# The Brothers Karamazov, A Sudden Resolution

Братья Карамазовы · Fyodor Dostoevsky · Book VIII — Mitya

Source: https://1732studios.com/books/karamazov/b8-c5. Data: https://1732studios.com/books/karamazov/b8-c5.json.


Та сидела в кухне с бабушкой, обе собирались ложиться спать.  
She was sitting in the kitchen with the old woman, the two of them just about to go to bed.
> «Та» as a topic-tracking demonstrative: The sentence opens with «Та» (literally 'that [one, fem.]') rather than a name, picking up Fenya from the previous chapter — the demonstrative «тот/та» works as a tracking pronoun, 'the said woman.' Starting a sentence with a bare «Та» is a typically Russian way of carrying a known referent forward.
> Imperfective «собирались» — 'were about to': «собирались ложиться» is imperfective past: not 'gathered' but 'were getting ready / were about to' lie down. The imperfective frames it as an unfinished intention interrupted by Mitya's arrival — exactly the standing background against which the next perfective verbs strike.
> «бабушка» — the old woman, not literally 'grandmother': Though «бабушка» means 'grandmother,' here it is used loosely for the old cook of the household (called «старуха кухарка» below) — an affectionate, folksy way of referring to any old peasant woman.

Надеясь на Назара Ивановича, они изнутри опять-таки не заперлись.  
Trusting in Nazar Ivanovich, once again they had not bolted themselves in from the inside.
> Present gerund «надеясь» — 'trusting': «Надеясь» is an imperfective present деепричастие (adverbial participle) from «надеяться», 'while trusting / because they trusted.' It shares the subject of the main clause (the two women) and compresses a whole 'because they relied on…' clause into one word — a hallmark of literary narration.
> Reflexive «запереться» and «-ся»: «заперлись» is the reflexive «запереться», 'to lock/bolt oneself in.' The «-ся» turns transitive «запереть» (to lock something) into an action the subject does to its own enclosure; with «изнутри», 'they had not bolted themselves in from within.'
> «опять-таки» — 'once again, as so often': The particle «-таки» fused to «опять» gives 'once again, predictably enough' — it carries a faint note of fateful repetition: they had carelessly left the door unbarred yet another time, the small negligence the plot turns on.

Митя вбежал, кинулся на Феню и крепко схватил ее за горло.  
Mitya rushed in, flung himself at Fenya, and seized her tightly by the throat.
> A chain of perfectives drives the action: Three perfective past verbs fire in sequence — «вбежал» (ran in), «кинулся» (flung himself), «схватил» (seized) — each a single completed event moving the story forward against the imperfective background of the women settling down. This is aspect doing narrative work.
> «за» + accusative for the body part seized: Russian says 'seized her by the throat' as «схватил её за горло» — «за» governs the accusative «горло» to name the part grabbed, while «её» is the person. This «глагол + за + часть тела» pattern is the standard way to express grasping someone by a limb or throat.

— Говори сейчас, где она, с кем теперь в Мокром? — завопил он в исступлении.  
"Tell me this instant, where is she, who is she with now at Mokroe?" he howled in a frenzy.
> Imperfective imperative «Говори» — urgency: «Говори!» is the imperfective imperative of «говорить», not the perfective «скажи». The imperfective command demands the immediate launching of the action — 'start talking, now!' — and is harsher and more insistent than the neutral perfective, fitting Mitya's frenzy.
> «исступление» — frenzy, transport: «исступление» is a strong, bookish word for a state of being beside oneself — frenzy, ecstasy, derangement of feeling. Dostoevsky reaches for it again and again to name the extreme emotional pitch at which his characters act; «завопил в исступлении» = 'howled in a frenzy.'

Обе женщины взвизгнули.  
Both women shrieked.
> «взвизгнуть» — to let out a shriek: «взвизгнули» is the perfective of «взвизгивать», a sharp expressive verb: to give a sudden high shriek or squeal. The prefix «вз-» captures the abrupt upward burst of sound — a single yelp from both women at once.

— Ай скажу, ай, голубчик Дмитрий Федорович, сейчас всё скажу, ничего не потаю, — прокричала скороговоркой насмерть испуганная Феня. — Она в Мокрое к офицеру поехала.  
"Oh, I'll tell you, oh, dear Dmitri Fyodorovich, I'll tell you everything this minute, I'll hide nothing," Fenya rattled off in a gabble, frightened half to death. "She's gone to Mokroe, to the officer."
> golubchik — a term of endearment: «голубчик» literally means 'little dove' (from «голубь», dove) and is a warm, pleading form of address — we render it here as 'dear.' Frightened common folk use it to soften and appease the person they are speaking to; English equivalents range across 'my dear,' 'darling,' and 'dear.'
> Negative concord: «ничего… не»: «ничего не потаю» = 'I'll hide nothing,' literally 'nothing not I-will-hide.' Russian requires negative concord: the negative pronoun «ничего» and the negator «не» on the verb both appear for a single negation. «потаю» is the perfective future of bookish «потаить», to conceal.
> «скороговоркой» — in a rapid gabble: «скороговорка» (from «скоро», fast + «говорить», to speak) means 'patter, a tongue-twister, rapid speech'; in the instrumental «скороговоркой» it works adverbially — 'rattling off at top speed.' It paints Fenya's terror-driven gabble, repeated again in the next segment.

— К какому офицеру? — вопил Митя.  
"What officer?" Mitya bellowed.
> «к» + dative; «какому» agreeing: «К какому офицеру?» = 'To what officer?' — the preposition «к» governs the dative, so both the interrogative «какому» and the noun «офицеру» stand in the dative. «к» here marks motion/direction toward a person, the case Fenya echoes back from her own «к офицеру поехала».

— К прежнему офицеру, к тому самому, к прежнему своему, пять лет тому который был, бросил и уехал, — тою же скороговоркой протрещала Феня.  
"The former officer, that very one, her own from before, the one who five years ago threw her over and went away," Fenya rapped out in the same gabble.
> Reflexive possessive «свой» — 'her own': «своему» is the reflexive possessive «свой», 'her own [officer],' referring back to the subject (Grushenka). Russian uses «свой» rather than «её» when the possessor is the clause's own subject; here it underlines that the officer was hers, from before.
> Colloquial relative «который» word order: Fenya's breathless syntax scrambles the relative clause: «который… бросил и уехал», 'who threw her over and went away.' «который» agrees in gender/number with «офицер» but the clause spills out of order — a deliberately oral, ungrammatical-sounding tumble that mimics her panic.
> «протрещать» — to rattle out: «протрещала» literally 'crackled/rattled through' (from «трещать», to crackle, chatter), an expressive verb of speech: she rapped the words out like a magpie. With «тою же скороговоркой» it doubles down on Fenya's machine-gun delivery.

Дмитрий Федорович отнял руки, которыми сжимал ей горло.  
Dmitri Fyodorovich let go of the hands with which he had been gripping her throat.
> «которыми» in the instrumental: «которыми сжимал» = 'with which he was gripping' — the relative «который» takes the instrumental plural «которыми» because the hands are the instrument of the gripping. The case is set by the verb's government inside the relative clause, not by the antecedent «руки».
> Dative «ей» of the affected possessor: Instead of 'her throat' as a possessive, Russian says «сжимал ей горло» — dative «ей», 'gripped the throat to/for her,' the dative naming the person the body part belongs to. This dative-of-possession is the idiomatic way to speak of acting on someone's body.

Он стоял пред нею бледный как мертвец и безгласный, но по глазам его было видно, что он всё разом понял, всё, всё разом с полслова понял до последней черточки и обо всем догадался.  
He stood before her, pale as a corpse and speechless, but by his eyes one could see that he had understood it all at once — all of it, all at once, grasped it from half a word down to the last little detail, and had guessed everything.
> Predicate adjectives, including bookish «безгласный»: «бледный… и безгласный» are predicate adjectives describing how he stood. «безгласный» ('voiceless, mute', from Church-Slavonic «глас» for «голос») belongs to the elevated literary layer — Dostoevsky chooses the solemn non-pleophonic «глас»-form over plain «голос» for gravity.
> Impersonal «было видно» + «по» + dative: «по глазам… было видно, что…» is an impersonal construction: 'by his eyes it was visible that…' There is no nominative subject; «было видно» is the neuter impersonal predicate, and «по глазам» ('by/from his eyes') uses «по» + dative for the evidence read off something.
> «с полслова» — to grasp from half a word: «понять с полслова» is an idiom: to understand instantly, 'from half a word,' before the speaker even finishes. Heaped here with «всё разом… до последней чёрточки» ('all at once… down to the last little stroke'), it conveys Mitya's lightning, total comprehension.

Не бедной Фене, конечно, было наблюдать в ту секунду, понял он или нет.  
It was not for poor Fenya, of course, to be observing in that second whether he understood or not.
> Dative + infinitive: 'it was not for her to…': «Не бедной Фене было наблюдать» is a dative-plus-infinitive impersonal: 'it was not for poor Fenya to observe.' The experiencer «Фене» stands in the dative and the fronted «Не» negates the whole proposition — an elegant, slightly archaic way to say something was beyond her in that moment.
> Embedded yes/no question without «ли»: «наблюдать… понял он или нет» = 'to observe… whether he understood or not.' The indirect question is built with the «… или нет» frame ('…or not') rather than the particle «ли»; word order «понял он» fronts the verb as the focus of the doubt.

Она как была, сидя на сундуке, когда он вбежал, так и осталась теперь, вся трепещущая и, выставив пред собою руки, как бы желая защититься, так и замерла в этом положении.  
Just as she had been when he rushed in, sitting on the trunk, so she stayed now, all atremble, and with her hands thrust out before her as if wishing to ward him off, she froze stock-still in that posture.
> The «как… так и» correlative — 'just as… so': The sentence is framed by the correlative «как была… так и осталась… так и замерла»: 'just as she was… so she stayed… so she froze.' The repeated «так и» binds her former and present posture into one frozen image — she did not stir from how she had been.
> Perfective gerund «выставив» — 'having thrust out': «выставив» is a perfective past деепричастие, 'having thrust out [her hands].' It names a completed action prior to / underlying the main «замерла» (froze), and «пред собою» uses the reflexive «себя» in the instrumental — 'before herself.' Stacked gerunds like this are pure literary syntax.
> «пред» — the elevated form of «перед»: «пред» is the bookish, shortened variant of the preposition «перед» ('before, in front of'), favoured in 19th-century literary prose for its slightly archaic, weighty tone. It recurs throughout this passage («пред нею», «пред ним», «пред собою»).

Испуганными, расширенными от страха зрачками глаз впилась она в него неподвижно.  
With the pupils of her eyes frightened and dilated by terror, she fixed them on him without moving.
> Past passive participles as modifiers: Both «испуганными» (frightened) and «расширенными» (dilated) are past passive participles in -нн-, declined into the instrumental plural to agree with «зрачками» ('with eyes/pupils…that were frightened and dilated'). «расширенными от страха» even takes its own agent-like phrase, 'widened by terror.'
> Reflexive «впиться» — to fix/fasten on: «впилась» is the reflexive «впиться» (в + пить-stem + ся), 'to fasten onto, dig into, fix upon' — here her eyes 'bored into' him. The «-ся» makes it intransitive and intense; «впиться в кого-то взглядом» is to stare fixedly, and «в него» takes the accusative after «в» of direction.

А у того как раз к тому обе руки были запачканы в крови.  
And on top of it all, his two hands happened to be smeared with blood.
> «у» + genitive possession; passive «были запачканы»: Russian has no verb 'to have' here: «у того… руки были запачканы» = 'on that one… the hands were smeared.' «у того» is «у» + genitive marking the possessor, and «были запачканы» is a short past passive participle joined to «были» — the periphrastic passive stating a result.
> «А» + «как раз к тому» — narrative hinge: The sentence opens with contrastive «А» ('and/but, meanwhile') plus «как раз к тому» ('right on top of that, just then') — a colloquial connective heaping one dreadful circumstance onto another. «того» is the tracking demonstrative for Mitya, keeping him the topic without naming him.

Дорогой, когда бежал, он, должно быть, дотрогивался ими до своего лба, вытирая с лица пот, так что и на лбу, и на правой щеке остались красные пятна размазанной крови.  
On the way, while running, he must have touched them to his forehead, wiping the sweat from his face, so that on his brow and on his right cheek there were left red smears of blood.
> «должно быть» + imperfective for inference: «должно быть» ('he must have…') is an impersonal modal hedge, and the verb «дотрогивался» (was touching, repeatedly) is imperfective — the narrator reconstructs a probable, repeated action: he kept touching his face while running. The imperfective suits a reconstructed habit rather than a single event.
> Present gerund «вытирая» — simultaneous action: «вытирая» is an imperfective present деепричастие, 'while wiping [the sweat],' an action going on at the same time as «дотрогивался». It shares the main subject (Mitya) and adds the attendant circumstance — the very mechanism by which the blood got onto his face.
> «так что» — result clause: «так что» introduces a clause of result: 'so that… red smears were left.' «остались» (perfective, 'were left, remained') reports the outcome, with «на лбу» and «на правой щеке» both in the prepositional after «на» locating where the marks remained.

С Феней могла сейчас начаться истерика, старуха же кухарка вскочила и глядела как сумасшедшая, почти потеряв сознание.  
Fenya was on the verge of hysterics, while the old cook had sprung up and was staring like a madwoman, all but fainting away.
> Reflexive «начаться» with a non-person subject: «могла начаться истерика» = 'hysterics could start.' The grammatical subject is «истерика» (feminine, hence «могла»), and «начаться» is the reflexive intransitive 'to begin' (vs transitive «начать»). «С Феней» ('with/in Fenya') locates whom it would seize — the event happens to her, not by her.
> Contrastive particle «же»: «старуха же кухарка» — the particle «же» here is not emphatic 'indeed' but a soft contrastive pivot, 'the old cook, for her part / meanwhile,' setting the cook against Fenya. This adversative «же» is one of Russian's commonest ways of marking a shift of subject.
> Perfective gerund «потеряв» — 'having nearly lost': «потеряв сознание» is a perfective past деепричастие, 'having lost consciousness,' softened by «почти» to 'all but fainting.' It runs parallel to «глядела» as an attendant state — she stared even as she nearly passed out.

Дмитрий Федорович простоял с минуту и вдруг машинально опустился возле Фени на стул.  
Dmitri Fyodorovich stood a minute and then suddenly, mechanically, sank down on a chair beside Fenya.
> «про-» of duration + «с» 'about': «простоял» carries the prefix «про-» meaning 'to spend a span doing' — 'stood [for a while].' «с минуту» uses «с» + accusative for an approximate quantity, 'about a minute.' This «про-» of measured duration recurs in the chapter («простоял с минуту»).
> «машинально» — mechanically: «машинально» (from «машина», machine) means 'mechanically, automatically, without conscious will.' It is a keynote of this whole scene — Mitya acts «машинально» twice (here and at s33), his body moving while his mind is fixed elsewhere on the catastrophe.

Он сидел и не то чтобы соображал, а был как бы в испуге, точно в каком-то столбняке.  
He sat there, and not so much thinking as if seized by fright, as though sunk in some kind of stupor.
> «не то чтобы… а» — 'not so much… as': «не то чтобы соображал, а был как бы в испуге» is the set frame «не то чтобы X, а Y» — 'not exactly that he was thinking it through, but rather he was…' It refines a description by denying the first term and substituting a truer second; «чтобы» here is part of the fixed phrase, not a purpose clause.
> «столбняк» — stupor, tetanus-like rigidity: «столбняк» (from «столб», post/pillar) literally names tetanus, but figuratively a state of being rooted to the spot, stunned into rigidity 'like a post.' «точно в каком-то столбняке» = 'as if in some kind of stupor' — Mitya frozen and uncomprehending.

Но всё было ясно как день: этот офицер — он знал про него, знал ведь отлично всё, знал от самой же Грушеньки, знал, что месяц назад он письмо прислал.  
But everything was clear as day: this officer — he knew about him, knew everything about him perfectly well, knew it from Grushenka herself, knew that a month ago he had sent a letter.
> Anaphoric repetition of «знал»: The fourfold hammering «знал… знал ведь… знал… знал» renders Mitya's stunned interior insistence — the imperfective past «знал» ('he knew, all along') circling back on itself. The repetition is free indirect discourse: the narrator's words shading into Mitya's own racing thought.
> Particle «ведь» — 'after all, you know': «ведь» appeals to shared, self-evident knowledge — here Mitya berating himself, 'he knew it, after all, knew it perfectly well.' It carries the exasperated 'and yet!' that the rest of the paragraph builds on. Such particles give Dostoevsky's inner monologue its spoken texture.
> Intensifier «сам» + «же»: «от самой же Грушеньки» = 'from Grushenka herself, of all people.' «самой» (genitive of «сама») intensifies — the news came from her own lips — and the particle «же» sharpens the irony of it. «от» governs the genitive of source.

Значит, месяц, целый месяц это дело велось в глубокой от него тайне до самого теперешнего приезда этого нового человека, а он-то и не думал о нем!  
So for a month, a whole month, this affair had been carried on in deep secret from him, right up until the present arrival of this new man, and he had never once thought of him!
> Adjective–noun agreement wrapped around «от него»: «в глубокой… тайне» = 'in deep secrecy' — «глубокой» is a long adjective in the prepositional feminine, agreeing with «тайне». Russian's free word order lets «от него» ('from him') slot inside the noun phrase, between adjective and noun: 'in deep-from-him secrecy.'
> Imperfective passive «велось»: «велось» is the «-ся» passive of «вести» — 'this affair was being conducted/carried on.' The reflexive «-ся» on an imperfective verb yields a passive without an expressed agent, foregrounding the long covert process rather than who ran it.
> Emphatic clitic «-то» and «и» of insistence: «он-то и не думал» — the clitic «-то» pins emphasis on the topic ('he, for his part / he of all people') and «и» adds 'simply, actually': 'and he never so much as thought of him!' The combination dramatizes the bitter self-reproach.

Но как мог, как мог он не думать о нем?  
But how could he, how could he not have thought of him?
> Repetition + word order for anguished emphasis: «Но как мог, как мог он не думать о нём?» doubles «как мог» before naming the subject — a rhetorical reduplication that throws the stress onto the impossibility. Russian's flexible order lets the verb-phrase front and «он» fall late, weighting the question as a cry rather than a query.

Почему он так-таки и забыл тогда про этого офицера, забыл тотчас же, как узнал про него?  
Why had he simply forgotten about this officer back then, forgotten him the very moment he learned of him?
> «так-таки и» — 'just up and forgot': «так-таки и забыл» piles particles for colloquial vehemence: «так» + the intensifier «-таки» + the 'simply' «и» — 'simply went and forgot, just like that.' It conveys Mitya's incredulous self-accusation at the sheer completeness of his forgetting.
> «как» = 'as soon as': Here «как» functions as a temporal conjunction meaning 'as soon as / the moment that': «забыл… тотчас же, как узнал про него» — 'forgot him the very instant he learned of him.' «тотчас же» ('at once, immediately') reinforces the instantaneity.

Вот вопрос, который стоял пред ним, как какое-то чудище.  
That was the question that stood before him like some kind of monster.
> Relative «который» in the nominative: «вопрос, который стоял пред ним» — the relative «который» is masculine singular to match «вопрос», and nominative because it is the subject of its own clause ('the question that stood before him'). The comma-set который-clause is the standard literary relative.
> «чудище» — a monstrous, fairy-tale beast: «чудище» is an expressive, folktale-flavoured word for a monster (related to «чудо», marvel; «чудовище»), with a touch of the grotesque and uncanny. The question rises before Mitya «как какое-то чудище» — like the dragon-beast of a Russian skazka, an apt image picked up in the next sentence.

И он созерцал это чудище действительно в испуге, похолодев от испуга.  
And he contemplated this monster truly in fright, gone cold with terror.
> Perfective gerund «похолодев» — 'having gone cold': «похолодев» is a perfective past деепричастие from «похолодеть», 'having gone cold.' It expresses the state into which he had passed while contemplating the monster; «от испуга» ('from fright') gives the cause with «от» + genitive.
> «созерцать» — to contemplate, behold: «созерцал» is a lofty, contemplative verb — 'to contemplate, gaze upon' — with an almost religious or aesthetic colouring (one «созерцает» an icon or a vision). Applied to the 'monster' of his own forgetting, it lends Mitya's terror a strange, exalted register.

Но вдруг он тихо и кротко, как тихий и ласковый ребенок, заговорил с Феней, совсем точно и забыв, что сейчас ее так перепугал, обидел и измучил.  
But suddenly, softly and gently, like a quiet and tender child, he began to speak with Fenya, as though entirely forgetting that he had just so frightened, offended, and tormented her.
> Simile with «как» + nominative: «как тихий и ласковый ребёнок» — 'like a quiet and tender child.' In a simile «как» ('like, as') takes the nominative for the thing compared, and the adjectives «тихий», «ласковый» agree with «ребёнок» in nominative masculine. The image marks the sudden, eerie gentling of Mitya's manner.
> Perfective gerund «забыв» — 'as though forgetting': «точно… забыв» = 'as if having forgotten.' «забыв» is a perfective past деепричастие, here governed by «точно» ('as though') to frame a hypothetical attendant circumstance — he spoke gently as if he had forgotten how he had just terrorized her.

Он вдруг с чрезвычайною и даже удивительною в его положении точностью принялся расспрашивать Феню.  
Suddenly he set about questioning Fenya with an extraordinary, even — given his condition — astonishing precision.
> Archaic instrumental ending -ою: «с чрезвычайною… точностью» = 'with extraordinary precision.' The adjective ending «-ою» (for modern «-ой») in the feminine instrumental is the older, bookish variant favoured in 19th-century prose; it recurs through this chapter («с удивительною готовностью», «с какою-то радостью»).
> «приняться» + imperfective infinitive — 'set about': «принялся расспрашивать» = 'set about questioning.' The perfective «приняться» (to set to, begin energetically) takes an imperfective infinitive «расспрашивать» for the ongoing activity it launches. The prefix «рас-» on «расспрашивать» gives thorough, exhaustive questioning.

А Феня хоть и дико смотрела на окровавленные руки его, но тоже с удивительною готовностью и поспешностью принялась отвечать ему на каждый вопрос, даже как бы спеша выложить ему всю «правду правдинскую».  
And Fenya, though she stared wildly at his bloodied hands, nonetheless set about answering his every question with an astonishing readiness and haste, even as if eager to lay before him the whole "honest-to-goodness truth."
> Concessive «хоть… но» — 'although… nonetheless': «хоть и дико смотрела… но тоже… принялась отвечать» is the concessive frame «хоть (и)… но» — 'although she stared wildly… nonetheless she set about answering.' «хоть» concedes, «но» reverses, capturing the contradiction between Fenya's horror and her eager helpfulness.
> Past passive participle «окровавленные»: «окровавленные» ('bloodied, blood-covered') is a past passive participle from «окровавить», declined into the accusative plural to modify «руки». Russian compresses 'hands that had been covered in blood' into a single attributive participle — typical of the language's bookish economy.
> «правда правдинская» — the honest-to-God truth: «правду правдинскую» is a folksy reduplicative intensifier — noun plus a coined adjective from the same root — meaning 'the truest truth, the honest-to-goodness truth.' The narrator sets it in quotation marks as Fenya's own peasant idiom. Such root-echoing emphasis («чин чином», «давным-давно») is deeply Russian.

Мало-помалу, даже с какою-то радостью начала излагать все подробности, и вовсе не желая мучить, а как бы спеша изо всех сил от сердца услужить ему.  
Little by little, even with a kind of joy, she began to set out all the details — not in the least wishing to torment him, but as if hurrying with all her might, from the heart, to be of service to him.
> «мало-помалу» — little by little: «мало-помалу» is a fixed adverbial pair, 'little by little, gradually,' built from «мало» (little) + «помалу» (a bit at a time). It opens the sentence to mark Fenya's mounting, accelerating eagerness as her fear gives way.
> Negated present gerund «не желая»: «вовсе не желая мучить» = 'not in the least wishing to torment' — «желая» is an imperfective present деепричастие negated by «не» and intensified by «вовсе» ('at all'). The gerund again shares the subject (Fenya) and runs in counterpoint to «спеша… услужить».
> Gerund «спеша» + dative «услужить ему»: «спеша… услужить ему» — present gerund «спеша» ('hurrying') governing «услужить» ('to do a service'), which takes the dative «ему», 'to oblige him.' «услужить» means to be of service, to do someone a kindness; «изо всех сил» ('with all her might') heightens her heartfelt zeal.

До последней подробности рассказала она ему и весь сегодняшний день, посещение Ракитина и Алеши, как она, Феня, стояла на сторожах, как барыня поехала и что она прокричала в окошко Алеше поклон ему, Митеньке, и чтобы «вечно помнил, как любила она его часочек».  
Down to the last particular she told him the whole of that day too: the visit of Rakitin and Alyosha, how she, Fenya, had kept watch, how the mistress had driven off, and what she had called out through the little window to Alyosha — her bow to him, to Mitenka, and that he should "remember forever how she had loved him for one little hour."
> «барыня» — the mistress: «барыня» is the feminine of «барин» (master, gentleman) — 'the lady, the mistress' of the household, as a servant calls her employer. Fenya so styles Grushenka, marking the social gulf and her own servant's-eye perspective; «барин» returns at s38 for Mitya himself.
> «Митенька» — the tenderest diminutive: Grushenka's parting message names him «Митенька», the doubly-affectionate diminutive of Дмитрий (Дмитрий → Митя → Митенька). The «-еньк-» suffix soaks the name in tenderness; that she used it is the very thing that makes Mitya flush (s30) and that he clings to at s44–45.
> «часочек» — one little hour: «часочек» is the diminutive of «час» (hour), with «-очек» — 'one little hour, one short hour.' The endearing suffix turns the brief span of her love into something precious and fleeting; Grushenka's «как любила она его часочек» is the message Mitya treasures.

Выслушав о поклоне, Митя вдруг усмехнулся, и на бледных щеках его вспыхнул румянец.  
Hearing of the bow, Mitya suddenly gave a smile, and on his pale cheeks a flush flared up.
> Perfective gerund «выслушав» — 'having heard out': «Выслушав о поклоне» opens with a perfective past деепричастие, 'having heard [the message about] the bow.' «вы-» gives the sense of hearing right through to the end; the gerund marks the completed prior action before «усмехнулся». «о поклоне» = «о» + prepositional, 'about the bow.'
> Subject-final word order: «на бледных щеках его вспыхнул румянец» places the subject «румянец» ('a flush') last — the new, vivid information — after the locative and verb. Russian's topic-comment order lets the flush 'flare up' as the climactic word of the clause.

Феня в ту же минуту сказала ему, уже ни крошечки не боясь за свое любопытство:  
At that very moment Fenya said to him, no longer the least bit afraid of being thought too curious:
> «ни крошечки» + «не» — 'not the least bit': «ни крошечки не боясь» = 'no longer afraid in the slightest.' «ни» + the diminutive «крошечка» (a tiny crumb) intensifies the negation — 'not a crumb's worth of fear' — and the verb still carries «не» (negative concord). «боясь» is the present gerund of «бояться».
> «крошечка» — a tiny crumb: «крошечка» is a double diminutive of «крошка» (crumb, from «кроха»), 'a wee crumb.' In «ни крошечки» it serves as an affectionate, folksy measure of 'the tiniest amount' — a peasant turn entirely in Fenya's voice.

