# The Brothers Karamazov, "I Am Coming, Too!"

Братья Карамазовы · Fyodor Dostoevsky · Book VIII — Mitya

Source: https://1732studios.com/books/karamazov/b8-c6. Data: https://1732studios.com/books/karamazov/b8-c6.json.


А Дмитрий Федорович летел по дороге.  
And Dmitri Fyodorovich was flying along the road.
> «лететь» of a racing carriage: «летел» literally means 'was flying', but of a vehicle or rider it is the ordinary idiom for tearing along at top speed. The word recurs as a leitmotif of this whole headlong chapter (note «к которой летел он», «тройка летела»).
> Scene-opening «а» and imperfective flight: The sentence opens on the mild contrastive «а», not really 'but' here but a narrative hinge that shifts the camera to a new scene. The imperfective past «летел» paints the ride as an ongoing process rather than a single completed event.

До Мокрого было двадцать верст с небольшим, но тройка Андреева скакала так, что могла поспеть в час с четвертью.  
It was a little over twenty versts to Mokroe, but Andrey's troika was galloping so hard that it could get there in an hour and a quarter.
> Genitive plural after a numeral: After «двадцать» (and any number ending in five or more) the counted noun stands in the genitive plural: «верст». The whole quantified phrase is then the subject of «было».
> Result clause «так, что»: «так… что» sets up a result clause — galloping 'so [hard] that it could get there'. «что» here is the subordinating conjunction introducing the consequence, set off by a comma.

Быстрая езда как бы вдруг освежила Митю.  
The swift ride seemed all at once to freshen Mitya.
> Hedging «как бы» + perfective: «как бы» ('as it were, seemingly') hedges the statement, a tic of Dostoevsky's narrator. The perfective «освежила» presents the freshening as a single accomplished change rather than a process, against which «как бы» casts a shade of doubt.
> «Митя», the diminutive of Dmitri: «Митя» is the warm, familiar short form of «Дмитрий». The narrator's slide from formal «Дмитрий Фёдорович» to intimate «Митя» pulls us inside the character's experience.

Воздух был свежий и холодноватый, на чистом небе сияли крупные звезды.  
The air was fresh and rather cold, and great stars shone in the clear sky.
> Fronted locative, verb-before-subject: The clause leads with the location «на чистом небе» ('in the clear sky', prepositional after «на»), then verb «сияли», then the new information «крупные звёзды» last — a textbook topic-comment ordering that lands the stars as the picture's focus.
> The softening suffix «-оватый»: «холодноватый» is «холодный» ('cold') plus «-оват-», a suffix meaning 'somewhat, -ish'. So 'rather cold, coolish' — a precise, attenuated shade rather than full cold.

Это была та самая ночь, а может, и тот самый час, когда Алеша, упав на землю, «исступленно клялся любить ее во веки веков».  
It was that very night, and perhaps that very hour, when Alyosha, having fallen to the earth, "in a frenzy swore to love her for ever and ever."
> «тот самый» — 'that very': The demonstrative «тот» reinforced by «самый» means 'that very same', pinning the moment to a precise one already known to the reader. «та» agrees as feminine with «ночь», «тот» as masculine with «час».
> Perfective gerund «упав»: «упав» is a perfective past gerund (деепричастие) from «упасть», 'having fallen'. It compresses a prior completed action sharing Alyosha's subject — 'Alyosha, having fallen to the earth, swore…' — a hallmark of literary narration.
> «во веки веков» — for ever and ever: A liturgical, Church-Slavonic-flavoured formula ('unto the ages of ages') closing Orthodox prayers. In quotation marks here, it echoes the elevated, ecstatic register of Alyosha's vow.

Но смутно, очень смутно было в душе Мити, и хоть многое терзало теперь его душу, но в этот момент всё существо его неотразимо устремилось лишь к ней, к его царице, к которой летел он, чтобы взглянуть на нее в последний раз.  
But a vague confusion, a very deep confusion, lay in Mitya's soul, and though much was tormenting him now, in this moment his whole being strained irresistibly toward her alone, toward his queen, toward whom he was flying so as to look upon her one last time.
> Impersonal 'it was confused in his soul': There is no nominative subject: the neuter predicate adverb «смутно» with «было» frames an impersonal state — literally 'it was vaguely/confusedly in Mitya's soul'. This subjectless, experiencer-centred frame is Dostoevsky's favourite way into inner life.
> Stacked datives, relative «который», purpose «чтобы»: The preposition «к» governs the dative through a chain of appositives («к ней, к царице, к которой»), with «который» taking dative from its own «к» inside the relative clause. «чтобы» + infinitive «взглянуть» then gives the purpose, 'so as to look'.
> «царица» — his 'queen': «царица» is 'tsaritsa, queen/empress'. Mitya's name for Grushenka, it raises her to sovereign status over him and prepares the language of worship and self-abasement («до моления, до исчезновения») that follows.
> Reflexive «-ся»: a surge of the whole being: «устремилось» (from «устремиться») carries the reflexive «-ся», here middle/intransitive: his whole being 'rushed, strained' toward her of its own motion. The perfective marks the surge as a single decisive movement.

