», a perfective verb of motion meaning 'ran in'; the prefix supplies both direction and completion. «К Фене» — «к» governing the dative of the diminutive name «Феня» — gives the goal: 'in to Fenya'.
> «Полоумный» — half-witted, frantic: «Полоумный» ('half-witted', literally 'half-minded', from «пол-» + «ум») here functions almost adverbially — 'like one out of his wits'. It conveys Mitya's frantic, unhinged state at the height of his jealous panic rather than literal madness.
---

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.