— Руки-то какие у вас, Дмитрий Федорович, все-то в крови!  
"Your hands, Dmitri Fyodorovich, what hands you have — all covered in blood!"
> Emphatic «-то» and exclamatory «какие»: «Руки-то какие у вас!» — the clitic «-то» tags «руки» as the marked topic ('those hands of yours!'), and «какие» is exclamatory, 'what [hands]!'. «у вас» ('on you') uses «у» + genitive of possession. The whole is a vivid spoken exclamation, not a question.
> «у вас» — polite plural «вы»: Fenya addresses Mitya with «вы» (here in «у вас»), the polite/respectful form a servant uses to a master, even mid-fright. The same «вы»-register runs through her speech to him, against his familiar «ты» back to her.

— Да, — ответил машинально Митя, рассеянно посмотрел на свои руки и тотчас забыл про них и про вопрос Фени.  
"Yes," Mitya answered mechanically, glanced absently at his hands, and at once forgot about them and about Fenya's question.
> Three perfectives for a chain of quick acts: «ответил… посмотрел… забыл» — three perfective past verbs in a row, each a single completed flick of action: answered, glanced, forgot. The terse perfective sequence mirrors how mechanically and momentarily Mitya registers his bloody hands.
> «рассеянно» — absently, distractedly: «рассеянно» (from «рассеять», to scatter/disperse) means 'absent-mindedly, with a scattered mind.' It pinpoints Mitya's divided attention — his eyes on his hands, his mind scattered far off — a state the chapter returns to («очень рассеян», s58).

Он опять погрузился в молчание.  
He sank into silence again.
> Reflexive «погрузиться» + «в» + accusative: «погрузился в молчание» = 'sank into silence.' The reflexive «погрузиться» ('to immerse/plunge oneself, sink') takes «в» + accusative «молчание» for the state plunged into. The «-ся» makes the immersion something that happens to the subject — he sank, intransitively.

С тех пор как вбежал он, прошло уже минут двадцать.  
Some twenty minutes had already passed since he had rushed in.
> «С тех пор как…» — 'ever since' + impersonal time: «С тех пор как вбежал он» is the temporal frame 'ever since he rushed in.' The main clause «прошло… минут двадцать» is impersonal — neuter «прошло» with no nominative subject — and «минут двадцать» inverts numeral and noun to mean 'some twenty minutes,' approximate.
> Inverted numeral = approximation: Putting the noun before the numeral — «минут двадцать» instead of «двадцать минут» — signals 'about, roughly twenty minutes.' The genitive plural «минут» is governed by the numeral, and the inversion is a standard, idiomatic way to hedge a quantity.

Давешний испуг его прошел, но, видимо, им уже овладела вполне какая-то новая непреклонная решимость.  
His earlier fright had passed, but evidently some new, unbending resolve had now taken complete possession of him.
> Instrumental «им» governed by «овладеть»: «им… овладела… решимость» = 'a resolve had taken possession of him.' The verb «овладеть» ('to take possession of, seize') governs the instrumental, so the person seized stands in the instrumental «им» — literally 'a resolve mastered itself by means of him.' The subject is «решимость».
> «непреклонный» — unbending, inflexible: «непреклонная решимость» = 'unbending resolve.' «непреклонный» (не- + «преклонить», to bend/incline) literally 'that cannot be bent,' an elevated word for iron, inflexible determination. It names the fatal new resolve — Mitya's decision to take his own life — that now grips him.
> «давешний» — earlier, of a moment ago: «давешний» is a colloquial-archaic adjective from «давеча» ('a while ago, earlier today') meaning 'the earlier, the recent.' «Давешний испуг его» = 'his fright of a few moments ago.' The word, dated even for Dostoevsky's day, gives the narration a homely, period flavour; «давеча» itself appears at s47, s48, s53.

Он вдруг встал с места и задумчиво улыбнулся.  
Suddenly he rose from his place and gave a pensive smile.
> Reflexive «улыбнуться»: «улыбнулся» is the perfective «улыбнуться», a verb that exists only with «-ся» (one cannot 'улыбнуть' anything) — the «-ся» is lexically bound, like «бояться» or «смеяться». «встал с места» = 'rose from his place,' a common collocation for getting up.

— Барин, что с вами это такое было? — проговорила Феня, опять показывая ему на его руки, — проговорила с сожалением, точно самое близкое теперь к нему в горе его существо.  
"Master, what is it that's happened to you?" said Fenya, pointing again at his hands — said it with pity, as if she were now the creature closest to him in his grief.
> «барин» — master, gentleman: «Барин» is the address a servant gives a gentleman of the landowning class — 'master, sir.' Fenya now calls Mitya «Барин», placing him as the gentry figure she serves; the word carries the whole pre-emancipation social order in a single syllable-pair.
> Impersonal «что с вами было» — 'what's happened to you': «что с вами… было» = 'what was/has happened with you.' It is an impersonal idiom of misfortune: «что с + instrumental»? — 'what's the matter with…?' The neuter «было» has no personal subject, and «это такое» heightens it to 'what on earth is this that has come over you.'
> Superlative «самое близкое»: «самое близкое… существо» = 'the closest creature [to him].' The superlative is formed with «самый» ('the very, the most'), here neuter «самое» agreeing with «существо» — the most intimate being now near him in his grief. «самый» declines along with the adjective it heads.

Митя опять посмотрел себе на руки.  
Mitya looked at his hands again.
> Reflexive dative «себе» of the body part: «посмотрел себе на руки» = 'looked at his [own] hands.' The reflexive «себе» (dative of «себя») marks that the hands are his own — Russian idiomatically inserts «себе» where English just says 'his.' Compare «посмотрел на свои руки»; the «себе»-construction is warmer and more colloquial.

— Это кровь, Феня, — проговорил он, со странным выражением смотря на нее, — это кровь человеческая и, боже, зачем она пролилась!  
"This is blood, Fenya," he said, gazing at her with a strange expression, "this is human blood, and — God, why was it spilled!"
> «боже» — the vocative 'O God': «боже» is the surviving Church-Slavonic vocative of «Бог», used in exclamation and prayer — 'O God!'. Modern Russian has no living vocative case, but these frozen religious vocatives («Боже», «Господи», «отче») persist; Mitya's «боже, зачем она пролилась!» is half-cry, half-prayer.
> Reflexive «пролиться» — '[it] was spilled': «пролилась» is the reflexive «пролиться», the intransitive 'to be spilled, to flow out' (vs transitive «пролить»). The «-ся» removes any agent — the blood 'spilled itself' — and «она» refers back to «кровь». The agentless form lets Mitya voice the horror without naming who shed it.

Но… Феня… тут один забор (он глядел на нее как бы загадывая ей загадку), один высокий забор и страшный на вид, но… завтра на рассвете, когда «взлетит солнце», Митенька через этот забор перескочит…  
"But... Fenya... there's a fence here" (he looked at her as though setting her a riddle), "a single high fence, dreadful to look at, but... tomorrow at daybreak, when 'the sun takes wing,' Mitenka will leap over that fence..."
> Perfective future «взлетит» — the riddling 'will rise': «взлетит» is the perfective future of «взлететь» ('to fly up, take wing') — a perfective verb conjugated like a present yields future meaning, 'will take wing.' The strange poetic «взлетит солнце» ('the sun will take flight') is Mitya's own riddling image, marked off in quotes.
> Mitya speaks of himself in the third person: «Митенька через этот забор перескочит» — Mitya names himself in the third person, «Митенька», with the perfective future «перескочит» ('will leap over'). Referring to oneself by one's own diminutive is a marked, childlike or theatrical move, here charged with his fey, riddling exaltation.
> «забор» — the fence as veiled metaphor: «забор» is a plain wooden fence, but Mitya turns it into a riddle «загадывая ей загадку» — the 'high fence, dreadful to look at,' that he will leap 'at daybreak' is his veiled image for death, the boundary he means to cross by suicide. Fenya cannot read it (s42), and the reader is left to.

Не понимаешь, Феня, какой забор, ну да ничего… всё равно, завтра услышишь и всё поймешь… а теперь прощай!  
"You don't understand, Fenya, what kind of fence — well, never mind... it doesn't matter, tomorrow you'll hear and understand it all... and now, farewell!"
> Perfective futures «услышишь», «поймёшь»: «услышишь… поймёшь» are perfective futures (of «услышать», «понять») conjugated like presents — 'you will hear and will understand it all.' The perfectives promise single, completed future events; «завтра» anchors them to the fatal morning Mitya foresees.
> Indirect question with «какой»: «Не понимаешь… какой забор» = 'you don't understand what kind of fence.' The interrogative «какой» ('what sort of') heads an embedded question after «понимаешь»; «какой» agrees as a masculine adjective with «забор». The whole sustains Mitya's deliberate riddling.

Не помешаю и устранюсь, сумею устраниться.  
"I won't stand in the way, I'll step aside — I'll know how to step aside."
> Reflexive «устраниться» in the perfective future: «устранюсь… сумею устраниться» — «устраниться» is the reflexive «устранить + ся», 'to remove oneself, step aside, withdraw.' «устранюсь» is its perfective future, 'I will step aside,' the «-ся» turning the transitive 'remove' into a self-effacing withdrawal. «Не помешаю» = 'I won't get in the way.'

Живи, моя радость… любила меня часок, так и помни навеки Митеньку Карамазова…  
"Live, my joy... you loved me for an hour, so remember Mitenka Karamazov forever..."
> Imperatives «живи» and «помни»: «Живи!» and «помни!» are imperatives in -и (from «жить», «помнить»): 'Live!' and 'Remember!'. Singular and familiar — Mitya uses «ты» with Grushenka — they sound the tender, valedictory note of a man taking leave. «навеки» = 'forever, for ages,' a solemn, slightly bookish 'evermore.'
> «моя радость» — 'my joy' as endearment: «моя радость» literally 'my joy' is a common Russian term of endearment for a beloved — 'my darling, my joy.' Mitya pours into Grushenka's parting message the same tender register she gave him with «Митенька».

Ведь она меня всё называла Митенькой, помнишь?  
"She always called me Mitenka, you know — remember?"
> Diminutives: Mitya, Mityenka: Russian builds affectionate diminutives by stacking suffixes. Дмитрий becomes Митя (Mitya), then the tenderer Митенька (Mityenka). The deeper the diminutive, the more intimate the feeling; Mitya cherishes that Grushenka used the most loving form for him.
> «ведь» appealing to shared memory: «Ведь она меня всё называла Митенькой, помнишь?» — the particle «ведь» appeals to shared knowledge ('after all, you know, remember?'), reinforced by the tag «помнишь?». «всё» here is the adverb 'always, all the time.' «называла… Митенькой» takes the instrumental for the name called.
> Instrumental of the name in «называть»: «называла… Митенькой» — the verb «называть» ('to call [by a name]') puts the name in the instrumental, «Митенькой», not the accusative: 'called me [by the name] Mityenka.' This predicate-instrumental after naming-verbs is a fixed Russian pattern.

И с этими словами вдруг вышел из кухни.  
And with these words he suddenly walked out of the kitchen.
> Prefixed motion verb «выйти»: «вышел» is the perfective of the prefixed motion verb «выйти» ('to go out, exit'): the prefix «вы-» ('out') gives direction and makes it a plain perfective. «из кухни» pairs with it — «из» + genitive marks motion out of an enclosed space, mirroring the «в»/«в кухне» of arrival.

А Феня выхода этого испугалась чуть не больше еще, чем когда он давеча вбежал и бросился на нее.  
And Fenya was almost more frightened by this exit than she had been a moment before, when he rushed in and flung himself at her.
> Genitive object of «испугаться»: «выхода этого испугалась» = 'was frightened of this exit.' The reflexive verb «испугаться» ('to take fright at') governs the genitive of what one fears, so «выхода… этого» stands in the genitive. The reflexive «-ся» and the genitive object together are the standard frame for 'to be afraid of X.'
> Comparative «больше… чем»: «испугалась чуть не больше… чем когда…» = 'was frightened almost more than when…'. «больше» is the suppletive comparative of «много/большой», and «чем» introduces the standard of comparison (the earlier moment). «чуть не» ('almost, nearly') softens it.

Ровно десять минут спустя Дмитрий Федорович вошел к тому молодому чиновнику, Петру Ильичу Перхотину, которому давеча заложил пистолеты.  
Exactly ten minutes later Dmitri Fyodorovich called on that young official, Pyotr Ilyich Perhotin, with whom he had pawned his pistols a little earlier.
> Relative «которому» in the dative: «которому… заложил пистолеты» — the relative «который» appears as dative «которому» because «заложить кому» ('to pawn/pledge to someone') governs the dative of the person pledged to. The case is dictated by the verb inside the relative clause, not by the antecedent.

Было уже половина девятого, и Петр Ильич, напившись дома чаю, только что облекся снова в сюртук, чтоб отправиться в трактир «Столичный город» поиграть на биллиарде.  
It was already half past eight, and Pyotr Ilyich, having taken his tea at home, had just put his frock coat back on to set off for the tavern "The Capital City" for a game of billiards.
> Perfective gerund «напившись» + partitive «чаю»: «напившись… чаю» is a perfective past деепричастие, 'having drunk his fill of tea.' The reflexive «напиться» ('to drink one's fill') takes the partitive genitive «чаю» (the old -у genitive of «чай»), 'some tea.' The gerund sets the completed prior action before «облёкся».
> «облечься в сюртук» — to don a frock-coat: «облечься» (reflexive, «в» + accusative) is an elevated, almost ceremonial verb for clothing oneself — 'to clothe/array oneself in.' Used of putting on a «сюртук» (a frock-coat, the formal day-dress of a gentleman) it lends a faint ironic grandeur to Perhotin's ordinary act of getting ready for billiards.

Митя захватил его на выходе.  
Mitya caught him on his way out.
> Perfective «захватить» — 'caught him just as': «захватил» is the perfective of «захватывать», here 'caught, intercepted' — Mitya caught Perhotin «на выходе», 'on his way out, just as he was leaving.' The perfective marks the single neat coincidence of timing; «на выходе» uses «на» + prepositional for the moment/situation.

Тот, увидев его и его запачканное кровью лицо, так и вскрикнул:  
Seeing him, and his face smeared with blood, the other man fairly cried out:
> Perfective gerund «увидев» + tracking «Тот»: «Тот, увидев его… вскрикнул» — the demonstrative «Тот» tracks Perhotin ('the other man'), and «увидев» is a perfective past деепричастие, 'having caught sight of him,' the completed action that triggers the main «вскрикнул». «так и вскрикнул» = 'fairly cried out,' «так и» emphasising the involuntary outburst.

— Господи! Да что это с вами?  
"Lord! What's the matter with you?"
> «Господи» — the vocative 'O Lord': «Господи!» is the Church-Slavonic vocative of «Господь» (the Lord), surviving as a fixed exclamation of shock or dismay — 'Lord! Good heavens!'. Like «Боже», it is a frozen vocative with no place in the modern case system, used here as an involuntary cry at Mitya's bloodied face.
> Particle «да» + impersonal «что с вами»: «Да что это с вами?» — the opening «да» is not 'yes' but an emphatic conversational particle, 'why, but, well.' «что… с вами?» is again the impersonal idiom of alarm, «что с + instrumental?», 'what's the matter with you?'. Together: 'But what on earth is the matter with you?'

— А вот, — быстро проговорил Митя, — за пистолетами моими пришел и вам деньги принес. С благодарностию. Тороплюсь, Петр Ильич, пожалуйста поскорее.  
"Here's the thing," Mitya said quickly, "I've come for my pistols and brought you the money. With thanks. I'm in a hurry, Pyotr Ilyich, please be quick."
> «за» + instrumental = 'to fetch': «за пистолетами… пришёл» = 'came for / to fetch the pistols.' The preposition «за» with the instrumental «пистолетами» expresses purpose — going after something to bring it back. Contrast «за» + accusative ('behind'); the instrumental is specifically the 'errand' sense.
> Archaic instrumental «-ию» in «благодарностию»: «С благодарностию» ('with thanks') shows the older instrumental ending «-ию» for the soft feminine noun «благодарность», where modern Russian writes «-ью» (благодарностью). The «-ию» form is a 19th-century literary spelling, slightly formal and dated.
> Reflexive «торопиться» + comparative «поскорее»: «Тороплюсь» is the reflexive «торопиться» ('to be in a hurry'), a verb that lives only with «-ся». «поскорее» is the comparative of «скоро» with the prefix «по-» softening to 'a bit quicker, as fast as you can' — the «по-» + comparative giving a polite, urging 'do hurry.'

Петр Ильич всё больше и больше удивлялся: в руках Мити он вдруг рассмотрел кучу денег, а главное, он держал эту кучу и вошел с нею, как никто деньги не держит и никто с ними не входит: все кредитки нес в правой руке, точно напоказ, прямо держа руку пред собою.  
Pyotr Ilyich grew more and more astonished: in Mitya's hands he suddenly made out a heap of money, and what was more, the man was holding that heap and had come in with it the way no one holds money and no one comes in — he was carrying all the notes in his right hand, as if on display, holding the hand straight out before him.
> «всё больше и больше» + imperfective — mounting state: «всё больше и больше удивлялся» = 'grew more and more astonished.' «всё» before a comparative means 'ever, increasingly,' and the doubled «больше и больше» plus the imperfective «удивлялся» paints a continuous, swelling reaction rather than a single moment.
> Double negative concord «никто… не»: «как никто… не держит и никто… не входит» = 'the way no one holds money and no one comes in.' Each clause pairs the negative «никто» with «не» on the verb — obligatory negative concord. The repeated «никто… не» underlines how singular and suspect Mitya's manner is.

Мальчик, слуга чиновника, встретивший Митю в передней, сказывал потом, что он так и в переднюю вошел с деньгами в руках, стало быть, и по улице всё так же нес их пред собою в правой руке.  
The boy, the official's servant who had met Mitya in the entryway, related afterward that he had come into the entry just so, with the money in his hands, which meant that he had carried it down the street the same way, before him in his right hand.
> «сказывать» — folksy 'to relate, tell': «сказывал» is the imperfective «сказывать», an older, folk-coloured verb for 'to tell, recount, relate' (where modern speech prefers «рассказывал»). It suits the boy-servant's humble status and gives the reported testimony a homely, narrational tone.
> «стало быть» — 'which meant, therefore': «стало быть» is a fixed parenthetical inferential, 'so then, which meant, consequently' — literally 'it came to be.' The narrator (relaying the boy) draws the deduction: since Mitya entered the hall with money in hand, «стало быть» he had carried it openly down the street too.
> «передняя» — the front hall / vestibule: «передняя» (a substantivized adjective, 'the front [room]') is the entrance hall or vestibule of a house, where outdoor coats were left and servants met callers. The boy meets Mitya «в передней» — the threshold space whose witnesses matter so much to the later inquiry.

Бумажки были всё сторублевые, радужные, придерживал он их окровавленными пальцами.  
The notes were all hundred-rouble bills, the rainbow kind, and he was holding them in his bloodstained fingers.
> «бумажки» — banknotes (lit. 'little papers'): «бумажки» is the diminutive of «бумага» (paper) used colloquially for paper money — 'bills, notes.' The casual diminutive, alongside «сторублёвые» ('hundred-rouble') and «радужные», keeps the narration close to the wondering, everyday eye of the witnesses.
> Instrumental of instrument «окровавленными пальцами»: «придерживал… окровавленными пальцами» = 'held them with bloodstained fingers.' The fingers are the instrument of the holding, hence the instrumental «пальцами», with the past passive participle «окровавленными» agreeing. The imperfective «придерживал» frames a steady, ongoing grip.

Петр Ильич потом на позднейшие вопросы интересовавшихся лиц: сколько было денег? — заявлял, что тогда сосчитать на глаз трудно было, может быть, две тысячи, может быть, три, но пачка была большая, «плотненькая».  
Pyotr Ilyich, when interested parties later asked him how much money there had been, declared that it had been hard to reckon by eye at the time — perhaps two thousand, perhaps three, but the wad was a big one, "nice and thick."
> Past active participle «интересовавшихся»: «интересовавшихся лиц» = 'of the interested parties / persons who had been taking an interest.' «интересовавшихся» is a past active participle of the reflexive «интересоваться», declined into the genitive plural with the «-ся» preserved — a dense, bookish way to say 'people who were curious about it.'
> Numerals + genitive in an estimate: «две тысячи… три [тысячи]» — «две» and «три» each govern the genitive singular «тысячи» ('two thousand, three thousand'). The hedging «может быть… может быть» ('perhaps… perhaps') frames Perhotin's eyeball estimate of the suspicious sum.
> «плотненькая» — 'nice and thick': «плотненькая» is the diminutive-affectionate form of «плотный» ('dense, thick, packed'), describing the wad of notes — 'a nice fat little bundle.' The «-еньк-» suffix gives an admiring, almost relishing tone, and the narrator sets it in quotes as Perhotin's own word.

Сам же Дмитрий Федорович, как показывал он тоже потом, «был как бы тоже совсем не в себе, но не пьян, а точно в каком-то восторге, очень рассеян, а в то же время как будто и сосредоточен, точно об чем-то думал и добивался и решить не мог. Очень торопился, отвечал резко, очень странно, мгновениями же был как будто вовсе не в горе, а даже весел».  
Dmitri Fyodorovich himself, as he too testified afterward, "was likewise altogether not himself, yet not drunk, but as though in some kind of rapture, very distracted, and at the same time as if concentrated, as though pondering something and trying to work it out and unable to decide. He was in a great hurry, answered abruptly and very strangely, and at moments seemed not to be in any grief at all, but even cheerful."
> «не в себе» — 'not himself': «не в себе» (literally 'not in himself') is a fixed idiom, 'beside oneself, not oneself, deranged.' Built on the reflexive «себя» in the prepositional, it states a disordered mental state without a verb. Perhotin's hedges «как бы», «точно», «как будто» cluster around it to qualify everything he reports.
> Short-form participle «сосредоточен»: «сосредоточен» is the short (predicative) form of the past passive participle «сосредоточенный» ('concentrated, focused'). The short form makes it a predicate — 'he was [as if] concentrated' — paired antithetically with «рассеян» ('distracted'), itself a short adjective, in Perhotin's paradoxical portrait.
> «об чём-то» — colloquial «о» before a consonant: «об чём-то думал» shows the colloquial/older use of «об» (rather than «о») before «чём» — modern standard prefers «о чём-то». The indefinite «-то» on «чём» marks a specific-but-unspecified something he was pondering. Such forms keep Perhotin's speech idiomatic and period.

— Да с вами-то что, с вами-то что теперь? — прокричал опять Петр Ильич, дико рассматривая гостя. — Как это вы так раскровенились, упали, что ли, посмотрите!  
"But what is the matter with you, what is the matter now?" Pyotr Ilyich cried out again, eyeing his guest wildly. "How did you get so bloodied — did you fall, or what? Look at yourself!"
> «да» + «-то» piling on the alarm: «Да с вами-то что… с вами-то что теперь?» repeats the impersonal «с вами что?» ('what's with you?') with the emphatic clitic «-то» ('what's with you, of all things?') and the urging «да». The doubled, particle-laden question conveys Perhotin's mounting, baffled alarm.
> «что ли» — tentative 'or what?': «упали, что ли?» = 'did you fall, or what?'. The particle phrase «что ли» tags a guess with hesitant uncertainty — the speaker floats a possible explanation he isn't sure of. «упали» is here the polite-plural perfective past addressed to Mitya as «вы».
> «раскровениться» — to get all bloodied: «раскровениться» is an expressive, colloquial reflexive coined on «кровь» (blood) — 'to become covered/smeared with blood, to bleed all over.' The prefix «рас-» spreads the effect ('all over'), and «-ся» makes it intransitive: 'how did you get yourself so bloodied?'

Он схватил его за локоть и поставил к зеркалу.  
He grabbed him by the elbow and stood him in front of the mirror.
> «за» + accusative for the limb grasped: «схватил его за локоть» = 'grabbed him by the elbow' — the same «глагол + за + часть тела» construction as in s3 («схватил её за горло»): «его» is the person, «за локоть» (accusative after «за») names the limb seized. The pattern frames Perhotin physically steering Mitya to the mirror.
> «к» + dative of direction toward: «поставил к зеркалу» = 'stood him at/by the mirror.' The preposition «к» governs the dative «зеркалу» to mark motion up to a point — he positioned Mitya right up against the looking-glass, forcing him to confront the blood on his own face.

Митя, увидав свое запачканное кровью лицо, вздрогнул и гневно нахмурился.  
Mitya, catching sight of his blood-smeared face, gave a start and frowned angrily.
> Perfective gerund «увидав»: «Увидав» is a past adverbial participle («деепричастие») from perfective «увидеть» — 'on catching sight of'. It marks the prior, completed action that triggers the main verbs, sharing Mitya's subject: he saw, then started and frowned.
> Passive participle + instrumental of means: «Запачканное» is a past passive participle ('smeared') agreeing with «лицо»; «кровью» is the instrumental naming what it was smeared with — 'smeared WITH blood'. The participle compresses a whole relative clause into one adjective.
> «вздрогнуть» — to give a start: A perfective verb for a single involuntary flinch or shudder, distinct from «дрожать» (to tremble continuously). The в-…-нуть pattern names one sudden jerk of the body.

— Э, черт! Этого недоставало, — пробормотал он со злобой, быстро переложил из правой руки кредитки в левую и судорожно выдернул из кармана платок.  
"Ah, the devil! That's all I needed," he muttered with vexation, quickly shifted the notes from his right hand to his left, and convulsively yanked a handkerchief out of his pocket.
> Genitive of negation in an idiom: «Этого недоставало» — literally 'of this there was lacking' — puts the missing thing in the genitive («этого») after the negative «недоставать». It is sarcastic: 'that's the one thing that was missing', i.e. 'that's all I needed'.
> «кредитки» — banknotes: Colloquial for paper money: «кредитный билет» was the imperial credit note, the everyday banknote. Mitya is juggling a wad of these from hand to hand.
> Chain of perfectives moves the action: «Пробормотал», «переложил», «выдернул» are all perfective pasts, firing off the sequence of completed gestures one after another. Perfectives are the engine that drives narrative forward, event by event.

Но и платок оказался весь в крови (этим самым платком он вытирал голову и лицо Григорию): ни одного почти местечка не было белого, и не то что начал засыхать, а как-то заскоруз в комке и не хотел развернуться.  
But the handkerchief too proved to be all blood (with this very handkerchief he had wiped Grigory's head and face): scarcely a single spot of it was white, and it had not so much begun to dry as somehow stiffened into a wad and would not unfold.
> «оказаться» + the result 'all in blood': «Оказался» (perfective, reflexive «-ся») means 'turned out / proved to be'. «Весь в крови» — 'all in blood' — uses «в» + prepositional to state the condition the thing is covered in, a common Russian way to say 'covered in'.
> Genitive of negation in an existential: With negated «не было» the absent subject goes genitive: «ни одного местечка не было» — 'not a single spot was [there]'. The «ни» reinforces the negation (negative concord), and «белого» agrees with «местечка» in the genitive.
> Diminutive «местечко»: A diminutive of «место» ('spot, place'), here softening to 'a little spot'. The genitive «местечка» follows «ни одного».
> «заскоруз(нуть)» — stiffened into a crust: An expressive, slightly rustic verb meaning to grow hard, caked, or crusty. Here the bloody handkerchief has «заскоруз в комке» — stiffened into a wad — and 'would not unfold' («не хотел развернуться»).
> Correlative «не то что... а»: «Не то что X, а Y» is a corrective construction — 'not so much X as Y'. It withdraws the first description («начал засыхать», had begun to dry) in favour of the more vivid second.