Скажу лишь одно, даже и не спорило сердце его ни минуты.  
I will say only one thing: his heart did not argue with itself for even a minute.
> Negation with «ни» and genitive of time: «не… ни минуты» is negative concord — «не» on the verb plus intensifying «ни», 'not for a single minute'. «минуты» is genitive, the genitive of negated/duration measure. Word order also fronts the verb «не спорило» before the subject «сердце» for emphasis.
> Perfective future as narratorial 'I will say': «скажу» is the perfective «сказать» conjugated like a present, which yields a future meaning: 'I will say [just one thing]'. The intruding narrator-'I' addressing the reader is a signature Dostoevskian device.

Не поверят мне, может быть, если скажу, что этот ревнивец не ощущал к этому новому человеку, новому сопернику, выскочившему из-под земли, к этому «офицеру» ни малейшей ревности.  
Perhaps no one will believe me if I say that this jealous man felt not the slightest jealousy toward this new person, this new rival who had sprung up out of the ground, toward this "officer."
> Subjectless 'they-won't-believe' + conditional «если»: «не поверят» is a third-person plural with no expressed subject — the impersonal 'people won't believe me'. «если скажу» (perfective future) is a real conditional, 'if I say', not the irrealis «если бы».
> Genitive of negation: Under the negated verb «не ощущал» the object shifts to the genitive: «ни малейшей ревности» ('not the slightest jealousy'), reinforced by intensifying «ни». A negated abstract object in Russian regularly takes the genitive.
> Past active participle «выскочивший»: «выскочивший» is a past active participle from perfective «выскочить», 'who had sprung out', agreeing in the dative with «сопернику». It packs a whole «который»-clause into one modifier — the rival 'who had popped up out of the ground'.
> «как из-под земли» — out of nowhere: «выскочить из-под земли» ('to spring up from under the ground') is the Russian idiom for appearing suddenly, as if by magic — our 'sprung up out of the ground'. It marks the officer-rival as an uncanny, unlooked-for apparition.

Ко всякому другому, явись такой, приревновал бы тотчас же и, может, вновь бы намочил свои страшные руки кровью, а к этому, к этому «ее первому», не ощущал он теперь, летя на своей тройке, не только ревнивой ненависти, но даже враждебного чувства — правда, еще не видал его.  
Toward any other man, had one appeared, he would have flared into jealousy at once, and might once again have wetted his terrible hands with blood; yet toward this one, toward this "first lover of hers," he felt now, as he flew along in his troika, not only no jealous hatred but not even any hostility — true, he had not yet set eyes on him.
> Imperative-as-conditional + «бы» irrealis: «явись такой» is an imperative form used hypothetically — 'were such a one to appear'. The main clauses then run in the irrealis: past-tense verbs plus «бы» («приревновал бы… намочил бы»), 'he would have flared up… would have wetted'.
> Imperfective gerund «летя» + reflexive «свой»: «летя» is the imperfective present gerund of «лететь», 'as he flew', naming the simultaneous circumstance. «своей» is the reflexive possessive «свой», pointing the troika back to the clause's own subject ('his own').
> Negated correlative «не только… но даже»: The frame «не только X, но даже Y» ('not only X but even Y') is folded under the negation «не ощущал», so both members are felt as absent: neither jealous hatred nor even hostility. The negated objects sit in the genitive («ненависти… чувства»).
> «её первый» — 'her first one': An elliptical, possessive-flavoured phrase: «её первый» = her first [love/man]. In quotation marks it stands for the absent officer as a fixed mental label Mitya keeps turning over.