Митя злобно шваркнул его об пол.  
Mitya flung it angrily to the floor.
> «шваркнуть» — to fling down with a smack: A loud, expressive colloquial verb: to hurl or slam something down so it smacks. «Об пол» ('against the floor') uses «об» + accusative for the surface struck.

— Э, черт! Нет ли у вас какой тряпки… обтереться бы…  
"Ah, the devil! Haven't you got some sort of rag... to wipe myself off with..."
> «нет» + genitive, softened by «ли»: «Нет... тряпки» is the negative-existential genitive ('isn't there a rag'), and the particle «ли» turns it into a tentative yes/no question — 'haven't you got some sort of rag?' «Какой» here means 'some kind of', non-specific.
> «бы» + infinitive as a wish: «Обтереться бы» — 'to wipe oneself off, if only' — is the irrealis particle «бы» attached to an infinitive to voice a wish or vague intention. The reflexive «-ся» makes it 'wipe oneself'.

— Так вы только запачкались, а не ранены? Так уж лучше вымойтесь, — ответил Петр Ильич. — Вот рукомойник, я вам подам.  
"So you've only smeared yourself, you're not wounded? Then you'd best wash up," answered Pyotr Ilyich. "Here's the washstand, I'll pour for you."
> Short passive participle «ранены»: «Ранены» is the short-form past passive participle of «ранить» ('wounded'), used predicatively: 'you are not wounded'. The contrastive «а» sets the smear against the wound. «Запачкались» is the reflexive 'got yourself smeared'.
> Imperative «вымойтесь»: «Вымойтесь» is a perfective reflexive imperative (-те polite) — 'wash yourself up'. «Лучше» softens it to advice: 'you'd best wash up'.
> «рукомойник» — a washstand: A hanging hand-basin or washstand, often a simple tip-spout vessel one pours from. Pyotr Ilyich offers to «подам» (hand/pour) the water for Mitya.

— Рукомойник? Это хорошо… только куда же я это дену? — в каком-то совсем уж странном недоумении указал он Петру Ильичу на свою пачку сторублевых, вопросительно глядя на него, точно тот должен был решить, куда ему девать свои собственные деньги.  
"The washstand? That's good... only where am I to put this?" — in a perfectly strange bewilderment he pointed Pyotr Ilyich to his wad of hundreds, gazing at him questioningly, as if the other were the one who had to decide where he should stow his own money.
> Perfective future «дену» + particle «же»: «Дену» is the conjugated form of perfective «деть» ('to put/stow') — a perfective present-form that reads as future: 'where am I to stow this?' The particle «же» adds anxious emphasis: 'where on earth...'.
> «точно» = 'as if'; dative «ему» of the one who must: «Точно» here means 'as if'. Inside, «куда ему девать» uses a dative experiencer — 'where he is to stow' — the dative naming the person on whom the action falls. «Свои собственные» is the emphatic reflexive possessive: his own money.
> «сторублёвая» — a hundred-rouble note: «Сторублёвая» (from «сто рублей», a hundred roubles) is a hundred-rouble banknote; «пачка» is the wad. A staggering sum to flash in a provincial town — hence Perhotin's amazement.
> «недоумение» — bewilderment: A bookish noun for blank perplexity, not knowing what to make of something — built on «не-» + «уметь/ум». Dostoevsky uses it repeatedly for Mitya's dazed, dissociated state this night.

— В карман суньте али на стол вот здесь положите, не пропадут.  
"Stick it in your pocket, or set it here on the table — it won't go missing."
> Paired imperatives with object fronted: Two perfective imperatives — «суньте» (stick) and «положите» (lay) — each with its destination fronted («в карман», «на стол» + accusative of motion-toward). Russian's free word order puts the place first for emphasis on where.
> «али» — folk 'or': A rustic, colloquial variant of «или» ('or'). It flavours Perhotin's speech (and recurs in Mitya's) with a homely, popular register typical of Dostoevsky's spoken voices.
> Perfective future «не пропадут»: «Пропадут» is the perfective future of «пропасть» ('to be lost/vanish'); negated, 'they won't go missing'. The plural agrees with the banknotes («деньги», «кредитки»).

— В карман? Да, в карман. Это хорошо… Нет, видите ли, это всё вздор! — вскричал он, как бы вдруг выходя из рассеянности. — Видите: мы сперва это дело кончим, пистолеты-то, вы мне их отдайте, а вот ваши деньги… потому что мне очень, очень нужно… и времени, времени ни капли…  
"In my pocket? Yes, in my pocket. That's good... No, you see, this is all nonsense!" he cried, as if suddenly coming out of his abstraction. "Look: let's first finish this business — the pistols, hand them over to me — and here's your money... because I have great, great need... and I've not a drop of time, not a drop..."
> Present gerund «выходя» + hedging «как бы»: «Выходя» is an imperfective present gerund ('coming out of'), naming the simultaneous manner of his cry. «Как бы» ('as if, as it were') hedges the description — a favourite Dostoevskian softener for half-perceived states.
> Topic «пистолеты-то», then imperative: Mitya names the topic — «пистолеты-то» (the pistols, you know), with emphatic clitic «-то» — then issues the command «отдайте» (hand them over), the pronouns «вы мне их» piling subject, recipient, object. The loose, restarting syntax mimics agitated speech.
> Genitive of absence: «времени ни капли»: 'Not a drop of time': «времени» is genitive after the implied «нет», and «ни капли» ('not a drop') is the genitive intensifier of negation. The doubling «времени, времени» conveys breathless urgency.

И, сняв с пачки верхнюю сторублевую, он протянул ее чиновнику.  
And peeling the topmost hundred off the wad, he held it out to the official.
> Perfective gerund «сняв»: «Сняв» is the perfective past gerund of «снять» ('having taken off / peeled'), the prior act before he holds the note out. «С пачки» — 'off the wad' — uses «с» + genitive for removal from a surface.

— Да у меня и сдачи не будет, — заметил тот, — у вас мельче нет?  
"But I won't have any change," the other remarked. "Haven't you anything smaller?"
> Genitive after «не будет»: «Сдачи не будет» — 'there will be no change' — puts «сдача» (change) in the genitive after the negated future «не будет». The «и» here means 'even / for that matter': 'I won't have any change to give'.
> Comparative «мельче»: «Мельче» is the predicative comparative of «мелкий» ('small, fine') — here 'smaller [denominations]'. With «нет» it asks 'haven't you anything smaller?' Note the suppletive-style stem change мелкий → мельче.

— Нет, — сказал Митя, поглядев опять на пачку, и, как бы неуверенный в словах своих, попробовал пальцами две-три бумажки сверху, — нет, всё такие же, — прибавил он и опять вопросительно поглядел на Петра Ильича.  
"No," said Mitya, glancing again at the wad, and, as if unsure of his own words, he tried two or three of the notes from the top with his fingers. "No, they're all the same," he added, and looked questioningly at Pyotr Ilyich again.
> Perfective gerund «поглядев»: «Поглядев» (perfective past gerund of «поглядеть») marks the completed glance preceding his words. The prefix по- adds a sense of a brief, bounded look.
> Short adjective «неуверенный» + reflexive «своих»: «Неуверенный в словах своих» — 'unsure of his own words'. «В словах» is prepositional after «в», and «своих» is the reflexive possessive pointing back to Mitya himself. «Как бы» again hedges.
> «бумажка» — a banknote (lit. 'little paper'): Diminutive of «бумага» ('paper'), colloquial for a paper note. «Две-три» ('two or three') is an approximate-number idiom; «бумажки» stands in the genitive singular form required after «две/три».

— Да откуда вы так разбогатели? — спросил тот. — Постойте, я мальчишку своего пошлю сбегать к Плотниковым. Они запирают поздно — вот не разменяют ли. Эй, Миша! — крикнул он в переднюю.  
"How did you come into such riches?" the other asked. "Hold on, I'll send my boy running over to the Plotnikovs'. They close late — perhaps they'll change it. Hey, Misha!" he called into the entryway.
> Perfective «разбогатеть» — became rich: «Разбогатели» is the perfective past of «разбогатеть» ('to get rich'), viewing the enrichment as a completed event: 'how did you come into such riches?' «Откуда» ('from where') asks the source.
> «ли» = 'perhaps... whether': «Не разменяют ли» uses the particle «ли» with negation to voice a hopeful 'perhaps they'll change it / let's see whether they will'. «Разменять» is to break a large note into smaller money.
> «мальчишка» + «сбегать»: «Мальчишка» is an expressive, slightly rough word for 'boy, lad' (the errand-boy Misha). «Пошлю сбегать» — 'I'll send [him] to run over' — pairs a perfective future with the perfective «сбегать» (make a quick round trip).

— В лавку к Плотниковым — великолепнейшее дело! — крикнул и Митя, как бы осененный какою-то мыслью. — Миша, — обернулся он к вошедшему мальчику, — видишь, беги к Плотниковым и скажи, что Дмитрий Федорович велел кланяться и сейчас сам будет…  
"To the Plotnikovs' shop — a capital idea!" Mitya cried too, as if struck by some thought. "Misha," he turned to the boy who had come in, "look here, run to the Plotnikovs' and tell them that Dmitri Fyodorovich sends his compliments and will be there himself directly..."
> Past passive participle «осенённый» + instrumental: «Осенённый» is a past passive participle ('overshadowed / struck'), with «какою-то мыслью» in the instrumental naming what struck him. «Какою-то» is the older instrumental ending (modern «какой-то»), and «-то» marks a specific-but-unnamed thought.
> Imperatives «беги», «скажи»: Two singular imperatives to the boy: «беги» (run, from «бежать») and perfective «скажи» (tell). The familiar singular form fits an adult addressing a child servant.

Да слушай, слушай: чтобы к его приходу приготовили шампанского, этак дюжинки три, да уложили как тогда, когда в Мокрое ездил…  
"Now listen, listen: have them get champagne ready against his coming, say three dozen, and pack it the way they did the time I drove to Mokroe..."
> «чтобы» + past-form for an indirect command: After 'tell them', «чтобы приготовили» uses «чтобы» + past-tense form to give an indirect order — 'that they get ready'. «Шампанского» is partitive genitive: 'some champagne', a quantity of it.
> Diminutive + inverted numeral «дюжинки три»: «Дюжинка» is a diminutive of «дюжина» (dozen), here breezily casual. Putting the noun before the numeral («дюжинки три» rather than «три дюжины») signals approximation: 'say three dozen or so'.

Я тогда четыре дюжины у них взял, — вдруг обратился он к Петру Ильичу, — они уж знают, не беспокойся, Миша, — повернулся он опять к мальчику.  
"I took four dozen off them that time," he suddenly turned to Pyotr Ilyich, "they know how, don't worry. Misha," he turned back to the boy again,
> Genitive singular after «четыре»: «Четыре дюжины»: the numeral four governs the genitive singular «дюжины» (two, three, four take gen. sg.). «У них взял» — 'took off them' — uses «у» + genitive for the source.
> Negated imperative «не беспокойся»: An imperfective reflexive imperative under negation — 'don't worry'. With negation Russian strongly prefers the imperfective imperative, which reads as a general 'don't be doing this'.

Да слушай: чтобы сыру там, пирогов страсбургских, сигов копченых, ветчины, икры, ну и всего, всего, что только есть у них, рублей этак на сто или на сто двадцать, как прежде было…  
"now listen: have them put in cheese, Strasbourg pies, smoked whitefish, ham, caviar, well, and everything, everything they've got, say to a hundred or a hundred and twenty roubles' worth, as it was before..."
> Partitive genitives after «чтобы»: The whole shopping list stands in the genitive — «сыру, пирогов, сигов, ветчины, икры» — partitive 'some of': have them put in [some] cheese, pies, whitefish, ham, caviar. «Сыру» shows the old partitive genitive in -у.
> «сиг» — whitefish: «Сиг» is a whitefish (a prized lake fish of the salmon family); «копчёный» means smoked. Genitive plural «сигов» continues the partitive list.

Да слушай: гостинцев чтобы не забыли, конфет, груш, арбуза два или три, аль четыре — ну нет, арбуза-то одного довольно, а шоколаду, леденцов, монпансье, тягушек — ну всего, что тогда со мной в Мокрое уложили, с шампанским рублей на триста чтобы было…  
"And listen: don't let them forget the treats — sweets, pears, two or three watermelons, or maybe four — well no, one watermelon is enough — and chocolate, barley sugar, fruit drops, taffy, well, everything they packed for me to Mokroe that time, so that with the champagne it comes to about three hundred roubles..."
> Fronted object + «чтобы не забыли»: «Гостинцев» (gen. pl. of «гостинец», the negated object) is fronted for emphasis before «чтобы не забыли» — 'mind they don't forget the treats'. The genitive follows the negated verb.
> «гостинец» — a treat brought as a present: A warm, homely word for a small gift or treat (often sweets) brought to someone, especially to children. It colours the spree with festive, indulgent generosity.
> A spill of sweets: «Леденцы» are boiled hard candies; «монпансье» (from French 'Montpensier') are little fruit drops in a tin; «тягушки» are pulled, chewy taffy. The piling-up of candy names conveys Mitya's manic abundance.
> Genitive with «довольно» + clitic «-то»: «Арбуза одного довольно» — 'one watermelon is enough' — puts the noun in the genitive after «довольно» ('enough of'). The emphatic «-то» on «арбуза» picks the watermelon out as the topic he's reconsidering.

Ну, вот и теперь чтобы так же точно.  
"Well, now have it be exactly the same again."
> Elliptical «чтобы» command: A clipped indirect order with the verb dropped: «чтобы [было] так же точно» — 'have it be exactly the same'. «Так же точно» means 'just exactly so', echoing the earlier feast.

Да вспомни ты, Миша, если ты Миша… Ведь его Мишей зовут? — опять обратился он к Петру Ильичу.  
"And mind you remember it, Misha, if you are Misha... His name is Misha, isn't it?" he turned to Pyotr Ilyich once more.
> Imperative + emphatic «ты»: «Вспомни» is a perfective imperative ('do remember'); the normally-dropped «ты» is added for insistence and direct appeal. The repetition «если ты Миша» shows Mitya's distraction — he is unsure of the boy's name.
> Particle «ведь» + instrumental of naming: «Ведь» appeals to shared knowledge — 'his name is Misha, isn't it?' «Мишей зовут» uses the instrumental «Мишей» in the 'they call him X' construction (зовут + instr.), the standard way to give a name.
> «Миша» — pet form of Mikhail: The affectionate diminutive of «Михаил». Mitya, in his giddy warmth, leans on the boy's pet name even as he can't quite hold onto it.

— Да постойте, — перебил Петр Ильич, с беспокойством его слушая и рассматривая, — вы лучше сами пойдете, тогда и скажете, а он переврет.  
"Now hold on," Pyotr Ilyich broke in, listening to him and studying him uneasily, "you'd do better to go yourself and tell them then, or he'll garble it."
> Perfective futures «пойдёте... скажете»: Both verbs are perfective futures of motion/speech ('you'll go... and tell'), conjugated like a present but future in meaning. «Сами» ('yourself') and the «тогда и» ('and then') chain the advised sequence.
> «переврать» — to garble in the retelling: A vivid verb (пере- + «врать», to lie) meaning to get a message wrong, mangle, or garble it in passing it on. Perhotin fears Misha «переврёт» Mitya's elaborate orders.
> Paired present gerunds «слушая... рассматривая»: Two imperfective present gerunds describe how Perhotin breaks in — 'listening to and studying him' simultaneously and with unease («с беспокойством», instrumental of manner).

— Переврет, вижу, что переврет! Эх, Миша, а я было тебя поцеловать хотел за комиссию…  
"He'll garble it, I can see he'll garble it! Ah, Misha, and I'd meant to give you a kiss for the errand..."
> The particle «было» — an intention undone: «Было» here is the special particle of an aborted or unfulfilled action: 'I had meant / was about to kiss you'. It signals that the intention is now cancelled — Misha will garble the errand, so the kiss is off.
> «комиссия» — an errand, a commission: Here «комиссия» means a task or errand entrusted to someone (the French 'commission'), not a committee. Mitya would have rewarded Misha for running the errand.

Коли не переврешь, десять рублей тебе, скачи скорей… Шампанское, главное шампанское чтобы выкатили, да и коньячку, и красного, и белого, и всего этого, как тогда… Они уж знают, как тогда было.  
"If you don't garble it, ten roubles for you — off you gallop, quick... Champagne, the main thing is to have the champagne brought out, and brandy too, and red, and white, and all of it, just like that time... They know how it was that time."
> «коли» = if; dative «тебе» of the recipient: «Коли» is a colloquial/archaic 'if' for «если». «Десять рублей тебе» is verbless — 'ten roubles [are] for you' — with the dative «тебе» marking who gets them. «Десять рублей» takes gen. pl. after a number above four.
> Imperative «скачи»: «Скачи» is the imperative of «скакать» ('to gallop, dash'), urging the boy to race off. «Скорей» (comparative of «скоро») intensifies: 'quick, faster'.
> «чтобы выкатили» — willed outcome: «Чтобы выкатили» ('have them roll out / bring out') is again «чтобы» + past-form for a willed command. «Главное» ('the main thing') fronts the champagne as the priority.

— Да слушайте вы! — с нетерпением уже перебил Петр Ильич. — Я говорю: пусть он только сбегает разменять да прикажет, чтобы не запирали, а вы пойдете и сами скажете… Давайте вашу кредитку. Марш, Миша, одна нога там, другая тут! —  
"Now you listen to me!" Pyotr Ilyich broke in at last, impatient now. "What I'm saying is: let him just run to get it changed and tell them not to close up, and you'll go yourself and give the orders... Hand over your note. March, Misha — one foot here, the other there!"
> «пусть» + 3rd-person imperative: «Пусть он сбегает» is the third-person imperative formed with «пусть» + a finite verb — 'let him just run'. «Сбегать разменять» chains 'run to change it', the perfective «сбегать» a quick there-and-back.
> «чтобы не запирали» — order not to close: After «прикажет» ('let him order'), «чтобы не запирали» is the negated «чтобы» + past-form indirect command: 'that they not lock up'. Imperfective «запирали» views the closing as the whole process.
> Idiom: «одна нога там, другая тут»: Literally 'one foot there, the other here' — a lively idiom meaning 'go and come back in a flash, look sharp'. «Марш!» ('March!', from the military) reinforces the order to dash off.

Петр Ильич, кажется, нарочно поскорей прогнал Мишу, потому что тот как стал пред гостем, выпуча глаза на его кровавое лицо и окровавленные руки с пучком денег в дрожавших пальцах, так и стоял, разиня рот от удивления и страха, и, вероятно, мало понял изо всего того, что ему наказывал Митя.  
Pyotr Ilyich, it seems, deliberately got Misha off as quickly as he could, because the moment the boy stood before the guest, goggling at his bloodied face and gore-smeared hands with the wad of money in their trembling fingers, he simply stayed where he was, mouth agape with astonishment and fear, and probably understood little of all that Mitya had charged him with.
> Correlative «как... так и»: «Как стал... так и стоял» — 'the moment he stood... he just stayed put'. This «как... так и» frame links the instant of standing to his frozen immobility. «Пред» is the bookish/old form of «перед» (before, + instr.).
> Archaic gerunds «выпуча», «разиня»: «Выпуча» (goggling) and «разиня» (gaping) are old/colloquial present-gerund forms — modern Russian would say «выпучив», «разинув». These frozen folk participles paint the boy's astonished posture vividly.
> Correlative «всего того, что» + dative «ему»: «Изо всего того, что» ('of all that which') uses the correlative «то, что» with «изо» (variant of «из» + genitive). «Наказывал ему» — 'charged him', dative recipient — uses «наказывать» in the older sense 'to instruct, enjoin'.
> «кровавый» vs «окровавленный»: Two adjectives from «кровь» (blood): «кровавое» (bloody, blood-coloured) for the face, «окровавленные» (a past passive participle, 'covered in blood') for the hands. The pairing intensifies the gory image the boy gapes at.

— Ну, теперь пойдемте мыться, — сурово сказал Петр Ильич. — Положите деньги на стол али суньте в карман… Вот так, идем. Да снимите сюртук.  
"Now then, let's go wash up," Pyotr Ilyich said sternly. "Put the money on the table or stick it in your pocket... There, like that, come along. And take off your frock coat."
> «пойдёмте» — let's go (hortative): «Пойдёмте» is the first-person-plural hortative ('let's go', with polite -те). «Мыться» is the reflexive infinitive 'to wash oneself'. So: 'let's go [and] wash up'.
> Brisk chain of imperatives: Pyotr Ilyich takes command with a string of perfective imperatives — «положите» (put), «суньте» (stick), «снимите» (take off) — the staccato orders marking his new upper hand over Mitya.

И он стал ему помогать снять сюртук и вдруг опять вскрикнул:  
And he began helping him off with the frock coat, and suddenly cried out again:
> «стать» + imperfective infinitive; dative «ему»: «Стал помогать» — 'began to help' — uses «стать» (perfective) plus the imperfective infinitive «помогать», which governs the dative «ему» ('help him'). The phasal «стать» marks the onset of the ongoing action.
> Perfective «вскрикнул»: «Вскрикнул» (perfective, в-…-нуть) names one sudden outcry. «Вдруг» ('suddenly') and «опять» ('again') frame the abrupt, repeated startles that punctuate the scene.

— Смотрите, у вас и сюртук в крови!  
"Look, your coat's bloody too!"
> «у вас... в крови» — possession + condition: «У вас» ('on/with you', у + genitive) plus «в крови» ('in blood') states that the coat too is bloodied. The «и» means 'also': not just the handkerchief, the coat as well.

— Это… это не сюртук. Только немного тут у рукава… А это вот только здесь, где платок лежал. Из кармана просочилось. Я на платок-то у Фени сел, кровь-то и просочилась, — с какою-то удивительною доверчивостью тотчас же объяснил Митя.  
"This... this isn't the coat. Only a little here on the cuff... And this bit is only here, where the handkerchief lay. It soaked through from the pocket. I sat down on the handkerchief at Fenya's, and the blood soaked through," Mitya explained at once, with a kind of astonishing trustfulness.
> «просочиться» — soaked through (reflexive): «Просочилось / просочилась» is the perfective reflexive «-ся» verb 'to seep / soak through'. The first is neuter impersonal ('it soaked through'), the second agrees with «кровь» (f.). The clitic «-то» on «кровь-то» foregrounds the blood as the known topic.
> Motion-result «сел на» + topic «-то»: «Сел на платок» ('sat down on the handkerchief') uses «на» + accusative for motion onto a surface. «У Фени» (у + genitive) means 'at Fenya's place'. «Платок-то» again marks the known topic.
> Old instrumental endings -ою: «Какою-то удивительною доверчивостью» shows the 19th-century full feminine instrumental ending -ою (modern -ой): 'with a kind of astonishing trustfulness'. The whole phrase is instrumental of manner after «с».

Петр Ильич выслушал, нахмурившись.  
Pyotr Ilyich listened, frowning.
> Perfective gerund «нахмурившись»: «Нахмурившись» (perfective past gerund of reflexive «нахмуриться», 'to frown') describes Perhotin's attendant state as he heard Mitya out — 'listened, frowning'. «Выслушал» (perfective) = heard to the end.

— Угораздило же вас; подрались, должно быть, с кем, — пробормотал он.  
"You've gotten yourself into something; you must have had a fight with somebody," he muttered.
> Impersonal «угораздить» — 'to get oneself into': «Угораздило» is an impersonal perfective with the affected person in the accusative («вас») — 'the devil prompted you / you managed to get yourself into [it]'. It carries a wry, faintly exasperated note; «же» sharpens it.
> «должно быть» — inferential 'must have': «Должно быть» ('must be, presumably') is the parenthetical inference: 'you must have had a fight'. «Подрались с кем» uses reflexive-reciprocal «-ся» («подраться», to fight each other) with «с кем» = 'with someone'.

Начали мыться. Петр Ильич держал кувшин и подливал воду.  
They began to wash. Pyotr Ilyich held the jug and poured the water.
> Aspect contrast: «начали» vs imperfective background: «Начали» (perfective) marks the onset; then «держал» and «подливал» (imperfective pasts) supply the ongoing background — he was holding the jug and pouring as the washing went on. This is the perfective-event/imperfective-process interplay of narration.

Митя торопился и плохо было намылил руки. (Руки у него дрожали, как припомнил потом Петр Ильич).  
Mitya was in a hurry and lathered his hands poorly. (His hands were trembling, as Pyotr Ilyich recalled afterward.)
> Aspect + «было»: an action barely begun: «Было намылил» pairs the perfective «намылил» with the particle «было», hinting the soaping was scarcely done — 'had lathered poorly'. Reflexive subject is absent here; «руки» is the direct object washed.
> Imperfective «дрожали» of duration: «Дрожали» (imperfective past) frames the trembling as a lasting state. «У него» (у + genitive) = 'his'; «как припомнил потом» is a parenthetical flash-forward to Perhotin's later recollection.

Петр Ильич тотчас же велел намылить больше и тереть больше.  
Pyotr Ilyich at once told him to lather up more and scrub harder.
> «велел» + infinitives: «Велел» ('told, ordered') takes bare infinitives: «намылить» (perfective, lather up) and «тереть» (imperfective, keep scrubbing). The aspect choice tells: lather once, scrub on and on.

Он как будто брал какой-то верх над Митей в эту минуту, чем дальше, тем больше.  
He seemed to be gaining a kind of upper hand over Mitya in that minute — more and more, the longer it went on.
> Imperfective «брал верх» — was gaining the upper hand: «Брал верх над» ('was getting the upper hand over', над + instrumental «Митей») in the imperfective renders an ongoing, incremental ascendancy — matched by «чем дальше, тем больше» below.
> Correlative «чем... тем» with comparatives: «Чем дальше, тем больше» — 'the further [it went], the more [so]' — is the standard 'the more... the more' frame, built from two comparatives. It conveys a steadily growing effect.

Заметим кстати: молодой человек был характера неробкого.  
Let us note in passing: the young man was of no timid character.
> Authorial «Заметим» — let us note: «Заметим» is a first-person-plural perfective form used hortatively — 'let us note'. The narrator steps forward in his own voice, a hallmark of Dostoevsky's chronicler. «Кстати» = 'by the way, in passing'.
> Genitive of quality «характера неробкого»: 'Was of no timid character': «был» takes a genitive-of-description («характера неробкого»), a bookish way of attributing a quality. The adjective «неробкого» (от «робкий», timid) agrees with «характера».

— Смотрите, не отмыли под ногтями; ну, теперь трите лицо, вот тут: на висках, у уха… Вы в этой рубашке и поедете? Куда это вы едете? Смотрите, весь обшлаг правого рукава в крови.  
"Look, you haven't washed out under your nails; now scrub your face, here, look: on the temples, by your ear... Are you going to drive off in that shirt? Where is it you're off to? Look, the whole cuff of the right sleeve is in blood."
> Perfective vs imperfective imperatives: «Не отмыли» (perfective past, 'you haven't washed out') reports a result; «трите» (imperfective imperative) urges continued scrubbing 'keep rubbing your face'. The imperfective fits an ongoing instruction.
> Perfective future «поедете» + emphatic «и»: «Поедете» is the perfective future of «поехать» ('to set off [by vehicle]'). The «и» is emphatic-incredulous: 'you're going to drive off in THAT shirt?' «В рубашке» (в + prepositional) describes attire.
> «обшлаг» — a cuff: A turned-back cuff of a sleeve (from German 'Aufschlag'). The whole right «обшлаг» is soaked in blood — a damning detail Perhotin keeps spotting.

— Да, в крови, — заметил Митя, рассматривая обшлаг рубашки.  
"Yes, in blood," Mitya remarked, examining the cuff of his shirt.
> Present gerund «рассматривая»: «Рассматривая» (imperfective present gerund of «рассматривать», to scrutinise) gives the simultaneous action — Mitya remarks 'yes, in blood' while examining the cuff, oddly detached.

— Так перемените белье.  
"Then change your linen."
> Perfective imperative «перемените»: «Перемените» (perfective, пере- 'change over') commands a single completed change of linen. «Бельё» is underclothing / linen as a collective neuter noun.

— Некогда. А я вот, вот видите… — продолжал с тою же доверчивостью Митя, уже вытирая полотенцем лицо и руки и надевая сюртук, — я вот здесь край рукава загну, его и не видно будет под сюртуком… Видите!  
"No time. But here, you see..." Mitya went on with the same trustfulness, already wiping his face and hands with a towel and putting on his frock coat, "I'll just turn the edge of the sleeve under here, and it won't show under the coat... See!"
> Impersonal «некогда» — no time: «Некогда» is a negative impersonal predicate ('there's no time [to]'), part of the не-кого/не-где family. It takes a dative experiencer (here unspoken 'for me') and an infinitive: 'I've no time'.
> Imperfective gerunds of accompanying action: «Вытирая» and «надевая» are imperfective present gerunds describing what Mitya does while speaking — wiping and putting on his coat at once. «Полотенцем» is instrumental: 'with a towel'.
> Perfective future «загну» + impersonal «не видно»: «Загну» is perfective future ('I'll tuck under'). «Его не видно будет» is the impersonal 'it won't be visible' construction («видно» + genitive «его»), with future «будет».

— Говорите теперь, где это вас угораздило? Подрались, что ли, с кем? Не в трактире ли опять, как тогда? Не опять ли с капитаном, как тогда, били его и таскали? — как бы с укоризною припомнил Петр Ильич. — Кого еще прибили… али убили, пожалуй?  
"Now tell me, where did you get yourself into this? Had a fight with somebody, did you? Not at the tavern again, like that time? Not with the captain again, like that time, beating him and dragging him about?" Pyotr Ilyich recalled, as if reproachfully. "Who else have you thrashed... or done in, maybe?"
> Impersonal «угораздило вас» again: Repeated impersonal «угораздило» with accusative «вас» — 'where did you manage to get yourself into this?' The «это» is a colloquial intensifier of the question, not a true pronoun.
> «не... ли» — leading questions: The «не... ли» frame voices a suspecting guess — 'wasn't it at the tavern again?', 'not with the captain again?'. The fronted «не» + enclitic «ли» make insinuating yes/no questions.
> Wordplay «прибить» / «убить»: «Прибить» here means 'to thrash, beat up'; «убить» 'to kill'. The near-rhyme (при-/у-бить) makes Perhotin's grim half-joke land — 'thrashed... or killed, maybe?' — chilling given what Mitya may have done.

— Вздор! — проговорил Митя.  
"Nonsense!" said Mitya.
> «вздор» — nonsense, rubbish: A curt, dismissive word for nonsense or rot. Mitya throws it off to wave away the questioning — and it becomes a small refrain in the exchange («Как вздор?»).

— Как вздор?  
"How nonsense?"
> Elliptical echo question: A verbless echo — 'How [is it] nonsense?' Russian readily drops the copula and any verb, leaving the bare interrogative «как» plus the picked-up word to challenge Mitya's dismissal.

— Не надо, — сказал Митя и вдруг усмехнулся. — Это я старушонку одну на площади сейчас раздавил.  
"Never mind," said Mitya, and suddenly grinned. "It's that I just ran over a little old woman in the square."
> Perfective reflexive «усмехнулся»: «Усмехнуться» (perfective, «-ся») is to give a single wry grin or smirk. «Вдруг» marks the sudden shift to grim levity as Mitya makes his black joke.
> Pejorative diminutive «старушонка»: «Старушонка» adds the slighting/affectionate-rough suffix -онк- to «старуха» (old woman) — 'a wretched/scrap of an old woman'. The expressive suffix colours Mitya's reckless, callous joke about running her over.
> Marked word order: object before subject: «Старушонку одну... я... раздавил» fronts the object for grim emphasis. «Раздавить» is perfective 'to crush, run over'. The «это» cleft and free order put the shocking deed first — only later revealed as a joke.

— Раздавили? Старушонку?  
"Ran over? A little old woman?"
> Incredulous echo: Perhotin echoes the verb and object back as stunned questions — perfective «раздавили» and accusative «старушонку». Bare repetition, with rising intonation, carries the disbelief.

— Старика! — крикнул Митя, смотря Петру Ильичу прямо в лицо, смеясь и крича ему как глухому.  
"An old man!" cried Mitya, looking Pyotr Ilyich straight in the face, laughing and shouting at him as if at a deaf man.
> Three present gerunds chained: «Смотря», «смеясь», «крича» are imperfective present gerunds piling up the simultaneous manner of his cry — looking, laughing, shouting all at once. «Петру Ильичу... в лицо» = looking into his face (dative + в + accusative).
> Dative in the simile «как глухому»: «Как глухому» — 'as [to] a deaf man' — keeps the dative («глухому») governed by «крича ему» (shouting to him). The case carries across the comparison, a neat economy of Russian.

— Э, черт возьми, старика, старушонку… Убили, что ли, кого?  
"Eh, the devil take it, an old man, a little old woman... Did you kill somebody, or what?"
> Oath «чёрт возьми»: Literally 'may the devil take [it]', a common mild expletive — 'the devil take it / damn it'. «Возьми» is a frozen imperative. Such devil-oaths recur all through this agitated scene («Э, чёрт!»).
> Tag «что ли» + indefinite «кого»: «Что ли» is a colloquial dubitative tag — 'or what?'. «Кого» here is the indefinite 'somebody' (interrogative pronoun pressed into 'anyone'). Together: 'did you kill somebody, or what?'

— Помирились. Сцепились — и помирились. В одном месте. Разошлись приятельски. Один дурак… он мне простил, теперь уж наверно простил… Если бы встал, так не простил бы, — подмигнул вдруг Митя, — только знаете, к черту его, слышите, Петр Ильич, к черту, не надо! В сию минуту не хочу! — решительно отрезал Митя.  
"We made it up. We came to blows — and made it up. In a certain place. Parted as friends. One fool... he forgave me, by now he's surely forgiven me... If he'd gotten up, he wouldn't have forgiven me," Mitya suddenly winked. "Only, you know, to the devil with him — do you hear, Pyotr Ilyich, to the devil, never mind! At this minute I don't want to!" Mitya cut it off decisively.
> Reciprocal «-ся» perfectives: «Помирились» (made up), «сцепились» (came to blows), «разошлись» (parted) are all reciprocal «-ся» perfectives — actions two parties do to/with each other. The clipped one-word sentences mimic Mitya's evasive jerks.
> Counterfactual conditional with «бы»: A pure counterfactual: «если бы встал... не простил бы» — 'if he had got up, he wouldn't have forgiven'. Past-tense forms + «бы» build the irrealis; «так» introduces the apodosis. The chilling implication: the man did not get up.
> Archaic «сию» — 'this very': «В сию минуту» ('at this very minute') uses the bookish/archaic demonstrative «сей» (here acc. f. «сию»), a period-elevated equivalent of «эту». It lends a sudden formal, declamatory note to Mitya's refusal.

— Я ведь к тому, что охота же вам со всяким связываться… как тогда из пустяков с этим штабс-капитаном… Подрались и кутить теперь мчитесь — весь ваш характер. Три дюжины шампанского — это куда же столько?  
"I only mean — what makes you want to tangle with every soul... like that time over nothing with that staff captain... You have a fight, and now you're tearing off to carouse — that's your whole character. Three dozen of champagne — what do you want with so much?"
> Impersonal «охота» + dative «вам»: «Охота вам» is an impersonal predicate of inclination — 'you feel like / what makes you want', with the dative experiencer «вам». «Связываться со всяким» = 'to get entangled with anyone at all'. The «же» adds reproachful astonishment.
> Aspect tells a sequence: «Подрались» (perfective past — had a fight, done) then «мчитесь кутить» (imperfective present — you're tearing off to carouse, ongoing). The shift from finished event to rushing present captures the impulsive pattern Perhotin names.
> «штабс-капитан» — staff captain: A specific army rank below «капитан», borne by the humiliated Snegiryov. The instrumental «штабс-капитаном» follows «с» ('with'). Such precise ranks place a character exactly in the imperial hierarchy.
> Idiomatic «куда столько» + «же»: «Куда столько?» literally 'whither so much?' is an idiom meaning 'what do you need so much for?'. «Же» sharpens the incredulous tone — three dozen bottles of champagne is absurd.

— Браво! Давайте теперь пистолеты. Ей-богу, нет времени. И хотел бы с тобой поговорить, голубчик, да времени нет. Да и не надо вовсе, поздно говорить. А! где же деньги, куда я их дел? — вскрикнул он и принялся совать по карманам руки.  
"Bravo! Now give me the pistols. By God, there's no time. I'd have liked to talk with you, my dear fellow, but there's no time. And there's no need at all, it's too late to talk. Ah! where's the money, where did I put it?" he cried, and began thrusting his hands into his pockets.
> «хотел бы» + the shift to «ты»: «Хотел бы поговорить» is the conditional of wish — 'I'd have liked to talk'. Note Mitya slips into the intimate «с тобой» (ты) and «голубчик», warming toward Perhotin even as he rushes off. «Да» = 'but'.
> Endearment «голубчик»: A tender diminutive ('little dove') used as an affectionate address — 'my dear fellow'. From «голубь» (dove) + «-чик», it is one of the warmest terms in spoken Russian and signals Mitya's expansive tenderness.
> Perfective past «дел» — where did I put it: «Дел» is the past of «деть» ('to put/stow'), perfective: 'where did I put them?'. Mitya, scatterbrained, has already lost track of the money he set down moments ago.

— На стол положили… сами… вон они лежат. Забыли? Подлинно деньги у вас точно сор аль вода. Вот ваши пистолеты. Странно, в шестом часу давеча заложил их за десять рублей, а теперь эвона у вас, тысяч-то. Две или три небось?  
"You put it on the table... yourself... there it lies. Forgot? Truly, money is no more to you than dirt or water. Here are your pistols. Strange — at five o'clock just now you pawned them for ten roubles, and now look at you, thousands of it. Two or three, I'll wager?"
> Fronted place + deictic «вон»: «На стол положили» fronts the destination (на + accusative). «Сами» ('yourself') and «вон они лежат» ('there they lie', deictic «вон» pointing) re-orient Mitya — Russian's free order lets the salient bit lead.
> Zero-copula simile with «точно»: 'Truly money to you is just like dirt or water' — no verb 'to be' in the present; «точно» ('exactly, just like') links money to «сор» (litter) and «вода». «Подлинно» ('truly') is a bookish sentence adverb. «Аль» = folk 'or'.
> Folk deictics «давеча», «эвона»: «Давеча» means 'a little while ago, earlier today'; «эвона» is an expressive folk 'look there! / lo!'. Both flavour Perhotin's speech with homely, vernacular Russian.

— Три небось, — засмеялся Митя, суя деньги в боковой карман панталон.  
"Three, I'll wager," Mitya laughed, stuffing the money into the side pocket of his trousers.
> Present gerund «суя»: «Суя» (imperfective present gerund of «совать», to stuff) names what Mitya does as he laughs — stuffing the money into his trouser pocket. «В карман» (в + accusative) marks motion into.
> «небось» — I daresay, I'll wager: A folksy modal word (originally 'don't fear') meaning 'probably, I bet, I daresay'. Both speakers toss it into the guess about how many thousands — 'three, I'll wager'.

— Потеряете этак-то. Золотые прииски у вас, что ли?  
"You'll lose it that way. Have you got gold mines, or what?"
> Perfective future «потеряете» + «этак-то»: «Потеряете» is the perfective future ('you'll lose [it]'). «Этак-то» — 'in that way, like that' — pairs the manner adverb «этак» with the topic-emphatic clitic «-то», a colloquial 'carrying on like that'.

— Прииски? Золотые прииски! — изо всей силы закричал Митя и закатился смехом. — Хотите, Перхотин, на прииски? Тотчас вам одна дама здесь три тысячи отсыплет, чтобы только ехали. Мне отсыпала, уж так она прииски любит! Хохлакову знаете?  
"Mines? Gold mines!" Mitya shouted at the top of his voice and dissolved into laughter. "Do you want to go to the mines, Perhotin? There's a lady here who'll instantly pour out three thousand to you, just to make you go. She poured it out to me — that's how she loves the mines! Do you know Madame Khokhlakova?"
> «изо всей силы»; «закатиться смехом»: «Изо всей силы» ('with all his might', изо + genitive) intensifies the shout. «Закатился смехом» — 'rolled off into laughter' — uses inceptive за- with the instrumental «смехом» of manner: he burst out laughing.
> Perfective future «отсыплет» + «чтобы ехали»: «Отсыплет» (perfective future of «отсыпать», to pour out a portion) — 'she'll pour out three thousand to you'. «Чтобы только ехали» is a «чтобы» purpose-clause with the past-form: 'just so that you'd go'.

— Незнаком, а слыхал и видал. Неужто это она вам три тысячи дала? Так и отсыпала? — недоверчиво глядел Петр Ильич.  
"I'm not acquainted with her, but I've heard of her and seen her. Can it be that she really gave you three thousand? Just poured it out like that?" Pyotr Ilyich gazed at him incredulously.
> Short adjective «незнаком»; iterative «слыхал/видал»: «Незнаком» is a short-form adjective predicate ('[I'm] not acquainted'). «Слыхал» and «видал» are the colloquial, iterative-flavoured variants of «слышал/видел» — 'I've heard of and seen [her]'. «А» softly contrasts.
> «неужто» — surely not?: «Неужто» (folk variant of «неужели») is the particle of astonished disbelief — 'can it really be that...?'. «Вам... дала» (dative recipient) asks whether she truly gave him the three thousand.

— А вы завтра, как солнце взлетит, вечно юный-то Феб как взлетит, хваля и славя бога, вы завтра пойдите к ней, Хохлаковой-то, и спросите у ней сами: отсыпала она мне три тысячи али нет? Справьтесь-ка.  
"Tomorrow, when the sun takes wing — the eternally youthful Phoebus, when it takes wing, praising and glorifying God — tomorrow you go to her, to Madame Khokhlakova, and ask her yourself: did she pour out three thousand to me or not? Go and find out."
> «как» + perfective future = 'when': «Как солнце взлетит» — 'when the sun takes wing' — uses «как» with the perfective future «взлетит» to mean 'as soon as / when'. The mock-solemn repetition and «-то» on «Феб» mark Mitya's flight into grand rhetoric.
> Imperatives «пойдите», «спросите»: Two perfective imperatives — «пойдите» (go) and «спросите» (ask) — sending Perhotin to verify. «Справьтесь-ка» below adds the softening/urging particle «-ка»: 'do go and find out'.

— Я не знаю ваших отношений… коли вы так утвердительно говорите, значит дала… А вы денежки-то в лапки, да вместо Сибири-то, по всем по трем.. Да куда вы в самом деле теперь, а?  
"I don't know your dealings... but if you say so with such conviction, then she gave it... And so you've got the cash in your paws, and instead of off to Siberia, off you go on the spree... Well, where on earth are you off to now, eh?"
> «коли... значит» inference: «Коли» (folk 'if') opens the condition, «значит» ('then, so it follows') draws the conclusion — 'if you say so positively, then she gave it'. A loose colloquial syllogism with the verb «дала» left bare.
> Diminutives «денежки», «лапки»: «Денежки» (dear little money) and «лапки» (little paws, for hands) are folksy diminutives that paint the grab earthily and ironically: 'so you've got the cash in your paws'. The «-то» foregrounds the money as topic.

— В Мокрое.  
"To Mokroe."
> «в» + accusative of destination: «В Мокрое» answers «куда?» (whither) with «в» + accusative — motion toward. The bare phrase, verb elided, is the whole answer: 'To Mokroe.'

— В Мокрое? Да ведь ночь!  
"To Mokroe? But it's night!"
> Particles «да ведь»: «Да ведь» stacks two particles for protesting appeal: «да» (but, why) + «ведь» (after all, you know) — 'but it's night, you know!'. The verbless «ночь» (it's night) carries the whole objection.

— Был Мастрюк во всем, стал Мастрюк ни в чем! — проговорил вдруг Митя.  
"Mastryuk had everything, and now Mastryuk has nothing!" Mitya suddenly declared.
> «во всём» vs «ни в чём» — антитеза: A balanced antithesis: «во всём» ('in everything', в + prepositional «всём») against «ни в чём» ('in nothing', negative «ни» + в + prepositional). «Был... стал» (was... became) frame the fall from all to nothing.

— Как ни в чем? Это с такими-то тысячами, да ни в чем?  
"Nothing? With thousands like those in hand, and still nothing?"
> «ни» intensifying a negation: «ни в чём» echoes Mitya's earlier «ни в чём» (in nothing / it's nothing) — «ни» here is the intensifying negator, not the conjunction. It strengthens the sense of utter nothingness; the verb of the full negative phrase «ни в чём не бывало» is suppressed in this clipped retort.
> The emphatic clitic «-то»: The hyphenated «-то» on «такими-то» is the emphatic, topic-marking clitic — 'thousands like THOSE', dwelling pointedly on the known sum. It is distinct from the indefinite «-то» of «кто-то»; here it lends the incredulous, insistent tone of spoken Russian.
> Adversative «да»: «да» here is not 'yes' but the folksy adversative/additive conjunction — 'and yet', 'and still'. It pits the thousands against the 'nothing', carrying the speaker's astonishment.

— Я не про тысячи. К черту тысячи! Я про женский нрав говорю:  
"I'm not talking about the thousands. To the devil with the thousands! I'm talking about a woman's nature:
> «к чёрту» — to the devil with it: «к чёрту» (literally 'to the devil') is a stock dismissive exclamation, taking the dative «чёрту». Mitya brushes the money aside to pivot to his real subject — a woman's nature.
> «нрав» — disposition, temper: «нрав» is a somewhat bookish word for innate character or disposition (cf. «нравиться», to please). 'Женский нрав' — 'a woman's nature/temper' — sets up the verse Mitya is about to quote.

Легковерен женский нрав, И изменчив, и порочен.  
A woman's nature is credulous, And fickle, and corrupt.
> Short-form predicate adjectives: «Легковерен, изменчив, порочен» are short-form (predicative) adjectives agreeing with masculine «нрав». The short form is bookish and states an inherent quality as a predicate — exactly the elevated, sententious register of recited verse.

Я с Улиссом согласен, это он говорит.  
I agree with Ulysses there — it's he who says it."
> Instrumental after «с» and «согласен»: «с Улиссом» is the instrumental of accompaniment governed by «с» (with), and «согласен с кем-то» ('to agree with someone') idiomatically takes «с» + instrumental. «согласен» itself is a short-form adjective serving as predicate.

— Не понимаю я вас!  
"I don't follow you!"
> Emphatic word order with dropped-then-restored subject: Neutral order would be «Я вас не понимаю». Fronting the negated verb and placing «я» after it throws the weight onto the failure to understand — an exasperated, expressive arrangement that free Russian word order allows.

— Пьян, что ли?  
"Are you drunk, or what?"
> «что ли» — a tentative question tag: «что ли» is a colloquial particle cluster (built on the interrogative «ли») softening a question into a guess — 'or what?', 'I suppose?'. «Пьян» is again a short-form predicate adjective, with the copula 'are you' simply unexpressed.

— Не пьян, а хуже того.  
"Not drunk — worse than that."
> Contrastive «а» and the genitive of comparison: «а» is the soft contrastive 'and/but' marking the turn from 'not drunk' to 'worse'. «хуже того» — 'worse than that' — uses the suppletive comparative «хуже» (from «плохой») with the genitive «того» standing for the second term of comparison.

— Я духом пьян, Петр Ильич, духом пьян, и довольно, довольно…  
"I'm drunk in spirit, Pyotr Ilyich, drunk in spirit, and that's enough, enough…"
> Instrumental of respect: «духом»: «духом» is the instrumental of «дух» (spirit), here an instrumental of respect/manner — 'drunk in/with respect to spirit'. The instrumental answers 'in what way?'; Mitya means spiritually, not physically, intoxicated.

— Что это вы, пистолет заряжаете?  
"What are you doing — loading a pistol?"
> Imperfective for an action in progress: «заряжаете» is imperfective present — Pyotr Ilyich is naming an ongoing process he sees happening ('are you loading…?'). The imperfective views the act as unfolding rather than completed.

— Пистолет заряжаю.  
"Loading a pistol."

Митя действительно, раскрыв ящик с пистолетами, отомкнул рожок с порохом и тщательно всыпал и забил заряд.  
Mitya had in fact opened the case of pistols, unstopped the powder horn, and was carefully pouring in the charge and ramming it home.
> Perfective gerund «раскрыв»: «раскрыв» is a perfective past gerund (деепричастие) — 'having opened'. It compresses a prior, completed action into an adverbial that shares Mitya's subject, framing the opening of the case as the step before he stops the powder horn.
> A chain of perfective verbs: «отомкнул», «всыпал», «забил» are all perfective past, moving the narrative forward event by event — unstopped, poured in, rammed home. Perfectives narrate the discrete completed steps of an action against an imperfective background.
> «рожок» — a powder horn: «рожок» is a diminutive of «рог» (horn), here the small flask of a powder horn for muzzle-loading. «забил заряд» — 'rammed the charge home' — belongs to the same archaic world of black-powder pistols.

Затем взял пулю и, пред тем как вкатить ее, поднял ее в двух пальцах пред собою над свечкой.  
Then he took a bullet and, before rolling it into the barrel, held it up between two fingers in front of him, over the candle flame.
> «пред тем как» + infinitive — 'before doing': «пред тем как» + infinitive means 'before (doing) something'; «пред» is the bookish/archaic variant of «перед». The perfective infinitive «вкатить» frames the rolling-in as a single completed act yet to come.
> «пред» for «перед»: «пред» is the non-pleophonic, Church-Slavonic-flavored form of «перед» ('before'), repeated here («пред тем», «пред собою»). Such elevated doublets give Dostoevsky's prose its 19th-century literary texture.

— Чего это вы на пулю смотрите? — с беспокойным любопытством следил Петр Ильич.  
"Why are you staring at the bullet like that?" Pyotr Ilyich asked, watching him with uneasy curiosity.
> Imperfective «следил» for a sustained gaze: «следил» (imperfective past of «следить», to watch/track) describes a continuous, durative watching — the verb of an attendant background state, fittingly paired with «с беспокойным любопытством» (with uneasy curiosity).
> Genitive «чего» for 'why / what for': Colloquial «чего» (genitive of «что») here means 'why on earth?' / 'what are you…for?'. The reinforcing «это» adds the puzzled, conversational tone; the construction is more idiomatic and expressive than a plain «почему».

— Так. Воображение. Вот если бы ты вздумал эту пулю всадить себе в мозг, то, заряжая пистолет, посмотрел бы на нее или нет?  
"No reason. Fancy. Now, if you'd taken it into your head to lodge this bullet in your own brain, would you, while loading the pistol, look at it or not?"
> Conditional with «бы»: This is the irrealis conditional: «если бы» + past-form «вздумал» in the protasis and «посмотрел бы» in the apodosis. The doubled particle «бы» plus past tense builds a hypothetical — 'if you had taken it into your head… would you look?'.
> Imperfective gerund «заряжая»: «заряжая» is an imperfective present gerund — 'while loading'. It expresses an action simultaneous with the main verb «посмотрел бы», sharing its subject: 'would you, in the act of loading, look at it?'.
> «вздумать» — to take it into one's head: «вздумать» (perfective) means to take a sudden notion to do something, often rash or whimsical. The «вз-» prefix conveys an abrupt impulse — apt for Mitya's morbid hypothetical of putting a bullet in one's own brain.

— Зачем на нее смотреть?  
"Why would I look at it?"
> Infinitive question with «зачем»: A bare infinitive «смотреть» after «зачем» forms a rhetorical 'why look at it?' — a subjectless construction in which the implied 'one / I' is left unstated. Such infinitive questions express the pointlessness of the act.

— В мой мозг войдет, так интересно на нее взглянуть, какова она есть… А впрочем, вздор, минутный вздор. Вот и кончено, — прибавил он, вкатив пулю и заколотив ее паклей. — Петр Ильич, милый, вздор, всё вздор, и если бы ты знал, до какой степени вздор! Дай-ка мне теперь бумажки кусочек.  
"It will go into my brain, so it's interesting to see what it's like… But never mind, it's nonsense, a moment's nonsense. There — it's done," he added, having rolled the bullet in and tamped it down with tow. "Pyotr Ilyich, my dear fellow, it's nonsense, all of it nonsense, and if you only knew to what degree it's nonsense! Now give me a scrap of paper."
> «какова … есть» — what it is like: «какова» is the short interrogative form of «каков» ('of what sort'), agreeing with feminine «пуля» (bullet). The explicit copula «есть» (normally dropped in the present) is an archaic, emphatic flourish — 'what it actually is'.
> «вздор» — nonsense, rot: «вздор» is a slightly bookish word for nonsense or rubbish. Mitya hammers it five times here («вздор, минутный вздор… всё вздор»), the repetition itself dramatizing his feverish self-dismissal.
> Paired perfective gerunds: «вкатив» and «заколотив» are perfective past gerunds — 'having rolled in… and tamped down'. They package the just-completed steps as background to «прибавил он» (he added), a hallmark of literary narration.
> Exclamatory «если бы ты знал»: The conditional «если бы ты знал» ('if only you knew') is used exclamatorily, not as a real condition — a common emotive idiom. The past-form verb plus «бы» voices a wish/lament rather than a hypothesis.
> The softening particle «-ка»: «Дай-ка» = imperative «дай» (give) + the coaxing particle «-ка», which softens a command to a casual request — 'just give me'. «бумажки кусочек» (a scrap of paper) shows two affectionate diminutives stacked together.