«Тут уж бесспорно, тут право ее и его; тут ее первая любовь, которую она в пять лет не забыла: значит, только его и любила в эти пять лет, а я-то, я зачем тут подвернулся?  
"Here there can be no dispute — here is her right and his; here is her first love, the one she has not forgotten in five years: which means she loved only him through these five years, and I — why did I shove myself in here?
> Relative «которую» in the accusative: «которую» agrees in gender/number with its antecedent «любовь» but takes the accusative as direct object of «не забыла» inside its own clause — 'which she has not forgotten'. «в пять лет» is 'in/over five years'.
> Emphatic clitic «-то» and topic-shift «а»: The hyphenated «-то» in «я-то» foregrounds the contrast 'I, for my part / as for me'. With the topic-shifting «а» it pits Mitya against the loved 'first one' — a self-deprecating turn. «подвернулся» carries reflexive «-ся».
> «подвернуться» — to turn up underfoot: «подвернуться» means to crop up, get in the way, turn up by chance (often unwanted). Mitya casts himself as having merely 'shoved himself in' where he didn't belong — a deliberately belittling verb for his own role.

Что я-то тут и при чем?  
What have I to do with any of it?
> Idiom «при чём» + emphatic «-то»: «при чём тут…?» is the set idiom 'what does X have to do with it?'. «при чём» is «при» + the prepositional of «что». The clitic «-то» on «я» again stresses the self: 'and what have I, of all people, to do with it?'.

Отстранись, Митя, и дай дорогу!  
Step aside, Mitya, and give way!
> Imperatives, including reflexive «-сь»: Two commands addressed by Mitya to himself: «отстранись» (reflexive «отстраниться», 'step aside', with «-сь» after the vowel) and «дай» (from «дать», 'give'). The singular imperative shows him talking to his own self as 'Митя'.

Да и что я теперь?  
And what am I now?
> Connective «да и» + zero copula: «да и» links on a further thought, 'and besides / and anyway'. «что я теперь?» has no verb 'to be' — the present tense uses no copula, so the nominative «я» simply stands against «что»: 'and what am I now?'.

Теперь уж и без офицера всё кончено, хотя бы и не явился он вовсе, то всё равно всё было бы кончено…»  
Now everything is over even without the officer; even had he never appeared at all, everything would have been over just the same…"
> Counterfactual «хотя бы… то… бы»: A full irrealis condition: concessive «хотя бы… не явился» ('even had he not appeared at all') answered by «всё было бы кончено» ('everything would have been over'), the past form plus «бы». The mobile «бы» appears in both clauses.
> Short passive participle «кончено»: «кончено» is the short-form neuter past passive participle of «кончить», used predicatively: 'it is finished / over'. Such short participles with an implied «было/было бы» build Russian's resultative passive.

Вот в каких словах он бы мог приблизительно изложить свои ощущения, если бы только мог рассуждать.  
It was in some such words that he might have set out his feelings, more or less, if only he had been able to reason.
> Hypothetical with «бы» in both clauses: Classic conditional: main clause «он бы мог изложить» ('he might have set out') and protasis «если бы только мог» ('if only he had been able'), each built on a past-form verb plus «бы». The narrator marks all this self-articulation as something Mitya could not actually do.
> Fronted «вот в каких словах»: The sentence opens by fronting the manner phrase «вот в каких словах» ('it was in just such words that…'), throwing emphasis onto the manner before the subject and verb arrive — period rhetorical inversion.

Но он уже не мог тогда рассуждать.  
But by then he was no longer able to reason.
> «уже не» — 'no longer': «уже не» negates with the sense 'no longer, not any more': by then he was no longer able to reason. The imperfective infinitive «рассуждать» names the ongoing capacity that has lapsed.

Вся теперешняя решимость его родилась без рассуждений, в один миг, была сразу почувствована и принята целиком со всеми последствиями еще давеча, у Фени, с первых слов ее.  
His whole present resolve had been born without reasoning, in a single instant; it had been felt all at once and accepted whole, with all its consequences, back at Fenya's, at her very first words.
> Periphrastic passive with short participles: «была… почувствована и принята» is the past passive built from «быть» plus short-form past passive participles (feminine, agreeing with «решимость»): 'was at once felt and accepted'. This resultative passive states the outcome rather than the act.
> «давеча» — 'a while ago, earlier today': «давеча» is a colloquial, somewhat old-fashioned adverb meaning 'a little while back, earlier (today)'. It recurs in Andrey's speech («даве») as a marker of peasant register and rural texture.