— Вот бумажка.  
"Here's a bit of paper."

— Нет, гладкой, чистой, на которой пишут. Вот так. — И Митя, схватив со стола перо, быстро написал на бумажке две строки, сложил вчетверо бумажку и сунул в жилетный карман.  
"No, a smooth, clean one, the sort you write on. There — like that." And Mitya, snatching a pen from the table, swiftly wrote two lines on the paper, folded it in four, and thrust it into his waistcoat pocket.
> Relative «который» + indefinite-personal «пишут»: «на которой пишут» — 'on which one writes' — has «которой» in the prepositional after «на», agreeing in feminine gender with «бумага». The bare 3rd-person-plural «пишут» with no subject is the indefinite-personal 'one writes / people write'.
> Perfective gerund «схватив»: «схватив» ('having snatched') is a perfective past gerund opening a chain of completed actions — «написал… сложил… сунул». It folds the grabbing of the pen into Mitya's rapid sequence of movements.
> «перо» — pen (quill): «перо», literally 'feather', is the period word for a writing pen — a dip pen or quill. The everyday detail roots the scene in its 1860s-70s material world.

Пистолеты вложил в ящик, запер ключиком и взял ящик в руки.  
He put the pistols back in the case, locked it with the little key, and took the case in his hands.
> Object-first word order: Fronting the object «пистолеты» before the verb «вложил» (and dropping the subject 'he') ties the sentence tightly to the preceding action, keeping the pistols as the topic. Russian's free order lets the given information lead.
> Diminutive «ключик»: «ключиком» is the instrumental of «ключик», a diminutive of «ключ» (key) — 'the little key'. The diminutive conveys the small, neat key of the pistol case; the instrumental marks it as the means of locking.

Затем посмотрел на Петра Ильича и длинно, вдумчиво улыбнулся.  
Then he looked at Pyotr Ilyich and smiled a long, brooding smile.
> Perfective «улыбнулся» with the «-ся» suffix: «улыбнулся» is the perfective past of «улыбнуться» (to smile), one of many verbs fixed in the reflexive «-ся» form. The «-ну-» suffix marks a single, momentary act, and the adverbs «длинно, вдумчиво» color that single smile as long and brooding.

— Теперь идем, — сказал он.  
"Now let's go," he said.
> «идём» as a 'let's go': Here the 1st-person-plural present «идём» functions as an exhortation — 'let's go' — a common alternative to «давай пойдём». «идти» is the unidirectional motion verb, picturing a single setting-out.

— Куда идем? Нет, постойте… Это вы, пожалуй, себе в мозг ее хотите послать, пулю-то… — с беспокойством произнес Петр Ильич.  
"Go where? No, wait… You mean to send it into your own brain, perhaps — the bullet, I mean…" Pyotr Ilyich brought out anxiously.
> Scrambled word order and the reflexive «себе»: The order «себе в мозг её хотите послать» front-loads the dative «себе» ('into your own brain') and object «её' before the verb «послать», dramatizing the chilling idea. «себе» is the reflexive pronoun pointing back to the subject 'you'.
> Afterthought topic clitic «-то»: «пулю-то» tacks the emphatic «-то» onto a belated clarification — 'the bullet, I mean'. The clitic flags an already-known topic being singled out, a very speech-like touch as Pyotr Ilyich nervously specifies what he means.

— Пуля вздор! Я жить хочу, я жизнь люблю! Знай ты это. Я златокудрого Феба и свет его горячий люблю… Милый Петр Ильич, умеешь ты устраниться?  
"The bullet's nonsense! I want to live, I love life! Know that. I love golden-haired Phoebus and his burning light… Dear Pyotr Ilyich, do you know how to step aside?"
> Imperative «знай»: «Знай» is the imperative of «знать» (the «-й» imperative after a vowel stem), with the pronoun «ты» added for emphasis — 'Know this, you'. The bare imperative gives the line its declamatory force.
> «устраниться» — to step aside: «устраниться» (reflexive «-ся») means to withdraw, remove oneself, get out of the way. Mitya gives it a charged moral meaning — renouncing one's claim — which he unfolds in the next exchange.

— Как это устраниться?  
"What do you mean, step aside?"
> «как это» + infinitive — asking for sense: «Как это устраниться?» — 'What do you mean, step aside?' — uses «как это» to query the meaning of a word just spoken, with the bare infinitive echoing it. The «это» adds the baffled, conversational note.

— Дорогу дать. Милому существу и ненавистному дать дорогу. И чтоб и ненавистное милым стало, — вот как дать дорогу! И сказать им: бог с вами, идите, проходите мимо, а я…  
"To make way. To make way for one you love and for one you hate. And so that even the hated one becomes dear to you — that's what it is to make way! And to say to them: God be with you, go on, pass by, and as for me…"
> Dative recipients of «дать дорогу»: «дать дорогу» (to give way) takes the dative of the one yielded to: «милому существу» (to a dear being) and «ненавистному» (to the hated one) are both datives — the indirect objects of giving. The substantivized adjective «ненавистному» stands alone for 'the hateful one'.
> «чтоб» + past-form for willed result: «чтоб» (clipped «чтобы») introduces a willed/purposed outcome with the past-form verb «стало» — 'so that the hated one might become dear'. «милым» is an instrumental predicate after «стать» ('become'), framing the new state.
> Polite/plural imperatives in «-те»: «идите» and «проходите» are plural/polite imperatives (stem + «-те») addressed to 'them'. Imperfective imperatives like these invite an open, ongoing action — 'go on, keep passing by'.

— А вы?  
"And as for you?"
> Contrastive «а» picking up the dangling clause: Pyotr Ilyich completes Mitya's trailed-off «а я…» by flipping it to «А вы?» — 'And as for you?'. «а» is the topic-shifting contrastive that pivots from one party to another, the untranslatable hinge of Russian dialogue.

— Довольно, идем.  
"Enough — let's go."

— Ей-богу, скажу кому-нибудь, — глядел на него Петр Ильич, — чтобы вас не пустить туда. Зачем вам теперь в Мокрое?  
"By God, I'll tell somebody," said Pyotr Ilyich, looking at him, "to keep them from letting you go there. What do you want in Mokroe now?"
> Indefinite «кому-нибудь»: «кому-нибудь» is the dative of «кто-нибудь», the non-specific 'someone, anyone'. The «-нибудь» series marks an undetermined person — he doesn't yet know whom he'll tell.
> Purpose «чтобы» + infinitive: «чтобы … не пустить» expresses purpose with an infinitive (same implied subject) — 'so as not to let you go there'. When the subject of the «чтобы»-clause matches the main clause, Russian uses the infinitive rather than the past form.

— Женщина там, женщина, и довольно с тебя, Петр Ильич, и шабаш!  
"There's a woman there, a woman — and that's enough for you to know, Pyotr Ilyich, and basta!"
> «шабаш!» — and that's that: «шабаш!» (from the Hebrew/Yiddish 'sabbath', via workmen's slang for knocking off work) is an emphatic 'enough!', 'finished!', 'basta!'. It seals Mitya's refusal to explain further.
> «довольно с тебя» — that's enough for you: «довольно с тебя» — 'that's enough for you' — uses «с» + genitive «тебя» in the idiom 'enough from/of you'. The impersonal «довольно» needs no subject, an expressive subjectless turn.

— Послушайте, вы хоть и дики, но вы мне всегда как-то нравились… я вот и беспокоюсь.  
"Listen, wild as you are, I've always somehow rather liked you… and that's just why I'm worried."
> Concessive «хоть и» + short adjective: «хоть и дики» — 'wild though you are' — uses concessive «хоть (и)» ('even though'). «дики» is a short-form predicate adjective (plural, agreeing with polite «вы»), the bookish predicate form that states an inherent quality.
> Dative experiencer with «нравиться»: «нравиться» reverses English logic: the thing liked is the subject («вы») and the liker stands in the dative («мне») — 'you have always somehow pleased me'. «как-то» ('somehow') adds the vague, half-conscious quality of the liking.

— Спасибо тебе, брат. Я дикий, говоришь ты. Дикари, дикари! Я одно только и твержу: дикари! А да, вот Миша, а я-то его и забыл.  
"Thank you, brother. I'm wild, you say. Savages, savages! It's the one word I keep repeating: savages! Ah yes — there's Misha, and I'd quite forgotten him."
> «дикарь» — savage: «дикари» (plural of «дикарь», a savage/wild man) picks up «дикий» (wild) from the previous line. Mitya turns Pyotr Ilyich's mild 'wild' into a self-flagellating refrain — 'savages, savages!'.
> Emphatic «только и» + «твержу»: «только и … что/как» means 'do nothing but —'; «одно только и твержу» = 'the one thing I keep repeating'. «твержу» is imperfective present, conveying obsessive repetition. The construction concentrates focus on that single word.
> The emphatic «я-то» + intensifying «и»: «я-то» uses the contrastive «-то» clitic — 'I, for my part'; the «и» before «забыл» intensifies ('and clean forgot him'). Together with «а» they give the line its self-mocking, conversational lilt.

Вошел впопыхах Миша с пачкой размененных денег и отрапортовал, что у Плотниковых «все заходили» и бутылки волокут, и рыбу, и чай — сейчас всё готово будет.  
Misha came hurrying in with a bundle of changed money and reported that at the Plotnikovs' "everyone was on the move" — hauling out the bottles, and the fish, and the tea — and that everything would be ready in a moment.
> «впопыхах» — in a flurry: «впопыхах» is an adverb meaning 'in a great hurry', 'in a flurry/rush'. It paints Misha bursting in breathlessly with the changed money.
> Reported speech with «что»: «отрапортовал, что …» introduces indirect speech with «что» ('reported that…'). Inside, «волокут» is the indefinite-personal 3rd-plural ('they're hauling'), and «всё готово будет» is a compound future ('everything will be ready').

Митя схватил десятирублевую и подал Петру Ильичу, а другую десятирублевую кинул Мише.  
Mitya seized a ten-rouble note and handed it to Pyotr Ilyich, then tossed another ten-rouble note to Misha.
> Contrastive «а» pairing two gifts: «а другую … кинул» sets the second note against the first with the mild contrastive «а» ('while the other one he tossed'). The verbs «схватил… подал… кинул» are perfectives narrating three quick completed moves.

— Не сметь! — вскричал Петр Ильич. — У меня дома нельзя, да и дурное баловство это. Спрячьте ваши деньги, вот сюда положите, чего их сорить-то? Завтра же пригодятся, ко мне же ведь и придете десять рублей просить. Что это вы в боковой карман всё суете? Эй, потеряете!  
"Don't you dare!" cried Pyotr Ilyich. "Not in my house — besides, it's bad to spoil the boy. Put your money away, set it down here — what's the use of scattering it about? It'll come in handy tomorrow, and tomorrow you'll be coming to me to beg ten roubles. What's this — keeping shoving it all into your side pocket? Hey, you'll lose it!"
> Infinitive as a sharp command: «Не сметь!» — a bare negated infinitive — functions as a categorical prohibition: 'Don't you dare!'. The infinitive-imperative is curt and authoritative, stronger than an ordinary «не смейте».
> Genitive object + «-то»: 'why scatter them?': «чего … сорить-то?» = 'what's the use of scattering them?'. «чего» is the genitive 'why/what for', «их» the object of «сорить» (to squander/litter), and «-то» adds the chiding, conversational emphasis.
> Stacked particles «же … ведь … и»: «же», «ведь», and «и» pile up to press the point — 'you'll come to ME, you know, of all people, to beg ten roubles'. «ведь» appeals to shared knowledge, «же» insists, and «и» here means 'the very same'; together they carry the speaker's exasperated certainty.
> «баловство» — spoiling, indulgence: «баловство» is naughtiness or, here, indulgent spoiling ('дурное баловство' — bad spoiling). Pyotr Ilyich objects that pressing money on the boy spoils him; the word carries a mildly disapproving, homely flavor.

— Слушай, милый человек, поедем в Мокрое вместе?  
"Listen, my dear man, won't you come to Mokroe with me?"
> Perfective future «поедем» as invitation: «поедем» is the perfective (simple) future of «поехать» — its present-form ending carries future meaning. Posed as a question it works as a friendly invitation: 'shall we drive to Mokroe together?'. «поехать» is the prefixed perfective of the motion verb «ехать».

— Мне-то зачем туда?  
"What would I do there?"
> Dative «мне» + «-то» in a subjectless question: «Мне-то зачем туда?» — 'what would I do there?' — is a subjectless question with the dative experiencer «мне» and emphatic «-то» ('me, of all people'). No verb is needed; the dative-plus-adverb frame carries the whole meaning.

— Слушай, хочешь сейчас бутылку откупорю, выпьем за жизнь! Мне хочется выпить, а пуще всего с тобою выпить. Никогда я с тобою не пил, а?  
"Listen — shall I uncork a bottle right now, and we'll drink to life! I want a drink, and most of all I want to drink with you. I've never once had a drink with you, eh?"
> «хочешь» + perfective future as an offer: «хочешь … откупорю?» juxtaposes «хочешь» ('do you want') with the perfective future «откупорю» ('I'll uncork') to make a lively offer — 'want me to uncork a bottle?'. Russian readily drops a linking 'that I' here.
> «пуще» — an archaic 'more': «пуще» is an archaic/folksy comparative meaning 'more', and «пуще всего» = 'most of all'. The form is bookish-colloquial, lending Mitya's outpouring a heightened, slightly old-fashioned color.
> Negative concord with «никогда … не»: «Никогда … не пил» shows negative concord: the negative adverb «никогда» (never) still requires «не» on the verb. Imperfective «пил» states the general fact of never-having-drunk-together; «с тобою» is instrumental of accompaniment.

— Пожалуй, в трактире можно, пойдем, я туда сам сейчас отправляюсь.  
"All right, we can do it at the tavern — let's go, I'm heading there myself just now."
> Imperfective present for imminent action; «сам»: «отправляюсь» (imperfective present of «отправляться», to set off) here denotes an imminent, planned action — 'I'm heading there myself just now'. «сам» is the intensifier 'myself', and «-ся» marks the verb's middle, self-directed sense.

— Некогда в трактире, а у Плотниковых в лавке, в задней комнате. Хочешь, я тебе одну загадку загадаю сейчас.  
"No time for the tavern — at the Plotnikovs' shop instead, in the back room. Shall I set you a riddle right now?"
> Impersonal «некогда» — no time: «некогда» means 'there's no time', an impersonal negative adverb that takes no nominative subject (the doer would stand in the dative). The clipped «Некогда в трактире» = 'no time for the tavern'.
> Figura etymologica «загадку загадаю»: «загадку загадаю» pairs a noun and verb from the same root ('a riddle I'll riddle' = 'set you a riddle') — a figura etymologica idiomatic in Russian. «загадаю» is perfective future; «одну» here means 'a' rather than 'one'.

— Загадай.  
"Set it."
> Perfective imperative «загадай»: «Загадай» is the perfective imperative of «загадать» — 'set it (and get it done)'. A perfective command calls for a single completed act, here answering Mitya's offer with one curt word.

Митя вынул из жилета свою бумажку, развернул ее и показал. Четким и крупным почерком было на ней написано:  
Mitya drew his paper out of his waistcoat, unfolded it, and showed it. On it, in a clear, bold hand, was written:
> Perfective narrative chain: «вынул, развернул, показал» — drew out, unfolded, showed — are three perfective past verbs advancing the action step by step. The subject 'Mitya' governs all three; the perfectives give the brisk, sequential rhythm of stage business.
> Passive participle short form + instrumental of means: «было … написано» is the periphrastic passive: short-form past passive participle «написано» + «было». «Чётким и крупным почерком» is the instrumental of means — 'in a clear, bold hand'. The construction names a result and how it was produced.

«Казню себя за всю жизнь, всю жизнь мою наказую!»  
"I punish myself for my whole life; my whole life I chastise!"
> «наказую» — archaic 'I chastise': «наказую» is an archaic/Church-Slavonic 1st-person form (modern «наказываю», I punish/chastise), paired with «казню себя» (I execute/punish myself). The solemn old endings give Mitya's written self-sentence the ring of liturgical condemnation.
> Reflexive «себя» as object: «себя» is the reflexive pronoun (object 'myself'), referring back to the subject 'I'; in the second clause «всю жизнь мою» is the object and 'myself' is understood. The mirrored structure — punish myself / my life I chastise — is rhetorically charged.

— Право, скажу кому-нибудь, пойду сейчас и скажу, — проговорил, прочитав бумажку, Петр Ильич.  
"Really, I'll tell somebody — I'll go right now and tell them," said Pyotr Ilyich, having read the paper.
> Perfective gerund «прочитав»: «прочитав» is a perfective past gerund — 'having read'. It marks the completed act preceding «проговорил» (he uttered), sharing Pyotr Ilyich's subject: he speaks after reading the note.

— Не успеешь, голубчик, идем и выпьем, марш!  
"You won't have time, my dear — come, let's drink, march!"
> Perfective future «успеешь»: «успеешь» is the perfective (simple) future of «успеть» (to manage in time) — 'you won't have time'. The perfective frames the failure to make it as a single, definite outcome.
> «голубчик» — my dear (little dove): «голубчик» (a diminutive of «голубь», dove) is an affectionate term of address — 'my dear fellow'. The dove-diminutive carries warm, coaxing intimacy as Mitya hurries his reluctant friend along.

Лавка Плотниковых приходилась почти через один только дом от Петра Ильича, на углу улицы.  
The Plotnikovs' shop stood scarcely more than one house away from Pyotr Ilyich's, on the corner of the street.
> Imperfective «приходилась» for a standing fact: «приходилась» (imperfective past of «приходиться» in the sense 'to be situated/work out') describes a static state — where the shop stood relative to the house. The «-ся» verb here is impersonal-locative, not reflexive in meaning.

Это был самый главный бакалейный магазин в нашем городе, богатых торговцев, и сам по себе весьма недурной.  
It was the chief grocery in our town, owned by wealthy merchants, and in itself a thoroughly respectable establishment.
> Superlative «самый главный»: «самый главный» forms the superlative periphrastically with «самый» ('the very chief/principal'), which declines along with the adjective. «Это был … магазин» is a past-tense identifying clause where «был» agrees with masculine «магазин».
> Genitive of origin/ownership: «богатых торговцев» (genitive plural) loosely marks ownership — '[the shop] of wealthy merchants'. The genitive is Russian's all-purpose 'of'-case; «торговец» (merchant) names the prosperous shopkeeping class.

Было всё, что и в любом магазине в столице, всякая бакалея: вина «разлива братьев Елисеевых», фрукты, сигары, чай, сахар, кофе и проч.  
It had everything you would find in any shop in the capital, every sort of grocery: wines "bottled by the Yeliseyev Brothers," fruit, cigars, tea, sugar, coffee, and the rest.
> «и проч.» — 'and so forth': «и проч.» abbreviates «и прочее» ('and the rest, et cetera'), a common bookish list-closer. The narrator uses it to wave off the remaining inventory.

Всегда сидели три приказчика и бегали два рассыльных мальчика.  
There were always three clerks behind the counter and two errand-boys running about.
> «три» + genitive singular «приказчика»: After «три» the counted noun takes the genitive singular: «три приказчика» (three clerks). «Всегда сидели… бегали» are imperfective pasts of habit — the recurring scene of the busy shop.
> «приказчик» — shop clerk / steward: A «приказчик» was a hired shop assistant or estate steward — the salesman behind the counter here. «рассыльные мальчики» are the errand-boys who carry deliveries; both are period fixtures of merchant trade.

Хотя край наш и обеднел, помещики разъехались, торговля затихла, а бакалея процветала по-прежнему и даже всё лучше и лучше с каждым годом: на эти предметы не переводились покупатели.  
Though our region had grown poor, the landowners had scattered, and trade had fallen quiet, the grocery business flourished as before — better, in fact, year by year: for these goods there was never any shortage of buyers.
> Concessive «хотя … и … а»: «Хотя … и …» ('although') sets up a concession answered by «а» ('yet') — although the region grew poor, the grocery trade flourished. The pleonastic «и» after «хотя» reinforces the concessive; «а» pivots to the contrasting main clause.
> «не переводились» — never ran short: «переводиться» (here «не переводились») means 'to run out, give out, cease to exist'; with negation, 'there was never a shortage of buyers'. The «-ся» verb is intransitive/middle, and the genitive-flavored negated subject phrasing underscores the inexhaustible custom.

Митю ждали в лавке с нетерпением.  
At the shop Mitya was awaited with impatience.
> Indefinite-personal «ждали» + animate accusative «Митю»: Subjectless 3rd-plural «ждали» ('they awaited / he was awaited') is the indefinite-personal construction. «Митю» is the accusative of the animate name «Митя», borrowing the form of an «-а»-stem; the object is fronted as the topic.

Слишком помнили, как он недели три-четыре назад забрал точно так же разом всякого товару и вин на несколько сот рублей чистыми деньгами (в кредит-то бы ему ничего, конечно, не поверили), помнили, что так же, как и теперь, в руках его торчала целая пачка радужных и он разбрасывал их зря, не торгуясь, не соображая и не желая соображать, на что ему столько товару, вина и проч.?  
They remembered all too well how, some three or four weeks before, he had carried off in just the same way, at one stroke, goods and wines of every kind to the tune of several hundred roubles in cash (on credit, of course, they'd not have trusted him with anything); they remembered that then, just as now, a whole wad of rainbow notes had stuck out of his hands, and that he had flung them about heedlessly, without haggling, without reckoning and without any wish to reckon what he needed with so much goods and wine and the rest.
> Counterfactual «бы» + negative concord: «бы … не поверили» is the conditional/counterfactual — 'they'd not have trusted him'. «ничего … не» shows negative concord (nothing + verb-«не»), «ему» is the dative of the person trusted-with, and «-то» on «кредит» emphasizes the contrasting hypothetical of credit.
> «радужная» — a rainbow note: «радужная» (literally 'rainbow-colored') was slang for the multicolored hundred-rouble banknote. «целая пачка радужных» — 'a whole wad of rainbow notes' — conveys an ostentatious fortune in Mitya's fist.
> Chain of negated imperfective gerunds: «не торгуясь, не соображая, не желая» are three imperfective present gerunds, all negated — 'without haggling, without reckoning, without wishing'. Stacking negative gerunds is a vivid literary way to pile up the manner of Mitya's heedless spending.

Во всем городе потом говорили, что он тогда, укатив с Грушенькой в Мокрое, «просадил в одну ночь и следующий за тем день три тысячи разом и воротился с кутежа без гроша, в чем мать родила».  
All over town they said afterward that, having driven off with Grushenka to Mokroe that time, he had "blown three thousand in a single night and the following day, all at once, and come back from the spree without a kopek, as naked as the day he was born."
> Perfective gerund of prefixed motion «укатив»: «укатив» is a perfective past gerund from «укатить» — a prefixed motion verb («у-» = 'away') meaning to drive/roll off. As a gerund it sets the prior circumstance ('having driven off to Mokroe') for the main clause about his squandering.
> «просадить», «кутёж» — to blow money on a binge: «просадить» is slang for squandering/blowing money; «кутёж» is a wild drinking-spree. «без гроша» (without a kopek) and «в чём мать родила» (lit. 'as one's mother bore one', i.e. stark naked / penniless) are stock idioms capping the tale of his ruin.

Поднял тогда цыган целый табор (в то время у нас закочевавший), которые в два дня вытащили-де у него у пьяного без счету денег и выпили без счету дорогого вина.  
He had roused a whole Gypsy camp then (one that was encamped in our parts at the time), and they, so the story went, in two days had dragged untold sums of money out of him while he was drunk and drunk up untold quantities of his expensive wine.
> The reportative particle «-де»: «-де» is an old enclitic marking reported, second-hand speech — 'so it was said', 'allegedly'. It signals the narrator is relaying town rumor about the Gypsies, not vouching for it.
> «без счёту» — without count: «без счёту» (the preposition «без» + genitive) is an idiom for 'untold amounts, beyond counting', repeated for emphasis — they dragged out untold money and drank untold wine. «без» always governs the genitive.

Рассказывали, смеясь над Митей, что в Мокром он запоил шампанским сиволапых мужиков, деревенских девок и баб закормил конфетами и страсбургскими пирогами.  
People told, laughing at Mitya, how out at Mokroe he had plied boorish peasants with champagne, and stuffed the village girls and women with sweets and Strasbourg pies.
> Indefinite-personal verb + imperfective gerund: «Рассказывали» is again the subjectless 'they told / it was told'; «смеясь над Митей» is an imperfective present gerund ('laughing at Mitya') giving the attendant manner. «над» + instrumental «Митей» is the construction for laughing AT someone.
> «сиволапый мужик» — a boorish peasant: «сиволапый» is a contemptuous epithet — 'clumsy, boorish, uncouth' (literally 'grey-pawed'). «запоил шампанским» (plied with champagne) and «закормил конфетами» (stuffed with sweets) use the «за-» prefix for 'to the point of excess'.
> «девки» and «бабы»: «девки» (village/peasant girls) and «бабы» (peasant women, married women) are plain, folk-register words for countrywomen — neutral or slightly coarse in this peasant context. «страсбургскими пирогами» refers to luxury Strasbourg (foie-gras) pies, an absurd extravagance for a village feast.

Смеялись тоже у нас, в трактире особенно, над собственным откровенным и публичным тогдашним признанием Мити (не в глаза ему, конечно, смеялись, в глаза ему смеяться было несколько опасно), что от Грушеньки он за всю ту «эскападу» только и получил, что «позволила ему свою ножку поцеловать, а более ничего не позволила».  
They laughed too among us, in the tavern especially, at Mitya's own frank, public confession at the time (not to his face, of course — to laugh in his face was rather dangerous) that out of that whole "escapade" all he had gotten from Grushenka was that "she let him kiss her little foot, and nothing more than that would she allow."
> Impersonal predicate «было … опасно» + dative: «смеяться … было опасно» is an impersonal construction — an infinitive subject with the neuter predicate «опасно» ('it was dangerous to laugh'). «в глаза ему» ('to his face') sets up the idiom; the dative «ему» marks the one laughed at.
> Diminutive «ножка»: «ножку» is the diminutive of «нога» (foot/leg) — 'her little foot'. The endearing diminutive lends a tender, almost reverent note to Mitya's confession that Grushenka 'let him kiss her little foot'.
> Negative concord with «более ничего … не»: «более ничего … не позволила» — 'allowed nothing more' — again shows negative concord (the negative pronoun «ничего» co-occurring with verbal «не»). «эскападу» (escapade) is a Gallicism flagged in quotation marks as Mitya's own dandyish word.

Когда Митя с Петром Ильичом подошли к лавке, то у входа нашли уже готовую тройку, в телеге, покрытой ковром, с колокольчиками и бубенчиками и с ямщиком Андреем, ожидавшим Митю.  
When Mitya and Pyotr Ilyich came up to the shop, they found a troika already harnessed and waiting at the entrance — a cart spread with a rug, hung with little bells and jingle-bells, and Andrei the driver waiting for Mitya.
> Past active participle «ожидавшим»: «ожидавшим» is a past active participle ('who was waiting'), in the instrumental to agree with «ямщиком Андреем» after «с». It condenses a «который»-clause ('the driver Andrei, who was waiting for Mitya') into a single modifier — a hallmark of literary description.

В лавке почти совсем успели «сладить» один ящик с товаром и ждали только появления Мити, чтобы заколотить и уложить его на телегу.  
At the shop they had very nearly finished "packing up" one case of goods, and were only waiting for Mitya to appear so as to nail it shut and load it onto the cart.
> Purpose «чтобы» + infinitives: «чтобы заколотить и уложить» — 'so as to nail shut and load' — is a purpose clause with infinitives (the subject being the same shop-hands). Both are perfective infinitives, naming the single completed acts they were waiting to perform.
> «сладить» — to get done, pack up: «сладить» (here in quotation marks as shop jargon) means to manage, fix up, or get a job done — informally, to finish packing the case. The scare-quotes flag the colloquial trade-usage.

Петр Ильич удивился.  
Pyotr Ilyich was astonished.

— Да откуда поспела у тебя тройка? — спросил он Митю.  
"Where did you get a troika so quickly?" he asked Mitya.
> Opening «да» and perfective «поспела»: Sentence-initial «да» here is an expressive opener ('But where…?'), not 'yes'. «поспела» is the perfective past of «поспеть» (to be ready/turn up in time) — 'how did a troika turn up so fast?'; «у тебя» (at yours) marks possession/availability.

— К тебе бежал, вот его, Андрея, встретил и велел ему прямо сюда к лавке и подъезжать. Времени терять нечего! В прошлый раз с Тимофеем ездил, да Тимофей теперь тю-тю-тю, вперед меня с волшебницей одной укатил. Андрей, опоздаем очень?  
"I was running to your place when I met this fellow, Andrei, and told him to drive straight here to the shop. No time to lose! Last time I went with Timofei, but Timofei's flown off now — gone on ahead of me with some enchantress. Andrei, will we be very late?"
> Imperfective «бежал» (background) vs perfective «встретил» (event): «бежал» (imperfective, unidirectional motion verb) sets the ongoing background — 'I was running to your place' — against which the perfective «встретил» ('met') marks the punctual event. This is the classic aspect contrast that drives Russian narrative.
> «нечего» + infinitive with genitive object: «нечего терять» ('there's nothing to lose') is a negative-impersonal construction; the doer, if named, would be dative. The object «времени» stands in the genitive — the genitive of negation under «нечего» — giving 'no time to lose'.
> «тю-тю» — gone, vanished: «тю-тю» is a childish/colloquial interjection meaning 'all gone', 'vanished into thin air' — here tripled for comic effect about Timofei having flown off. «волшебница» ('enchantress, sorceress') is Mitya's playful word for the woman Timofei carried away.

— Часом только разве прежде нашего прибудут, да и того не будет, часом всего упредят! — поспешно отозвался Андрей. — Я Тимофея и снарядил, знаю, как поедут. Их езда не наша езда, Дмитрий Федорович, где им до нашего. Часом не потрафят раньше! — с жаром перебил Андрей, еще не старый ямщик, рыжеватый, сухощавый парень в поддевке и с армяком на левой руке.  
"They'll get there an hour ahead of us at most, and not even that — an hour at the very most they'll beat us by!" Andrei answered hastily. "It was I who got Timofei ready, I know how they drive. Their driving's not our driving, Dmitry Fyodorovich — they're no match for us. They won't get there an hour sooner!" Andrei broke in heatedly — a driver not yet old, reddish-haired and lean, in a long-skirted coat with a peasant cloak slung over his left arm.
> «часом» — an hour's worth: The instrumental «часом» (from «час», hour) here measures a difference of time — 'by an hour'. Russian uses the bare instrumental for a span by which something exceeds or falls short, and it drums through this whole haggling scene like a refrain.
> «упредить» — to get ahead of: «упредят» (perfective «упредить») is a colloquial, slightly old-fashioned verb for 'forestall, get there before someone'. Andrei's speech is thick with such folk-coloured forms («потрафят», «снарядил») that mark him as a peasant driver.
> «где им до нашего» — they're no match: A colloquial idiom: literally 'where to them up to ours', i.e. 'they can't hold a candle to us'. «Где (уж) им...» is a dismissive construction meaning 'as if they could'.
> Zero copula in the present: 'Their driving is not our driving' has no verb 'to be': Russian omits the present-tense copula entirely, juxtaposing two nominatives. The negation «не» simply sits before the predicate noun.

— Пятьдесят рублей на водку, коли только часом отстанешь.  
"Fifty roubles for vodka if you're no more than an hour behind them."
> «коли» — folksy 'if': «Коли» is an archaic, colloquial conditional conjunction equivalent to «если» ('if'). It opens a real (not hypothetical) condition, so the verb «отстанешь» is a plain perfective future, with no «бы».

— За час времени ручаемся, Дмитрий Федорович, эх, получасом не упредят, не то что часом!  
"We'll vouch for the hour, Dmitry Fyodorovich — eh, they won't be half an hour ahead, let alone a whole one!"
> «ручаемся» — reflexive -ся verb: «Ручаться» ('to vouch, guarantee') exists only in the -ся form; there is no plain *«ручать». Such inherently reflexive verbs use the clitic without any reflexive meaning of their own.
> Instrumental of measure again: Both «получасом» (by half an hour) and «часом» (by an hour) are instrumentals of degree of difference. «Не то что» means 'let alone, much less', escalating the boast.

Митя хоть и засуетился, распоряжаясь, но говорил и приказывал как-то странно, вразбивку, а не по порядку.  
Mitya bustled about giving orders, but he spoke and directed somehow strangely, by fits and starts, not in any order.
> «распоряжаясь» — present gerund: The деепричастие «распоряжаясь» ('[while] giving orders') is the imperfective adverbial participle in -ясь, naming an action simultaneous with the main verb «засуетился» and sharing its subject (Mitya).
> «хоть и… но» — concessive: «Хоть и… но» ('although… yet') frames a concession: he did bustle about, but his orders came out strangely. «Хоть» is the colloquial reduction of «хотя».
> «вразбивку» — by fits and starts: An adverb meaning 'scattered, out of sequence, piecemeal' (from «разбивать», to break up), set against «по порядку» ('in order'). It captures Mitya's feverish, disordered state.

Начинал одно и забывал окончание.  
He would begin one thing and forget to finish it.
> Imperfective for the habitual: Both verbs are imperfective past, here with iterative force — 'he would (repeatedly) begin… and forget'. The imperfective is Russian's tool for a recurring, characteristic action, which English marks with 'would'.

Петр Ильич нашел необходимым ввязаться и помочь делу.  
Pyotr Ilyich found it necessary to step in and help matters along.
> «нашёл необходимым» — instrumental predicate: 'Found it necessary': the short adjective «необходимым» stands in the instrumental as the predicate complement of «найти» ('to find [something to be]'). With verbs like «считать», «находить», «делать», the predicate goes into the instrumental.
> «ввязаться» — to get mixed up in: A colloquial -ся verb meaning 'to get oneself involved, butt in' (literally 'to tie oneself into'). It carries a faint sense of involvement in something messy — apt for the chaos Pyotr Ilyich is wading into.

— На четыреста рублей, не менее как на четыреста, чтобы точь-в-точь по-тогдашнему, — командовал Митя. — Четыре дюжины шампанского, ни одной бутылки меньше.  
"Four hundred roubles' worth, no less than four hundred, so it's exactly as it was last time," Mitya commanded. "Four dozen of champagne, not one bottle fewer."
> «чтобы» of purpose: «Чтобы» ('so that') opens a purpose clause. Even with no overt verb here, it governs the irrealis: the whole order is bent toward the willed result — 'so that it be exactly as before'.
> «точь-в-точь» — exactly so: An emphatic reduplicated adverb meaning 'precisely, to a hair, identically'. «По-тогдашнему» ('as it was then/last time') is built with the adverbial prefix по- on «тогдашний» ('of that time').
> «ни одной» — intensified negation: 'Not a single bottle fewer': «ни одной» uses the intensifier «ни» with the genitive «бутылки» under negation. «Ни» reinforces an implied negative ('not even one').

— Зачем тебе столько, к чему это? Стой! — завопил Петр Ильич. — Это что за ящик? С чем? Неужели тут на четыреста рублей?  
"What do you want so much for — what's the point? Stop!" Pyotr Ilyich shouted. "What's that case? What's in it? Surely there isn't four hundred roubles' worth in there?"
> Dative of the person concerned: 'Why do you want so much' has no verb: «тебе» is a dative ('to/for you') in an impersonal frame, with «столько» ('so much') as the quantity. This subjectless, dative-experiencer phrasing is utterly idiomatic.
> «неужели» — incredulous question: «Неужели» is a modal particle of astonished disbelief: 'surely not…?', 'you don't mean…?'. It expects a 'no' and colours Pyotr Ilyich's whole protest.

Ему тотчас же объяснили суетившиеся приказчики со слащавою речью, что в этом первом ящике всего лишь полдюжины шампанского и «всякие необходимые на первый случай предметы» из закусок, конфет, монпансье и проч.  
The bustling clerks at once explained to him, in honeyed tones, that this first case held only half a dozen of champagne and "all sorts of things needed for the first moment" — hors d'oeuvres, sweets, fruit drops, and the rest.
> «суетившиеся» — past active participle: «Суетившиеся» ('[who were] bustling about') is the imperfective past active participle of «суетиться», agreeing with «приказчики» in nominative plural. It compresses a который-clause into a single bookish modifier.
> Dative object of «объяснить»: «Объяснить» ('explain') takes the thing explained in the accusative and the person in the dative — here «ему» ('to him'). The subjectless plural verb «объяснили» reads as an impersonal 'they explained'.
> «приказчик» — shop clerk: A «приказчик» was a salesman or steward in a merchant's shop or estate — the obsequious clerks here, with their «слащавая речь» ('honeyed, sugary speech'). The word vanished with the merchant class it served.
> «монпансье» — fruit drops: Hard fruit-flavoured boiled sweets, a French borrowing (after the Montpensier line) for a fashionable confection. With «конфеты» and «закуски» it stocks Mitya's extravagant provisioning.

Но что главное «потребление» уложится и отправится сей же час особо, как и в тогдашний раз, в особой телеге и тоже тройкой и потрафит к сроку, «разве всего только часом позже Дмитрия Федоровича к месту прибудет».  
But the main "consignment," they said, would be packed and dispatched separately that same hour, just as it had been the last time — in a cart of its own, drawn by a troika too — and would arrive on time, "reaching the place perhaps a bare hour later than Dmitry Fyodorovich himself."
> Reflexive -ся as middle voice: «Уложится» ('will be packed') and «отправится» ('will be dispatched') are perfective futures with -ся giving a middle/passive sense — the goods 'get packed and sent off' without a named agent.
> «сей же час» — this very hour: An archaic, emphatic idiom for 'at once, immediately', built on the bookish demonstrative «сей» ('this') plus the insistent particle «же». It belongs to the elevated 19th-century register.
> «потребление» in scare-quotes: Literally 'consumption', but here a clerk's mealy euphemism (note Dostoevsky's quotation marks) for the bulk order of drink and food — 'the consignment'. «Тройка» beside it is the famous three-horse team.
> «потрафить» + «к сроку»: «Потрафить» is folksy for 'manage, hit the mark, arrive in good time'; «к сроку» ('by the deadline') uses «к» + dative for a time limit. The clerks adopt the drivers' rustic idiom to reassure.

— Не более часу, чтоб не более часу, и как можно больше монпансье и тягушек положите; это там девки любят, — с жаром настаивал Митя.  
"No more than an hour — mind it's no more than an hour — and put in as many fruit drops and toffees as you can; the girls down there love them," Mitya insisted heatedly.
> «как можно больше» + imperative: «Как можно больше» ('as much as possible') is the fixed pattern «как можно» + comparative. «Положите» is the polite/plural imperative of «положить» ('put'), addressed to the clerks.
> «тягушки» — chewy toffees: A colloquial, almost childish word for soft pull-taffy or chews (from «тянуть», to pull/stretch). The genitive plural «тягушек» follows «больше». Mitya wants sweets for the village «девки» (girls).
> «девки» — country girls: «Девки» (sing. «девка») here means peasant girls/wenches — colloquial and a touch coarse beside the neutral «девушки». It places the merry-making firmly among the village folk at Mokroye.

— Тягушек — пусть. Да четыре-то дюжины к чему тебе? Одной довольно, — почти осердился уже Петр Ильич.  
"Toffees — all right. But what do you want with four dozen? One's plenty," said Pyotr Ilyich, by now nearly cross.
> «-то» topic-marking clitic: The clitic «-то» on «четыре-то» singles out 'four dozen' as the contested topic — 'but four dozen, what do you want that for?'. The dative «тебе» again frames need impersonally.
> «довольно» + genitive: 'One is enough': the predicative «довольно» ('sufficient') governs the genitive «одной» (one [dozen]). Quantity-and-sufficiency words regularly take the genitive of the thing measured.
> «осердиться» — to grow cross: An archaic/folk variant of «рассердиться» ('to get angry'), built on the older «сердиться». «Почти осердился уже» — 'by now nearly got cross' — keeps Pyotr Ilyich's rising irritation in period colour.

Он стал торговаться, он потребовал счет, он не хотел успокоиться.  
He began to haggle, he demanded an itemized bill, he would not be pacified.
> Anaphoric «он» triplet: Dostoevsky drives the sentence with three insistent clauses each opened by «он» — normally a dropped pronoun. The deliberate repetition (not idiomatic but rhetorical) hammers Pyotr Ilyich's stubborn campaign.
> Aspect across the verbs: «Стал» (perfective) marks the inceptive 'began to', taking the imperfective infinitive «торговаться»; «не хотел успокоиться» pairs imperfective 'wanted' with perfective 'calm down (once and for all)'. The aspect contrast is precise.

Спас, однако, всего одну сотню рублей.  
He saved, however, only one hundred roubles in all.
> Subject-drop and fronted verb: The pronoun 'he' is omitted — the past «спас» ('saved') agrees in gender/number alone — and is fronted for emphasis, with «однако» ('however') wedged in. «Сотня» is a colloquial noun for 'a hundred (roubles)'.

Остановились на том, чтобы всего товару доставлено было не более как на триста рублей.  
They settled on having no more than three hundred roubles' worth of goods delivered altogether.
> «остановиться на том, чтобы» + passive: 'They settled on having…': the correlative «на том, чтобы» introduces a purpose/result clause, inside which «доставлено было» is a short passive participle + «было» — 'should be delivered'. The agent is unnamed.
> Partitive genitive in -у: «Товару» is the old partitive genitive in -у (rather than -а), used for 'some of the goods, an amount of merchandise'. This second-genitive survives in mass nouns (чашка чаю, много народу) and lends a colloquial-archaic note.

— А, черт вас подери! — вскричал Петр Ильич, как бы вдруг одумавшись, — да мне-то тут что? Бросай свои деньги, коли даром нажил!  
"Ah, the devil take you all!" cried Pyotr Ilyich, as if suddenly coming to his senses. "What's it to me, anyway? Throw your money away, if you came by it for nothing!"
> «одумавшись» — past gerund: The perfective past gerund in -вшись, «одумавшись» ('having thought better of it / come to his senses'), names a completed action just prior to the main verb. «Как бы» ('as if') softens it to a semblance.
> «мне-то» — dative + emphatic «-то»: 'But what's it to me, anyway?' — the dative «мне» plus topic-clitic «-то» throws the focus onto the speaker: 'I, for my part'. The verbless impersonal question is pure spoken Russian.
> «коли» + «даром нажил»: Again folksy «коли» ('if'). «Даром» means 'for free, for nothing'; «нажил» (perfective «нажить») is 'to come by, acquire'. The taunt: throw money away if you got it for nothing.

— Сюда, эконом, сюда, не сердись, — потащил его Митя в заднюю комнату лавки. — Вот здесь нам бутылку сейчас подадут, мы и хлебнем. Эх, Петр Ильич, поедем вместе, потому что ты человек милый, таких люблю.  
"This way, my thrifty friend, this way, don't be angry," Mitya said, dragging him into the back room of the shop. "Here they'll bring us a bottle in a moment, and we'll have a swig. Eh, Pyotr Ilyich, come with me — because you're a dear fellow, and I love that sort."
> «эконом» — 'thrifty one': Mitya playfully dubs the penny-pinching Pyotr Ilyich «эконом», a steward or household manager — by extension a stickler for economy. The mock-title teases his haggling.
> «не сердись» — negated imperative: The imperfective imperative «сердись» under «не» ('don't be angry') is the normal way to tell someone to stop or refrain — Russian uses the imperfective for negative commands and prohibitions.
> «хлебнуть» — to take a swig: «Хлебнём» (perfective «хлебнуть») is colloquial for 'have a gulp/swig'. The -ну- suffix gives a single, momentary action — one quick drink, fitting Mitya's restless cheer.

Митя уселся на плетеный стульчик пред крошечным столиком, накрытым грязнейшею салфеткой.  
Mitya settled himself on a wicker stool before a tiny table covered with a filthy cloth.
> Diminutive cascade: «Стульчик» (little stool), «столиком» (little table), and the superlative «грязнейшею» pile up to render the squalid shabbiness of the back room. Diminutives here convey not affection but a shrunken, mean scale.
> «грязнейшею» — bookish superlative: «Грязнейший» ('filthiest') is the suffixal superlative in -ейш-, more literary than «самый грязный». The ending «-ею» (instrumental feminine) is the archaic/poetic variant of «-ой» common in 19th-century prose.

Петр Ильич примостился напротив него, и мигом явилось шампанское.  
Pyotr Ilyich perched opposite him, and in an instant the champagne appeared.
> «примоститься» — reflexive of position: «Примоститься» ('to perch, settle into a cramped spot') is a -ся verb of self-positioning, like «уселся» above. The prefix при- adds the sense of fitting oneself snugly in.
> «мигом» — in a flash: The instrumental of «миг» ('an instant') used adverbially: 'in a trice'. Like «часом» earlier, a noun's bare instrumental does adverbial duty — here of speed rather than measure.

Предложили, не пожелают ли господа устриц, «первейших устриц, самого последнего получения».  
They were offered oysters — wouldn't the gentlemen care for some? "The finest oysters, from the very latest delivery."
> «ли» + negated polite offer: The interrogative particle «ли» turns this into an embedded yes/no question ('whether the gentlemen would care for…'), and the negative «не пожелают ли» is a courteous way of offering — 'wouldn't you care for?'. «Устриц» is genitive after the verb of wishing.
> Salesman's superlatives: «Первейших» ('the very first/finest', a colloquial intensive superlative) and «самого последнего получения» ('of the very latest delivery') mimic the clerk's puffing patter — comically grand for a filthy provincial shop.

— К черту устриц, я не ем, да и ничего не надо, — почти злобно огрызнулся Петр Ильич.  
"To the devil with the oysters — I don't eat them, and I don't want anything," Pyotr Ilyich snapped, almost spitefully.
> «огрызнуться» — to snap back: «Огрызнуться» (perfective) is 'to snarl/snap in retort', literally as a dog gnaws back. The semelfactive -ну- and the adverb «почти злобно» ('almost spitefully') catch one sharp burst of temper.
> Genitive «ничего» + impersonal «надо»: 'Nothing is needed': «ничего» is the genitive form of «ничто» under the impersonal «надо», with the obligatory «не» (negative concord). No nominative subject appears — the want is framed impersonally.

— Некогда устриц, — заметил Митя, — да и аппетита нет. Знаешь, друг, — проговорил он вдруг с чувством, — не любил я никогда всего этого беспорядка.  
"No time for oysters," Mitya remarked, "and no appetite, besides. You know, my friend," he brought out suddenly with feeling, "I never did like all this disorder."
> Genitive of absence: «Аппетита нет» ('there's no appetite') puts the absent thing in the genitive after «нет» — the classic genitive of negation in an existential. «Некогда» ('no time') likewise frames a lack impersonally.
> Genitive object under negation: 'I never did like all this disorder': negated «не любил» pulls its object «всего этого беспорядка» into the genitive, reinforced by «никогда» (negative concord). The fronted verb and trailing «я» mark emphatic, emotional word order.

— Да кто ж его любит! Три дюжины, помилуй, на мужиков, это хоть кого взорвет.  
"Why, who does like it! Three dozen, for pity's sake, for a pack of peasants — that's enough to make anyone's blood boil."
> «же» as exclamatory emphasis: «Кто ж (же) его любит!» — 'Why, who DOES like it!' — the modal particle «же» throws indignant stress onto «кто», turning a question into a rhetorical exclamation. «Его» is the object 'it'.
> «хоть кого взорвёт» — enough to enrage anyone: Idiom: «взорвать» ('to blow up') here means 'to make furious', and «хоть кого» is 'anyone at all, no matter whom'. 'That's enough to make anybody's blood boil.' «Помилуй» ('for pity's sake') is an exclamatory imperative.

— Я не про это. Я про высший порядок. Порядку во мне нет, высшего порядка… Но… всё это закончено, горевать нечего. Поздно, и к черту! Вся жизнь моя была беспорядок, и надо положить порядок. Каламбурю, а?  
"That's not what I mean. I mean a higher order. There's no order in me, no higher order… But… it's all over now, no use grieving. Too late — to the devil with it! My whole life has been disorder, and I must set it in order. I'm punning, eh?"
> «порядку нет» — genitive of absence: 'There's no order in me': «порядку» is genitive (here the -у partitive variant) under «нет». Dostoevsky inverts the order for weight, leading with the missing «порядок» — the moral keyword of the passage.
> «нечего» + infinitive: «Нечего горевать» ('there's nothing to grieve over / no use grieving') is the negative pronoun «нечего» governing an infinitive — a tidy impersonal construction meaning 'no point in doing'.
> «надо» + perfective infinitive: The impersonal modal «надо» ('one must') governs the perfective «положить» — to establish order once and for all (literally 'to lay down order'). Mitya then puns on «порядок/беспорядок».

— Бредишь, а не каламбуришь.  
"You're raving, not punning."
> Contrastive «а»: «А» ('and/but, rather') sets one verb against the other: 'you're raving, not punning'. This mild adversative «а» — distinct from oppositional «но» — corrects rather than contradicts, a constant hinge in dialogue.
> «бредить» — to rave: «Бредить» is 'to be delirious, talk wildly (as in fever)'; «каламбурить» is 'to pun, make wordplay'. Pyotr Ilyich's retort dismisses Mitya's cleverness as feverish nonsense.

— Слава Высшему на свете, Слава Высшему во мне!  
"Glory to the Highest in the world, Glory to the Highest in me!
> Dative after «слава»: «Слава» ('glory') takes the dative of the one glorified — «Высшему» ('to the Highest'). The same dative governs the parallel «во мне» being read as the locus, not the recipient.

Этот стишок у меня из души вырвался когда-то, не стих, а слеза… сам сочинил… не тогда, однако, когда штабс-капитана за бороденку тащил…  
That little verse once tore itself out of my soul — not a verse but a tear… I made it up myself… not then, mind, when I was dragging the staff-captain by his little beard…"
> «вырваться» — reflexive of bursting out: «Вырвался» ('tore/burst itself out', + «из» + genitive «души') is a -ся verb giving an involuntary, self-acting sense — the verse erupted of its own accord, 'not a verse but a tear'.
> «стишок» — little verse: The diminutive of «стих» ('verse'), here self-deprecating and tender — 'this little verse of mine'. Set against the plain «стих» in the next breath ('not a verse, but a tear'), the suffix softens the boast into intimacy.

— Чего это ты вдруг о нем?  
"Why bring him up all of a sudden?"
> «чего» + «это» colloquial question: Verbless and very spoken: «чего» (colloquial genitive 'why/what for') with filler «это» and «вдруг» ('suddenly'). «О нём» (о + prepositional) means 'about him'. 'Why him, all of a sudden?'

— Чего я вдруг о нем? Вздор! Всё кончается, всё равняется, черта — и итог.  
"Why bring him up all of a sudden? Nonsense! Everything comes to an end, everything is leveled out — a line drawn, and the sum."
> Reflexive intransitives + present tense: «Кончается» and «равняется» are -ся verbs ('comes to an end', 'is leveled/equalled out'), imperfective present, here gnomic — stating a general truth. The rhyme drives Mitya's fatalistic aphorism.
> «черта — и итог» — line and sum: An accounting image: «черта» is the line drawn under a column of figures, «итог» the total beneath it. Mitya's whole life is reckoned up and closed off — 'a line drawn, and the sum'.

— Право, мне всё твои пистолеты мерещатся.  
"Really, those pistols of yours keep haunting me."
> Dative experiencer + «мерещиться»: 'Your pistols keep haunting me': «мерещиться» ('to seem, appear hauntingly') is an inherently -ся verb whose grammatical subject is «пистолеты», while the one who sees them stands in the dative «мне». «Всё» here means 'constantly'.

— И пистолеты вздор! Пей и не фантазируй. Жизнь люблю, слишком уж жизнь полюбил, так слишком, что и мерзко. Довольно! За жизнь, голубчик, за жизнь выпьем, за жизнь предлагаю тост! Почему я доволен собой? Я подл, но доволен собой. И, однако ж, я мучусь тем, что я подл, но доволен собой. Благословляю творение, сейчас готов бога благословить и его творение, но… надо истребить одно смрадное насекомое, чтобы не ползало, другим жизни не портило… Выпьем за жизнь, милый брат! Что может быть дороже жизни! Ничего, ничего! За жизнь и за одну царицу из цариц.  
"The pistols are nonsense too! Drink and don't fantasize. I love life — I've loved life too much, so much it's become loathsome. Enough! To life, my dear man, let's drink to life, I propose a toast to life! Why am I pleased with myself? I'm vile, yet I'm pleased with myself. And yet I'm tormented by it — that I'm vile, yet pleased with myself. I bless creation, I'm ready this minute to bless God and His creation, but… one foul insect must be stamped out, so it stops crawling about and spoiling life for others… Let's drink to life, dear brother! What can be dearer than life? Nothing, nothing! To life, and to one queen among queens."
> «полюбить» — inceptive perfective: «Полюбил» (perfective) means 'came to love, grew to love' — the prefix по- gives an inchoative sense beside the plain imperfective «люблю» ('I love') alongside it. «Уж» is the intensifying particle 'really, all too'.
> Short adjectives as predicate: «Подл» ('vile') and «доволен» ('content') are short-form adjectives, used only predicatively and carrying a sense of present, inherent state. «Доволен» governs the instrumental «собой» ('with himself').
> «чтобы» + past-form irrealis: After «чтобы» ('so that') the verbs take the past form as irrealis: «не ползало… не портило» ('so it not crawl about, not spoil life for others'). «Жизни» is genitive of negation; «другим» dative ('for others').
> «царица из цариц» — queen among queens: A Hebraic-style superlative ('king of kings' pattern): «из цариц» is the partitive genitive plural — the supreme queen of all queens. He toasts Grushenka, 'one queen among queens'.

— Выпьем за жизнь, а пожалуй, и за твою царицу.  
"To life — and, all right, to your queen as well."
> «пожалуй» — conceding particle: «Пожалуй» is a particle of grudging assent — 'all right then, I suppose, why not'. With «а» and «и» ('and… too') it concedes: 'and, all right, to your queen as well'. «За» + accusative is the standard 'to (someone's health)' of a toast.

Выпили по стакану.  
They each drank a glass.
> Distributive «по» + dative: «По стакану» means 'a glass each' — the distributive «по» (here with dative «стакану») shares one item out per person. «Выпили» (perfective) marks the single completed act of drinking down.

Митя был хотя и восторжен и раскидчив, но как-то грустен.  
Mitya, though exalted and expansive, was somehow sad.
> Short adjectives, concessive frame: Three short-form predicate adjectives — «восторжен» (exalted), «раскидчив» (expansive), «грустен» (sad) — describe Mitya's momentary state, held in a «хотя и… но» concession. The short form suits this transient mood.
> «раскидчивый» — expansive: A rarer adjective (from «раскидывать», to scatter/spread) meaning 'sprawling, expansive, given to grand impulsive gestures' — Mitya in his open-handed, scattering mood, even as sadness undercuts it.

Точно какая-то непреодолимая и тяжелая забота стояла за ним.  
It was as if some insurmountable, oppressive care stood behind him.
> «точно» + «какая-то» — as-if and indefinite: «Точно» here is 'as if, as though' (not 'exactly'), framing a simile. «Какая-то» ('some… or other') with -то marks an indefinite but real, looming care. «За ним» (за + instrumental) places it 'behind him'.

— Миша… это твой Миша вошел? Миша, голубчик, Миша, поди сюда, выпей ты мне этот стакан, за Феба златокудрого, завтрашнего…  
"Misha… is that your Misha who came in? Misha, my dear, Misha, come here, drink this glass for me — to golden-haired Phoebus, to tomorrow…"
> «голубчик» — term of endearment: «Голубчик» ('little dove', diminutive of «голубь») is a warm, coaxing address — 'my dear, my pet'. «Миша» itself is the affectionate hypocoristic of «Михаил». Mitya's tenderness toward the shop-boy is all in these suffixes.
> «поди» — archaic imperative: «Поди» is the old colloquial imperative of «пойти» ('come/go') — 'come here'; «выпей» is the perfective imperative 'drink (it down)'. Both are familiar, intimate commands to the boy.

— Да зачем ты ему! — крикнул Петр Ильич раздражительно.  
"Why give it to him!" Pyotr Ilyich cried irritably.
> Dative «ему» — 'to/for him': 'Why give it TO HIM!' — the verbless exclamation leans on the dative «ему» as recipient, with «зачем» ('what for') and exasperated «да». The verb 'give' is left implicit, as constantly in spoken Russian.

— Ну позволь, ну так, ну я хочу.  
"Oh, let me, just so, just because I want to."
> «ну» as coaxing filler: The particle «ну» ('oh, come on, well') softens and wheedles, repeated three times. «Позволь» is the perfective imperative 'allow (me)'; «так» here means 'just so, for no reason'. The whole line is pure coaxing texture.

— Э-эх!  
"Ah, well!"

Миша выпил стакан, поклонился и убежал.  
Misha drank the glass, bowed, and ran off.
> Perfective chain of events: Three perfective past verbs in sequence — «выпил» (drank down), «поклонился» (bowed), «убежал» (ran off) — move the action forward as a string of single completed events, the perfective's narrative job.

— Запомнит дольше, — заметил Митя. — Женщину я люблю, женщину! Что есть женщина? Царица земли! Грустно мне, грустно, Петр Ильич. Помнишь Гамлета: «Мне так грустно, так грустно, Горацио… Ах, бедный Йорик!» Это я, может быть, Йорик и есть. Именно теперь я Йорик, а череп потом.  
"He'll remember it the longer for it," Mitya remarked. "A woman — I love a woman! What is a woman? The queen of the earth! I'm sad, Pyotr Ilyich, sad. Do you remember Hamlet: 'I am so sad, so sad, Horatio… Ah, poor Yorick!' Perhaps I'm Yorick myself. Right now I'm Yorick, and the skull comes afterward."
> «дольше» — irregular comparative of долго: «Дольше» ('longer [in time]') is the comparative of «долго». «Запомнит» is perfective future ('he'll remember/fix it in memory'), the prefix за- marking the act of committing-to-memory.
> «есть» as emphatic copula: Russian usually drops the present 'to be', but here «что есть женщина» retains the archaic copular «есть» for solemn, rhetorical weight — 'what IS woman?'. «Царица земли» ('queen of the earth') answers with a bare nominative.

Петр Ильич слушал и молчал, помолчал и Митя.  
Pyotr Ilyich listened and was silent; Mitya too fell silent for a while.
> Imperfective vs perfective «молчать/помолчать»: «Слушал… молчал» are imperfective (ongoing listening and silence); «помолчал» adds the prefix по- for a bounded spell — 'was silent for a while too'. The по- delimitative marks a stretch of action with limits, a favourite narrative nuance.

— Это какая у вас собачка? — спросил он вдруг рассеянно приказчика, заметив в углу маленькую хорошенькую болоночку с черными глазками.  
"What's that little dog of yours?" he suddenly asked the clerk absently, having noticed in the corner a small, pretty lapdog with little black eyes.
> «заметив» — past gerund: «Заметив» ('having noticed') is the perfective past gerund, naming the prior act that prompts his question, sharing the subject «он». Such gerund-tails are a hallmark of Dostoevsky's narrative sentence.
> «болонка» — lapdog: A «болонка» is a small long-haired lapdog (a Bolognese/Bichon type). The double diminutive «болоночка» with «хорошенькую» ('pretty little') and «глазками' ('little eyes') drips affection — Mitya, near despair, is touched by the tiny dog.
> «у вас» — possession via «у» + genitive: 'What's that little dog of yours' — Russian expresses 'you have' with «у» + genitive «вас», so «у вас собачка» is literally 'at you [there is] a doggie'. «Собачка» is the diminutive of «собака».

— Это Варвары Алексеевны, хозяйки нашей, болоночка, — ответил приказчик, — сами занесли давеча да и забыли у нас. Отнести надо будет обратно.  
"That's the lapdog of Varvara Alekseyevna, our mistress," the clerk answered. "She brought it in herself a little while ago and forgot it here with us. We'll have to take it back to her."
> Possessive genitive of name + patronymic: 'It's Varvara Alekseyevna's lapdog': the owner's name and patronymic both go into the genitive («Варвары Алексеевны») to show possession, framing «болоночка». Patronymics decline like ordinary nouns.
> «давеча» and respectful «сами»: «Давеча» is a folk-colloquial 'a little while ago, earlier today'. «Сами» ('herself') here is the deferential plural-for-singular the clerk uses of his social superior «хозяйка» (mistress) — politeness encoded in number.
> «надо будет» — future of obligation: The impersonal «надо» takes the future of 'to be' — «надо будет» ('it will be necessary') — plus the perfective infinitive «отнести» ('to take back'). A subjectless obligation projected into the future.

— Я одну такую же видел… в полку… — вдумчиво произнес Митя, — только у той задняя ножка была сломана… Петр Ильич, хотел я тебя спросить кстати: крал ты когда что в своей жизни аль нет?  
"I once saw one just like it… in the regiment…" Mitya said musingly. "Only that one had a broken hind leg… Pyotr Ilyich, by the way, I wanted to ask you: did you ever steal anything in your life, or not?"
> Short passive participle as result: «Была сломана» ('was broken') is «была» + the short past passive participle of «сломать» — stating a resulting state, not an event. «У той» ('on that one') is again «у» + genitive of the demonstrative «та».
> «аль» — folksy 'or': «Аль» is a rustic/archaic contraction of «али» / «или» ('or'). «Крал… аль нет» — 'did you ever steal… or not'. «Когда» here means 'ever'. The folk particle suits Mitya's sudden lurch into earthy intimacy.
> Inverted dialogue tag: The verb «произнёс» ('uttered') precedes its subject «Митя» — the inverted verb-subject order standard in Russian narrative speech-tags (compare 'said Mitya'). «Вдумчиво» ('musingly') is the adverb of manner.

— Это что за вопрос?  
"What kind of question is that?"
> «что за» — 'what kind of': «Что за» is a fixed idiom meaning 'what sort of', taking a nominative noun («вопрос») rather than a case — a Germanic-style construction. 'What kind of question is that?'

— Нет, я так. Видишь, из кармана у кого-нибудь, чужое? Я не про казну говорю, казну все дерут, и ты, конечно, тоже…  
"No, I just ask. Out of somebody's pocket, I mean — something not your own? I'm not talking about the public purse; everyone fleeces the treasury, and you do too, of course…"
> «кого-нибудь» — non-specific indefinite: «Кого-нибудь» ('anybody, somebody-or-other') uses -нибудь for a non-specific, hypothetical person, as opposed to -то's specific-but-unknown one. «Чужое» ('what belongs to another') is a substantivized neuter adjective.

— Убирайся к черту.  
"Go to the devil."
> «убирайся к чёрту» — be off to the devil: «Убираться» ('clear off, get lost', imperfective imperative «убирайся») with «к чёрту» ('to the devil', к + dative «чёрту») is a brusque dismissal. The devil-idioms cluster thickly in this scene's irritable banter.

— Я про чужое: прямо из кармана, из кошелька, а?  
"I mean what's not your own: straight out of a pocket, out of a purse, eh?"
> «из» + genitive of source: The preposition «из» ('out of') governs the genitive, marking the source: «из кармана» (out of a pocket), «из кошелька» (out of a purse). The bare nouns, no article, name the place a theft would come from.

— Украл один раз у матери двугривенный, девяти лет был, со стола. Взял тихонько и зажал в руку.  
"I once stole twenty kopeks from my mother, when I was nine, off the table. I took it on the sly and clenched it in my fist."
> «девяти лет» — genitive of age: 'When I was nine': age can be given by the genitive «девяти лет» ('of nine years'), the numeral «девять» in the genitive plus genitive plural «лет». The subject «я» is dropped, recoverable from «был».
> Perfective pair of stealthy acts: «Взял» (took) and «зажал» (clenched, gripped tight) are perfective — two single completed actions. «Тихонько» ('quietly, on the sly') is the affectionate-diminutive adverb of «тихо», softening the furtive picture.

— Ну и что же?  
"Well, and what then?"
> «ну и что же?» — 'and then what?': A set conversational prompt: «ну и» ('well, and') with the urging particle «же» — 'so what then?', 'and what next?'. The «же» nudges the speaker to go on.

— Ну и ничего. Три дня хранил, стыдно стало, признался и отдал.  
"Well, nothing. I kept it three days, then felt ashamed, owned up, and gave it back."
> Imperfective duration, then perfective resolution: «Хранил» ('kept', imperfective) holds the three days of duration; then «стыдно стало» (impersonal 'became ashamed'), «признался» (owned up), «отдал» (gave back) — perfectives that resolve it. The aspect shift mirrors lingering guilt giving way to a decisive act.
> «стыдно стало» — dative-experiencer feeling: 'Felt ashamed': the impersonal predicate «стыдно» ('it is shameful') with «стало» ('became'), the experiencer left to be inferred in the dative. This subjectless emotion-frame is everywhere in Dostoevsky's inner life.

— Ну и что же?  
"Well, and what then?"

— Натурально, высекли. Да ты чего уж, ты сам не украл ли?  
"Naturally, I got a whipping. But why do you ask — haven't you stolen something yourself?"
> «не… ли» + «сам»: «Не украл ли?» uses the particle «ли» for a tentative yes/no question, the «не» softening it to 'haven't you perhaps…?'. The intensive «сам» ('yourself') turns the question back on the asker.

— Украл, — хитро подмигнул Митя.  
"I have," Mitya winked slyly.
> Inverted speech-tag with adverb: «Хитро подмигнул Митя» ('slyly winked Mitya') again puts verb before subject in the narrative tag. «Подмигнуть» (perfective, -ну- semelfactive) is a single wink; «хитро» ('cunningly') colours it.

— Что украл? — залюбопытствовал Петр Ильич.  
"What did you steal?" Pyotr Ilyich asked, his curiosity caught.
> «залюбопытствовать» — curiosity kindled: A vivid perfective with the inceptive prefix за- on «любопытствовать» ('to be curious') — 'his curiosity was suddenly caught/kindled'. The за- marks the onset of the state, a favourite Dostoevskian touch for sudden feeling.

— У матери двугривенный, девяти лет был, через три дня отдал. — Сказав это, Митя вдруг встал с места.  
"Twenty kopeks from my mother, when I was nine, and gave it back three days later." Having said this, Mitya suddenly rose from his seat.
> «сказав» — perfective gerund of prior action: «Сказав» ('having said') is the perfective past gerund, marking the completed act just before the main verb «встал» ('rose'), both sharing Mitya as subject. The construction tightly chains saying and standing up.
> «с места» — «с» + genitive of origin: «С места» ('from his seat/place') uses «с» + genitive to mark motion away from a surface or spot. The whole phrase «встал с места» is the idiomatic 'rose from where he sat'.

— Дмитрий Федорович, не поспешить ли? — крикнул вдруг у дверей лавки Андрей.  
"Dmitry Fyodorovich, oughtn't we to hurry?" Andrei suddenly called from the door of the shop.
> «не… ли» + infinitive — tentative suggestion: 'Oughtn't we to hurry?' — an impersonal infinitive «поспешить» framed by «не… ли» makes a deferential proposal. This infinitive-plus-«ли» is the polite Russian way of suggesting a course of action.
> «у дверей» — location at: «У дверей лавки» ('at the door of the shop') uses «у» + genitive for proximity/location, and «лавки» is a further genitive of 'of the shop'. The subject «Андрей» falls at the very end — end-weight on the speaker.

— Готово? Идем! — всполохнулся Митя. — Еще последнее сказанье и… Андрею стакан водки на дорогу сейчас! Да коньяку ему, кроме водки, рюмку! Этот ящик (с пистолетами) мне под сиденье. Прощай, Петр Ильич, не поминай лихом.  
"Ready? Let's go!" Mitya started up. "One last word and… A glass of vodka for Andrei for the road, this minute! And a glass of cognac for him too, besides the vodka! This case (the one with the pistols) goes under my seat. Farewell, Pyotr Ilyich, don't think too hard of me."
> «всполохнуться» — to start up: A vivid colloquial -ся perfective: 'started up, was suddenly roused/alarmed into motion'. The momentary -ну-/-ся combination paints Mitya jolting to his feet at Andrei's call.
> «сказанье» — a 'telling', bookish: «Сказанье» (var. «сказание») is an elevated, Slavonic-flavoured noun in -ние for a 'tale, legend, telling' — Mitya inflates 'just one last thing to say' into mock-epic grandeur, typical of his theatrical register.
> «не поминай лихом» — think kindly of me: A fixed folk farewell: literally 'don't remember (me) with evil', i.e. 'don't think ill of me, remember me kindly'. «Лихом» is the instrumental of the archaic «лихо» ('evil, misfortune'). Its valedictory weight darkens Mitya's goodbye — he speaks as a man not expecting to return.

— Да ведь завтра воротишься?  
"But you'll be back tomorrow?"
> «ведь» — appeal to shared assumption: «Ведь» ('but surely, after all') appeals to what both take for granted — Pyotr Ilyich assumes Mitya will of course be back tomorrow. The dramatic irony is sharp: «воротишься» (archaic/folk for «вернёшься», 'you'll return') is a perfective future the reader knows will not come true.

— Непременно.  
— Without fail.
> «Непременно» — without fail: An emphatic adverb meaning 'certainly, without fail, absolutely'. Literally 'without changing', it carries a tone of solemn promise — here Mitya pledging he will come back.

— Расчетец теперь изволите покончить? — подскочил приказчик.  
— Will you settle the little account now, sir? — the clerk piped up.
> «расчётец» — the little account: A diminutive of «расчёт» (settlement, bill), the suffix -ец here is not endearing but ingratiating — the clerk wheedling for his money by making the sum sound trivial and pleasant.
> «изволите покончить» — deferential 'will you be pleased to': «изволить» plus an infinitive is an obsequious, servile politeness formula ('would you be so good as to'), classic shop-and-servant register. The perfective «покончить» frames the settling as a single act to be completed.
> Verb-then-subject inversion: The narrative tag puts the perfective verb «подскочил» (darted up) before its subject «приказчик» — standard Russian order in dialogue attribution, where case endings free word order and the action leads.

— А, да, расчет! Непременно!  
— Ah, yes, the account! Without fail!
> «расчёт» — the bill, plainly: Mitya echoes the clerk's wheedling diminutive «расчётец» with the blunt full form «расчёт» — the same word stripped of its servile sugar, in his careless grandee's tone.

Он опять выхватил из кармана свою пачку кредиток, снял три радужных, бросил на прилавок и спеша вышел из лавки.  
Once more he snatched the wad of banknotes from his pocket, peeled off three rainbow-colored ones, tossed them on the counter, and hurried out of the shop.
> A chain of perfectives drives the action: Four perfective past verbs in a row («выхватил, снял, бросил, вышел») move the scene forward as a rapid sequence of completed acts — the perfective's narrative job of clocking events one after another.
> «из» + genitive of source: The preposition «из» ('out of') always governs the genitive: «из кармана» (out of the pocket). It pairs with «вышел из лавки» at the sentence's end, framing the whole action as a coming-out.
> «спеша» — present gerund of attendant manner: «спеша» (hurrying) is an imperfective present gerund (деепричастие) describing how he left — simultaneous manner sharing the main subject, a hallmark of literary narration.
> «кредитки» — banknotes: «Кредитка» (genitive plural «кредиток» after «пачку») is a period term for a paper credit-note, i.e. a banknote, as opposed to coin. «Пачка кредиток» is a wad of bills.

Все за ним последовали и, кланяясь, провожали с приветствиями и пожеланиями.  
They all trooped after him, bowing, and saw him off with their compliments and good wishes.
> «кланяясь» — bowing, present gerund: An imperfective present gerund from «кланяться» (a -ся verb), expressing the ongoing manner that accompanies «провожали» — they saw him off while bowing.
> «за» + instrumental of pursuit: «Последовать за» ('to follow after') takes «за» with the instrumental: «за ним» (after him). The н- prefix on «ним» is the obligatory third-person form after a preposition.
> «приветствия и пожелания» — compliments and good wishes: Two bookish -ие abstract nouns in the instrumental after «с»: «приветствие» (greeting/compliment) and «пожелание» (wish). The pairing gives a formal, ceremonious flavour to the farewell.

Андрей крякнул от только что выпитого коньяку и вскочил на сиденье.  
Andrei gave a grunt from the brandy he had just drunk and sprang up onto his seat.
> «крякнул» — gave a grunt: An expressive, semelfactive verb (suffix -ну-) for a single short sound: a grunt, a smacking 'ah' of satisfaction. The perfective marks one momentary noise, the grunt of a man warmed by brandy.
> «от» + genitive of cause, and a partitive -у: «от» ('from', here causal) governs the genitive: he grunted from the brandy. Note «коньяку», an older partitive genitive in -у (rather than -а) — 'some brandy' — common with mass nouns in 19th-century usage.
> «выпитого» — past passive participle: «Выпитый» (drunk-up) is a past passive participle from perfective «выпить», here long-form and declined to agree with «коньяку». It compresses 'the brandy that had just been drunk' into one modifier.

Но едва только Митя начал садиться, как вдруг пред ним совсем неожиданно очутилась Феня.  
But scarcely had Mitya begun to climb in when all at once, quite unexpectedly, Fenya appeared before him.
> «едва … как» — 'scarcely had … when': A classic correlative construction: «едва только» (scarcely) in the first clause answered by «как вдруг» (when suddenly) in the second, expressing one event cut short by another that bursts in.
> «начал» + imperfective infinitive: Phasal verbs of beginning, continuing, and ending («начать, продолжать, кончить») require an imperfective infinitive. So 'began to sit/climb in' is «начал садиться», never the perfective «сесть».
> «очутилась» — turned up, a -ся verb: «Очутиться» (to find oneself somewhere, to turn up) exists only in the -ся form. The reflexive marks a change of state with no transitive counterpart — Fenya is suddenly just there before him.
> «пред» — bookish 'before': «Пред» is the elevated, non-pleophonic doublet of everyday «перед» ('before, in front of'), governing the instrumental «ним». It lends a faintly solemn, literary register to the moment of her appearance.

Она прибежала вся запыхавшись, с криком сложила пред ним руки и бухнулась ему в ноги:  
She came running up entirely out of breath, with a cry clasped her hands before him, and flung herself down at his feet:
> «запыхавшись» — past gerund, 'having got out of breath': A perfective past gerund (деепричастие) from «запыхаться» — describing the completed state she arrives in. «Вся» ('all', entirely) intensifies it: she ran up completely out of breath.
> «бухнуться в ноги» — to flop down at someone's feet: «Бухнуться» is an expressive, sudden-movement verb ('to plump/flop down with a thud'); «(пасть/броситься) в ноги» is the set gesture of throwing oneself at another's feet to beg — a charged image of supplication.
> Dative of the person + «в ноги»: «Ему» is a dative marking the person to whom the gesture is directed; «в ноги» (accusative of motion-toward) names the goal — literally 'flung herself onto his feet'. The dative makes him the affected party of her plea.

— Батюшка, Дмитрий Федорович, голубчик, не погубите барыню! А я-то вам всё рассказала!.. И его не погубите, прежний ведь он, ихний! Замуж теперь Аграфену Александровну возьмет, с тем и из Сибири вернулся… Батюшка, Дмитрий Федорович, не загубите чужой жизни!  
— Master, Dmitri Fyodorovich, my dear, do not destroy the mistress! And it was I who told you everything!.. And do not destroy him either — he is hers, after all, the old one, her own! He will marry Agrafena Alexandrovna now — that is why he came back from Siberia… Master, Dmitri Fyodorovich, do not ruin another's life!
> «батюшка» — 'good master / dear father': A warm, deferential form of address from the lower orders — literally a diminutive of 'father', used to a superior or social better. From a maid to a gentleman it means roughly 'kind sir, master'. (It also addresses a priest.)
> «голубчик» — 'my dear, little dove': An affectionate diminutive of «голубь» (dove), used pleadingly to a person one is begging — 'my dear one'. It pours tenderness and entreaty into Fenya's appeal.
> «не погубите» — negated imperative: A polite/plural imperative «погубите» (destroy) under negation «не» — 'do not destroy'. Russian often pairs negation with the perfective imperative for a sharp warning against a single feared act.
> «я-то» — the emphatic clitic -то: Here -то is the topic-emphasising clitic, not the indefinite suffix: «я-то» singles her out — 'I, of all people / it was I who'. She underscores her own role in betraying the secret.
> «ведь» — the appealing particle: «Ведь» appeals to shared knowledge ('after all, you know'), softening her plea by treating the point as obvious. The inverted order «прежний ведь он» fronts «прежний» (the former one) as the stressed comment.
> «ихний» — non-standard 'theirs/hers': «Ихний» is a colloquial, substandard possessive for «их» ('their/hers'), strongly marking peasant speech. Fenya's mouth full of «ихний», «прежний», «барыня» is Dostoevsky painting her servant's register.

— Те-те-те, вот оно что! Ну, наделаешь ты теперь там дел! — пробормотал про себя Петр Ильич. — Теперь всё понятно, теперь как не понять. Дмитрий Федорович, отдай-ка мне сейчас пистолеты, если хочешь быть человеком, — воскликнул он громко Мите, — слышишь, Дмитрий!  
— Tut-tut-tut, so that's how it is! Well, you'll go and make a fine mess of things over there now! — Pyotr Ilyich muttered to himself. — Now it's all clear, now how could one fail to understand. Dmitri Fyodorovich, hand me your pistols this minute, if you want to be a man, — he called out loudly to Mitya, — do you hear me, Dmitri!
> «вот оно что!» — 'so that's it!': A fixed exclamation of sudden realization ('so that's how it is!'). The babbled «те-те-те» is a sound of dawning, slightly mocking comprehension as Pyotr Ilyich pieces things together.
> «наделать дел» — to make a mess of things: «Наделать» (perfective, prefix на- of accumulation) + the genitive plural «дел» means 'to get up to / make a heap of trouble'. The future «наделаешь» here predicts the mischief Mitya will cause.
> «как не понять» — rhetorical infinitive: A rhetorical question with a bare infinitive: 'how could one fail to understand?' = 'of course it's clear'. The negated infinitive after «как» expresses that the opposite is unthinkable.
> «отдай-ка» — imperative softened by -ка: «Отдай» is the perfective imperative 'hand over'; the clitic -ка softens and coaxes it ('come on, do hand them over'). It mixes urgency with a comradely nudge.
> «быть человеком» — predicate instrumental: After the infinitive «быть», the predicate noun goes in the instrumental: «человеком» (a man, a real man). The conditional «если хочешь» makes manhood the stake of handing over the pistols.

— Пистолеты? Подожди, голубчик, я их дорогой в лужу выброшу, — ответил Митя. — Феня, встань, не лежи ты предо мной. Не погубит Митя, впредь никого уж не погубит этот глупый человек. Да вот что, Феня, — крикнул он ей, уже усевшись, — обидел я тебя давеча, так прости меня и помилуй, прости подлеца… А не простишь, всё равно! Потому что теперь уже всё равно! Трогай, Андрей, живо улетай!  
— The pistols? Wait, my dear fellow, I'll throw them into a puddle along the road, — Mitya answered. — Fenya, get up, don't lie there before me. Mitya will destroy no one, this stupid man will never destroy anyone again. And listen, Fenya, — he cried out to her, already settled in his seat, — I wronged you just now, so forgive me and pardon me, forgive a scoundrel… And if you don't forgive me, it makes no difference! Because now nothing matters anymore! Drive on, Andrei, fly off at once!
> «дорогой» — instrumental of route/time: «Дорогой» here is the instrumental of «дорога» used adverbially — 'along the way, on the road'. The instrumental of path and of time ('one fine morning') is a common adverbial use.
> «не лежи» — imperfective negated imperative: Under a 'stop / don't go on' command Russian uses the imperfective imperative: «не лежи» (don't lie there) tells her to cease an ongoing posture. «Ты» adds urgent, intimate insistence; «предо мной» is the bookish «пред» + instrumental.
> Negative concord: «никого … не»: «Никого» (no one) obligatorily keeps the verbal «не»: «никого не погубит» — literally 'will not destroy no one', one negative meaning. The perfective future «погубит» promises a single completed non-act, never again.
> «усевшись» — past gerund, 'having settled in': A perfective past gerund from «усесться» (to settle oneself down), a -ся verb. It marks a completed prior action — he is now seated — accompanying his cry to Fenya.
> «давеча» — 'just now, a while ago': A folksy, archaic adverb meaning 'a little while back, earlier today'. It belongs to colloquial and 19th-century speech; a modern speaker would say «недавно».
> «прости… помилуй» — perfective imperatives of pleading: A cascade of perfective imperatives: «прости» (forgive), «помилуй» (have mercy). «Помилуй» especially carries a liturgical echo (cf. «Господи, помилуй»). «Подлеца» is the animate accusative = genitive — 'forgive a scoundrel', himself.
> Conditional without «если»: «(Если) не простишь» drops the conjunction: the bare perfective future «не простишь» ('if you don't forgive') sets up a condition by intonation alone, a vivid spoken-Russian shortcut. «Всё равно» = 'it makes no difference'.
> «трогай» and «улетай» — drive on, fly off: «Трогай!» is the coachman's standard command 'move off, drive on'. «Улетай» (lit. 'fly away') with «живо» (smartly, quick) is Mitya's reckless flourish — turning the troika ride into headlong flight.

Андрей тронул; колокольчик зазвенел.  
Andrei set off; the little bell began to ring.
> «колокольчик» — the troika bell: A diminutive of «колокол» (bell): the little harness-bell hung under the shaft-bow (дуга) of a troika, whose ringing announced a traveller on the open road. Its sound is a recurring motif of departure.
> Inceptive за- and two perfectives: «Тронул» (set off) and «зазвенел» pair as quick completed events. The prefix за- on «зазвенеть» is inceptive — 'began to ring, struck up' — capturing the bell's sudden onset.

— Прощай, Петр Ильич! Тебе последняя слеза!..  
— Farewell, Pyotr Ilyich! For you my last tear!..
> Dative of the recipient, verbless: «Тебе» (dative, 'for you') governs a verbless exclamation — 'for you my last tear'. The dropped copula and fronted dative give a heightened, declamatory force to Mitya's theatrical farewell.
> «Прощай» — farewell (and 'forgive'): The imperative «прощай» literally means 'forgive (me)' and serves as the weighty Russian goodbye, implying a parting that may be final — fitting Mitya's sense that he is going to his doom.

«Не пьян ведь, а какую ахинею порет!» — подумал вслед ему Петр Ильич.  
"He isn't even drunk, and yet what nonsense he spouts!" — Pyotr Ilyich thought, watching him go.
> Short adjective «пьян» + «ведь»: «Пьян» is the predicative short form of «пьяный» (drunk), normal after a (here implied) 'to be': 'he's not drunk'. «Ведь» appeals to the obvious — 'and yet, you know, he isn't drunk'.
> «пороть ахинею» — to talk nonsense: A vivid colloquial idiom: «ахинея» is gibberish/balderdash, and «пороть» (lit. 'to rip, flog') in this set phrase means 'to spout' it. Together: 'what rubbish he's babbling'.

Он расположился было остаться присмотреть за тем, как будут снаряжать воз (на тройке же) с остальными припасами и винами, предчувствуя, что надуют и обсчитают Митю, но вдруг, сам на себя рассердившись, плюнул и пошел в свой трактир играть на биллиарде.  
He had half made up his mind to stay and keep an eye on how they loaded the cart (a second troika) with the rest of the provisions and wines, sensing that they would cheat and overcharge Mitya, but suddenly, growing angry at himself, he spat and went off to his tavern to play billiards.
> «было» — the frustrated-intention particle: The particle «было» (from the past of «быть») marks an action begun or intended but then broken off or reversed: he 'had been about to' stay, but didn't. It is a distinctly Russian way of staging a change of mind.
> Compound imperfective future «будут снаряжать»: «Будут снаряжать» is the analytic imperfective future — «быть» conjugated + imperfective infinitive — naming an ongoing process (how they would go about loading), not a single completed act.
> «предчувствуя» — present gerund of foreboding: An imperfective present gerund ('sensing, foreseeing') introduces a «что»-clause. Inside it, two perfective futures «надуют» and «обсчитают» (they'll cheat and overcharge) name the swindle he expects.
> «на себя» — reflexive object, and a past gerund: «Себя» (reflexive pronoun, no nominative) points back to the subject — 'angry at himself'; «сам» intensifies it. «Рассердившись» is a perfective past gerund marking the completed flash of self-anger that precedes his spitting and leaving.
> «плюнул» — spat (in disgust/dismissal): To spit (perfective, single act) is a culturally loaded gesture of contempt and 'to hell with it' resignation — «плюнуть на что-то» means to give up on something. Here it seals his decision to walk away.

— Дурак, хоть и хороший малый… — бормотал он про себя дорогой. — Про этого какого-то офицера «прежнего» Грушенькинова я слыхал. Ну, если прибыл, то… Эх, пистолеты эти! А, черт, что я, его дядька, что ли? Пусть их! Да и ничего не будет. Горланы, и больше ничего. Напьются и подерутся, подерутся и помирятся. Разве это люди дела? Что это за «устранюсь», «казню себя» — ничего не будет! Тысячу раз кричал этим слогом пьяный в трактире. Теперь-то не пьян. «Пьян духом» — слог любят подлецы. Дядька я ему, что ли? И не мог не подраться, вся харя в крови. С кем бы это? В трактире узнаю. И платок в крови… Фу, черт, у меня на полу остался… наплевать!  
— A fool, though a decent enough fellow… — he muttered to himself along the way. — I've heard about that officer, that "old flame" of Grushenka's. Well, if he has turned up, then… Ah, those pistols, devil take them! And, hang it, what am I — his nursemaid? Let them be! Nothing will come of it anyway. Loudmouths, and nothing more. They'll get drunk and brawl, brawl and make up. Are these men of action? What's all this "I'll withdraw," "I'll execute myself" — nothing will come of it! A thousand times some drunk has shouted in that very vein at the tavern. Only now he isn't drunk. "Drunk in spirit" — scoundrels love that turn of phrase. Am I his nursemaid, or what? And he couldn't have helped getting into a fight, his whole mug was covered in blood. With whom, I wonder? I'll find out at the tavern. And the handkerchief soaked in blood… Pah, the devil, it's still lying on my floor… to hell with it!
> «малый» — fellow, lad: «Малый» (here a noun) means 'fellow, chap, young man', colloquial and a touch condescending. «Хоть и хороший малый» — 'though a good enough sort' — sets up Pyotr Ilyich's grudging affection for Mitya.
> «Грушенькин» — possessive adjective from a name: From «Грушенька» Russian forms a possessive adjective «Грушенькин» ('Grushenka's'), here inflected «Грушенькинова». This -ин possessive from personal names is colloquial and folk-flavoured — the officer who was 'Grushenka's own'.
> «что ли» — the dubitative tag: «Что ли» is a colloquial particle turning a statement into a sceptical, exasperated question ('am I his nursemaid, or what?'). The repeated «дядька … что ли?» becomes Pyotr Ilyich's refrain of self-irritation.
> «дядька» — manservant, minder: Beyond 'uncle', «дядька» historically meant a male servant put in charge of a boy — a tutor-minder. Pyotr Ilyich uses it scornfully: 'what am I, his nanny, his keeper?'
> «пусть» — third-person 'let them': «Пусть» + a verb (here elliptical) forms the third-person imperative of permission/dismissal: 'let them (do as they like)'. The bare «Пусть их!» is a curt 'leave them to it'.
> «горланы» — loudmouths, bawlers: «Горлан» (from «горло», throat) is a contemptuous word for a loud bawler, a shouter who is all noise. The plural dismisses Mitya and his sort as men of words, not deeds.
> Perfective futures in a chiastic rhythm: Four perfective futures of -ся verbs («напьются, подерутся, помирятся») chained in an A-B, B-C pattern: they'll get drunk and fight, fight and make up. The clipped sequence enacts the dreary inevitability he scorns.
> «что за» and the reflexive verbs Mitya quotes: «Что (это) за…» means 'what sort of… is this'. Pyotr Ilyich derisively quotes Mitya's grand reflexive verbs: «устранюсь» ('I'll remove myself', -ся) and «казню себя» ('I'll execute myself', with full pronoun «себя') — high-flown self-dramatizing talk.
> «этим слогом» — instrumental of manner: «Слог» here means 'style, manner of speaking'; «этим слогом» is the instrumental of manner — 'in that (very) style'. So many a drunk has 'shouted in that vein'.
> «теперь-то» — emphatic -то on the adverb: The clitic -то stresses the contrast in time: 'now, though / this time he isn't drunk'. It pins the unsettling point — the very thing that worries Pyotr Ilyich.
> «харя» — mug, ugly face: «Харя» is a coarse, abusive word for the face ('mug, snout'), far below «лицо». «Вся харя в крови» — his whole mug was bloodied — drops the register to gutter level, matching Pyotr Ilyich's contemptuous mood.
> «наплевать!» — 'to hell with it': Literally 'to spit (all over it)', «наплевать» is an emphatic idiom of total dismissal: 'I don't give a damn'. It caps his self-disgusted monologue about the bloodied handkerchief left on his floor.

Пришел в трактир он в сквернейшем расположении духа и тотчас же начал партию.  
He came to the tavern in the foulest of moods and at once started a game.
> «сквернейшем» — superlative in -ейш-: «Сквернейший» is the bookish synthetic superlative of «скверный» (vile, foul), formed with -ейш-: 'in the foulest of moods'. «Расположение духа» is a set phrase for one's frame of mind.
> «же» reinforcing «тотчас»: «Тотчас» means 'at once'; the particle «же» reinforces immediacy ('the very moment, right away'). «Начал партию» — 'started a game' — uses «партия» in its sense of a round of billiards.

Партия развеселила его.  
The game cheered him up.
> Perfective «развеселила» — caused to cheer up: «Развеселить» (perfective, prefix раз- of intensification) is the causative transitive 'to cheer up, make merry'; its -ся pair «развеселиться» would be 'to grow merry'. Here the game cheers him — a single completed effect.

Сыграл другую и вдруг заговорил с одним из партнеров о том, что у Дмитрия Карамазова опять деньги появились, тысяч до трех, сам видел, и что он опять укатил кутить в Мокрое с Грушенькой.  
He played another and suddenly fell to talking with one of his partners about how Dmitri Karamazov had money again, up to three thousand — he had seen it himself — and how he had gone off once more to carouse at Mokroye with Grushenka.
> Dropped subject, recoverable from the verb: The masculine perfective past «сыграл» needs no «он» — the -л form and context carry person and gender. Subject-drop is normal once the topic (Pyotr Ilyich) is established.
> «о том, что» — prepositional correlative + clause: «Говорить о» takes the prepositional; with a clause it uses the correlative «о том, что…» ('about how/that…'). It hangs the whole report — money, three thousand, Mokroye — off «заговорил».
> «до» + genitive = 'up to, about': «До трёх тысяч» literally 'up to three thousand', with «до» governing the genitive «трёх тысяч», expresses an approximate upper figure. Inverting to «тысяч до трёх» heightens the colloquial, approximating feel.
> «укатил кутить» — drove off to carouse: «Укатить» (perfective, prefix у- of departure) is a breezy colloquial 'to roll/drive off'; «кутить» is to go on a spree, to carouse and squander. The pair captures Mitya's whirlwind flight to revelry at Mokroye.

Это было принято почти с неожиданным любопытством слушателями.  
This was taken up by the listeners with an almost unexpected curiosity.
> Passive with short participle + instrumental agent: «Было принято» is the periphrastic passive: «быть» + short past passive participle «принято» (neuter, agreeing with «это»). The agent stands in the instrumental: «слушателями» (by the listeners).
> «с» + instrumental of manner: «С любопытством» ('with curiosity') uses «с» + instrumental to express the manner of reception. The agreeing adjective «неожиданным» (unexpected) makes the curiosity itself the surprising thing.

И все они заговорили не смеясь, а как-то странно серьезно.  
And they all began to talk, not laughing, but somehow strangely in earnest.
> «не … а» — corrective contrast: «Не смеясь, а … серьёзно» pairs a negated gerund with «а» in its corrective sense — 'not laughing but rather, in earnest'. «А» here marks substitution, not mere contrast: this, instead of that.
> «как-то» — vague intensifier: Here «как-то» (from «как» + indefinite -то) means 'somehow, in some odd way', softening and unsettling the description: they spoke 'somehow strangely in earnest'. It signals a mood the narrator can't quite pin down.

Даже игру перервали.  
They even broke off the game.
> «перервать» — to break off: «Перервать(ся)» ('to interrupt, break off') is a near-synonym of «прервать», the per-/pre- variant giving an emphatic, colloquial colour. «Игру перервали» — 'they even broke off the game', the impersonal plural standing for 'people'.
> Object-first word order for emphasis: The accusative object «игру» is fronted before the verb «перервали», throwing the weight onto what was interrupted — the game itself. «Даже» (even) underlines how arresting the news had become.

— Три тысячи? Да откуда у него быть трем тысячам?  
— Three thousand? But where would he get three thousand?
> Dative + infinitive «быть» of modal incredulity: A vivid idiom of disbelief: «откуда … быть» + dative «трём тысячам» — literally 'whence is there to be three thousand to him?', i.e. 'where on earth would he get three thousand?'. The dative «трём тысячам» marks what is (improbably) supposed to exist.
> «да» — interjective intensifier: Sentence-initial «да» here is not 'yes' but a colloquial intensifying particle ('but, why, come now'), heightening the rhetorical question's incredulity.

Стали расспрашивать дальше.  
They began to question further.
> «стали» + imperfective infinitive: The phasal «стать» (began) governs an imperfective infinitive «расспрашивать» (to question, prefix рас- of thoroughness, iterative -ыва-). The impersonal plural «стали» = 'they/people began to question further'.

Известие о Хохлаковой приняли сомнительно.  
The news about Madame Khokhlakova they received with skepticism.
> Fronted object + impersonal plural verb: The object «известие» (the news) leads, with the implied-subject plural «приняли» ('they received') following — a topic-comment ordering that makes the news the theme. «О Хохлаковой» is «о» + prepositional.

— А не ограбил ли старика, вот что? Три тысячи! Что-то не ладно.  
— Hasn't he robbed the old man, that's the thing? Three thousand! Something's not right.
> «не … ли» — tentative suspicious question: The frame «не … ли» softens a question into a dawning suspicion: «не ограбил ли он старика» — 'hasn't he perhaps robbed the old man?'. «Старика» is the animate accusative (= genitive). The enclitic «ли» leans on the focused verb.
> «что-то» + «не ладно» — something's amiss: «Что-то» (something, specific-but-unknown -то) as subject of the predicative «не ладно» ('not right, amiss') gives the uneasy verdict: 'something's not right here'. «Ладно» is the colloquial short predicative of 'fine, in order'.

— Похвалялся же убить отца вслух, все здесь слышали. Именно про три тысячи говорил…  
— Why, he boasted out loud that he'd kill his father, everyone here heard it. It was three thousand exactly that he was talking about…
> «же» asserting a shared fact: «Похвалялся» (boasted, imperfective -ся, slightly archaic for «хвалился») with «же» drives home a known point: 'why, he did boast…'. «Убить отца» — animate accusative «отца» — supplies the chilling content of the boast.
> Adverb «вслух» and dropped object: «Вслух» ('aloud, out loud') stresses the public nature of the threat. «Все здесь слышали» — 'everyone here heard (it)' — drops the object, recoverable from context, in the brisk manner of speech.

Петр Ильич слушал и вдруг стал отвечать на расспросы сухо и скупо.  
Pyotr Ilyich listened and suddenly began answering their questions curtly and sparingly.
> «стал» + imperfective, with adverbs of manner: «Стал отвечать» (began to answer) takes the imperfective infinitive; the manner adverbs «сухо» (dryly, curtly) and «скупо» (sparingly) describe his guarded new tone as suspicion thickens.
> «скупо» — sparingly, tight-lipped: Literally 'stingily' (from «скупой», miserly), «скупо» applied to speech means tight-lipped, giving little away — Pyotr Ilyich now hoarding his words about Mitya.

Про кровь, которая была на лице и на руках Мити, не упомянул ни слова, а когда шел сюда, хотел было рассказать.  
Of the blood that had been on Mitya's face and hands he mentioned not a word, though on his way here he had meant to tell of it.
> «ни слова» — genitive of negation, 'not a word': Under negation the object drops to the genitive and «ни» intensifies it: «не упомянул ни слова» — 'did not mention a single word'. «Ни» + the negated verb is one emphatic negation, not two.
> «про» + accusative, and a «который» clause: «Про» ('about', colloquial for «о») governs the accusative «кровь». The relative «которая» agrees with «кровь» in feminine singular but takes nominative for its own role as subject of «была».
> «хотел было» — the abandoned intention: Again the particle «было» marks an intention started and then dropped: on his way he 'had meant to tell of it' but, we now learn, held back. The construction quietly stages his change of resolve.

Начали третью партию, мало-помалу разговор о Мите затих; но, докончив третью партию, Петр Ильич больше играть не пожелал, положил кий и, не поужинав, как собирался, вышел из трактира.  
They began a third game; little by little the talk of Mitya died down; but, having finished the third game, Pyotr Ilyich had no wish to play any longer, laid down his cue, and — without having supper, as he had intended — left the tavern.
> Inceptive за- on «затих»: «Затихнуть» ('to die down, fall quiet') uses inceptive/resultative за- — the talk gradually subsided into silence. «Мало-помалу» ('little by little') is a reduplicative adverb of slow degree.
> «докончив» — past gerund, prefix до- of completion: A perfective past gerund from «докончить» (to finish off, до- = to the end), marking a completed prior action: 'having finished the third game'. It shares Pyotr Ilyich as subject with the main verbs that follow.
> Negated «пожелал» + «больше»: «Не пожелал» ('did not wish', a slightly formal perfective for 'wanted') with «больше» ('any longer') under negation = 'had no wish to play any more'. The imperfective infinitive «играть» names the durative activity declined.
> Negated gerund «не поужинав»: A negated perfective past gerund — 'without having supped' — neatly renders English 'without having supper'. «Как собирался» ('as he had intended') sets the unfulfilled plan against the bare fact.

Выйдя на площадь, он стал в недоумении и даже дивясь на себя.  
Coming out onto the square, he stopped in bewilderment, even astonished at himself.
> «выйдя» — past gerund of prefixed motion: «Выйдя» is the perfective past gerund of «выйти» (to go out, prefix вы-) — 'having come out onto the square'. The prefixed motion verb fixes both the completion and the direction (out, onto).
> «дивясь на себя» — present gerund + reflexive: «Дивясь» is an imperfective present gerund of the bookish «дивиться» (to marvel, -ся verb); «на себя» (reflexive pronoun, accusative) directs the wonder back at himself — astonished at his own behaviour.
> «недоумение» — bewilderment: A bookish abstract noun in -ение: «недоумение» is perplexity, the state of being unable to make sense of something. «Стал в недоумении» — he halted, baffled — captures the moment his own conduct puzzles him.

Он вдруг сообразил, что ведь он хотел сейчас идти в дом Федора Павловича, узнать, не произошло ли чего.  
He suddenly realized that he had in fact meant to go just now to Fyodor Pavlovich's house, to find out whether anything had happened.
> «ведь» inside a «что»-clause: «Сообразил, что…» reports a sudden realization. The «ведь» within ('that he had in fact, you know') colours the thought with the texture of inner speech — he reminds himself of his own forgotten intention.
> «не … ли» embedded + genitive «чего»: Indirect 'whether': «узнать, … ли» = 'find out whether anything had happened'. «Не произошло чего» shows the genitive of negation — «чего» (genitive of «что», 'anything') as the absent subject of negated «произошло».

«Из-за вздора, который окажется, разбужу чужой дом и наделаю скандала. Фу, черт, дядька я им, что ли?»  
"Over some trifle that will turn out to be nothing, I'll wake up a stranger's house and cause a scandal. Pah, the devil, am I their nursemaid, or what?"
> «из-за» + genitive, cause/blame: «Из-за» ('because of, on account of', often with a negative tinge of blame) governs the genitive «вздора». The «который окажется» clause ('that will turn out [to be nothing]') uses a perfective future inside the relative.
> «вздор» — nonsense, a trifle: «Вздор» means rubbish, nonsense, a trifling nothing. «Из-за вздора» — 'over some piece of nonsense' — is Pyotr Ilyich talking himself out of disturbing the household.
> Two perfective futures of consequence: «Разбужу» (I'll wake up) and «наделаю скандала» (I'll make a scandal — perfective with genitive after на-) project the embarrassing result he fears, in the simple future the perfective supplies.
> «что ли» refrain, dative «им»: The self-mocking refrain returns: «дядька я им, что ли?» — 'am I their nursemaid, or what?'. «Им» is dative ('to them'), and «что ли» tags it with weary exasperation. The repetition across segments marks his inner struggle.

В сквернейшем расположении духа направился он прямо к себе домой и вдруг вспомнил про Феню: «Э, черт, вот бы давеча расспросить ее, — подумал он в досаде, — всё бы и знал».  
In the foulest of moods he set off straight for home, and suddenly remembered Fenya: "Eh, the devil, I should have questioned her just now, — he thought in vexation, — then I'd have known everything."
> «к себе домой» — reflexive + adverbial home: «К себе» ('to one's own place', к + dative reflexive «себе») combined with the adverbial «домой» ('homeward') means 'to his own home'. «Направился» (set off, -ся) is the prefixed motion he chooses.
> «вот бы» — wish/regret with бы: «Вот бы» + infinitive expresses a wistful wish or regret: 'I really should have questioned her, if only I had'. The particle «бы» carries the irrealis without a finite verb; «давеча» anchors the missed moment.
> Conditional consequence «всё бы … знал»: The matching apodosis: «всё бы и знал» — 'then I'd have known everything'. Past-tense «знал» + «бы» forms the counterfactual conditional; «и» here is an intensifying 'then indeed'.
> «досада» — vexation: «Досада» is annoyance, chagrin, the sting of a missed chance or a small frustration. «Подумал в досаде» — 'thought with vexation' — names exactly his irritation at not having questioned Fenya.

И до того вдруг загорелось в нем самое нетерпеливое и упрямое желание поговорить с нею и разузнать, что с полдороги он круто повернул к дому Морозовой, в котором квартировала Грушенька.  
And so suddenly there flared up in him such an impatient and stubborn desire to talk with her and find out, that halfway there he turned sharply toward Morozova's house, where Grushenka lodged.
> «до того … что» — degree result construction: «До того … что…» ('to such a degree … that…') frames a result clause. «Загорелось … желание» — a desire 'flared up' (за- inceptive, impersonal-feeling word order with the subject last) so strongly that he turned aside.
> «самое» — periphrastic superlative: The superlative is built with «самый» agreeing with the noun: «самое нетерпеливое … желание» (the most impatient desire). Two agreeing adjectives «нетерпеливое» and «упрямое» pile on the intensity.
> «к» + dative of goal: «К дому Морозовой» ('toward Morozova's house') uses «к» + dative to mark direction-toward. «Круто повернул» — 'turned sharply' — captures the abrupt swerve his desire drives him into.
> «квартировать» — to lodge: A 19th-century borrowing-verb (from «квартира», lodgings) meaning 'to be quartered, to lodge/rent rooms'. «Грушенька квартировала в доме Морозовой» — she rented rooms in the merchant-widow Morozova's house.

Подойдя к воротам, он постучался, и раздавшийся в тишине ночи стук опять как бы вдруг отрезвил и обозлил его.  
Coming up to the gate, he knocked, and the knock, ringing out in the stillness of the night, seemed once more to sober and exasperate him all at once.
> «подойдя» — past gerund of prefixed motion: A perfective past gerund of «подойти» (to approach, prefix под- 'up to') governing «к воротам» (dative): 'having come up to the gate'. The prefix supplies both completion and the 'up-to' direction.
> «раздавшийся» — past active participle: «Раздавшийся» is a past active participle from «раздаться» (to ring out, -ся), declined to agree with «стук» — 'the knock that had rung out'. It packs a whole relative clause into a single attributive modifier before the noun.
> «как бы» — 'as if', softening modal: «Как бы» ('as it were, seemingly') hedges the claim: the knock 'seemed to' sober and anger him. Two perfectives «отрезвил» (sobered) and «обозлил» (made furious) name the paired sudden effects.

К тому же никто не откликнулся, все в доме спали.  
What's more, no one answered — everyone in the house was asleep.
> Negative concord «никто … не»: «Никто не откликнулся» — 'no one answered' — keeps the verbal «не» beside the negative pronoun «никто», the obligatory double negation. «Откликнуться» (to respond, -ся) is a single completed (non-)event.
> «к тому же» — 'what's more': A fixed connective («к» + dative «тому» + «же») meaning 'moreover, besides, what's more'. It adds the further discouragement — the whole house asleep — onto his hesitation.

«И тут скандалу наделаю!» — подумал он с каким-то уже страданием в душе, но вместо того чтоб уйти окончательно, принялся вдруг стучать снова и изо всей уже силы.  
"And here too I'll cause a scandal!" — he thought with a kind of suffering already in his soul, but instead of going off for good, he suddenly set to knocking again, and now with all his might.
> «вместо того чтобы» + infinitive: «Вместо того чтоб(ы)» ('instead of') takes an infinitive «уйти» (to go off, prefixed motion). The «чтобы» here governs an infinitive (same subject), not the past-form irrealis — 'instead of leaving'.
> «принялся» + imperfective infinitive: «Приняться» (-ся, 'to set about, fall to') is a phasal verb of beginning and so takes the imperfective «стучать» (to knock, repeatedly). «Изо всей … силы» — 'with all his might' — adds the violence of the renewed knocking.
> «какой-то» — vague indefinite adjective: «Какой-то» ('a kind of, some sort of', -то indefinite) hedges the noun «страдание» (suffering): 'with a kind of suffering already in his soul'. The vagueness deepens the inwardness Dostoevsky is tracing.

Поднялся гам на всю улицу.  
A din arose down the whole street.
> «гам» — a din, hubbub: «Гам» is loud confused noise, a racket or clamour. «Поднялся гам на всю улицу» — 'a din arose over the whole street' — with «подняться» (to arise, -ся) the natural verb for a noise springing up.
> «на всю улицу» — accusative of extent: «На» + accusative «всю улицу» here marks extent/scope — 'across the whole street', the noise carrying that far. The idiom «на всю улицу» means loud enough for the entire street to hear.

«Так вот нет же, достучусь, достучусь!» — бормотал он, с каждым звуком злясь на себя до остервенения, но с тем вместе и усугубляя удары в ворота.  
"No — so there — I'll knock till they answer, I'll knock till they answer!" — he muttered, with each blow growing furious at himself to the point of frenzy, yet at the same time redoubling his hammering at the gate.
> «нет же» — defiant insistence: «Нет же» piles the particle «же» onto «нет» for stubborn defiance — 'no, but I will, so there!'. «Так вот» ('so then, right then') launches the resolve. Together they stage his obstinate self-egging.
> «достучусь» — perfective future, до- 'until achieved': «Достучаться» (-ся) means 'to knock until one gets an answer' — the prefix до- marks attainment of the goal. The repeated perfective future «достучусь» ('I'll knock till they answer') doubles the stubborn vow.
> «злясь на себя» — present gerund + reflexive: «Злясь» is the imperfective present gerund of «злиться» (-ся, to be angry); «на себя» turns the anger on himself; «до остервенения» ('to the point of frenzy', до + genitive of degree) measures its rising pitch.
> «усугубляя» — present gerund of simultaneous action: An imperfective present gerund from the bookish «усугублять» (to intensify, redouble), describing the action that goes on alongside his fury — he keeps redoubling his blows. «С тем вместе» ('at the same time') ties the two together.
> «остервенение» — frenzy, fury: A strong bookish noun for a savage, beast-like frenzy (root tied to «зверь»-like rage). «До остервенения» marks the extreme degree of Pyotr Ilyich's self-directed fury — a pitch of feeling Dostoevsky loves to push his characters to.
---

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.