И все-таки, несмотря на всю принятую решимость, было смутно в душе его, смутно до страдания: не дала и решимость спокойствия.  
And yet, for all the resolve he had taken on, his soul was in confusion, in a confusion that hurt: even resolve had brought him no peace.
> Impersonal state intensified by «до»: Again the subjectless «было смутно» ('it was confused [in his soul]'), now pushed by «до страдания» ('to the point of suffering'). «до» + genitive is the recurring way Dostoevsky measures an inner state by its breaking point.
> Genitive of negation + emphatic «и»: Under negated «не дала» the object goes genitive: «спокойствия» ('peace'). The intrusive «и» before the subject «решимость» means 'even': 'even resolve gave no peace'. Note the fronted verb for emphasis.

Слишком многое стояло сзади его и мучило.  
Too much stood behind him and tormented him.
> Neuter «многое» as subject; imperfective duration: «многое» ('much, a great many things') is a substantivized neuter adjective serving as subject. The imperfective verbs «стояло… мучило» render a standing, lasting state — things kept standing behind him and tormenting him.

И странно было ему это мгновениями: ведь уж написан был им самим себе приговор пером на бумаге: «казню себя и наказую»; и бумажка лежала тут, в кармане его, приготовленная; ведь уж заряжен пистолет, ведь уж решил же он, как встретит он завтра первый горячий луч «Феба златокудрого», а между тем с прежним, со всем стоявшим сзади и мучившим его, все-таки нельзя было рассчитаться, чувствовал он это до мучения, и мысль о том впивалась в его душу отчаянием.  
And at moments it struck him as strange: after all, he had written his own sentence against himself, in his own hand, with pen on paper — "I execute myself and punish myself"; and the slip of paper was lying right there, in his pocket, made ready; after all, the pistol was already loaded, after all he had already decided how he would meet, tomorrow, the first hot ray of "golden-haired Phoebus" — and yet meanwhile, with the old life, with everything that stood behind him and tormented him, there was, all the same, no settling of accounts, and he felt this to the point of torture, and the thought of it bit into his soul with despair.
> Insistent particles «ведь… уж… же»: The long sentence is studded with modal particles: «ведь» appeals to what is already known ('after all'), «уж» means 'already, by now', and «же» (in «решил же») hammers the insistence. They give the inner monologue its driven, breathless voice.
> Short passive participles, resultative: «написан был» (with «приговор») and «заряжен» (with «пистолет») are short-form past passive participles building resultative passives: the sentence had been written, the pistol stood loaded. «им самим» — the instrumental of the agent, 'by himself'.
> Chained past active participles: «стоявшим… мучившим» are two past active participles (from «стоять», «мучить») in the instrumental after «со», governing «всем»: 'with everything that stood behind and tormented him'. Stacked participles like these are the texture of 19th-century literary syntax.

Было одно мгновение в пути, что ему вдруг захотелось остановить Андрея, выскочить из телеги, достать свой заряженный пистолет и покончить всё, не дождавшись и рассвета.  
There was one moment on the road when he suddenly wanted to stop Andrey, to leap out of the cart, to take out his loaded pistol and finish it all, without even waiting for the dawn.
> Dative-subject «ему захотелось»: «ему захотелось» is the impersonal desire construction: the experiencer is in the dative «ему», the verb is neuter reflexive «захотелось», and the wish itself is the infinitive «остановить». Literally 'to him it suddenly got-wanted to stop…'.
> Negated perfective gerund + genitive: «не дождавшись» is a negated perfective gerund from «дождаться» ('without even waiting for'), and the object «рассвета» stands in the genitive — both as the object of «дождаться» (which governs the genitive) and under negation.

Но мгновение это пролетело как искорка.  
But that moment flew past like a spark.
> Diminutive «искорка»: «искорка» is the diminutive of «искра» ('spark'), 'a little spark'. The diminutive miniaturizes the suicidal impulse — it flares and vanishes like a tiny ember, the suffix doing the work of fleeting smallness.
> Postposed «это» + perfective flash: Putting «это» after its noun («мгновение это», 'that moment') is a bookish, slightly archaic order. The perfective «пролетело» captures the instantaneous, completed flicker — the moment 'flew past' and was gone.

Да и тройка летела, «пожирая пространство», и по мере приближения к цели опять-таки мысль о ней, о ней одной, всё сильнее и сильнее захватывала ему дух и отгоняла все остальные страшные призраки от его сердца.  
And the troika went flying on, "devouring the distance," and the nearer it drew to its goal, again the thought of her, of her alone, took his breath away more and more strongly and drove away all the other terrible phantoms from his heart.
> «по мере» + imperfective intensification: «по мере» + genitive ('in proportion as, the more…') sets up a graded process, matched by the imperfective verbs «захватывала… отгоняла» and the doubled comparative «всё сильнее и сильнее» ('more and more strongly'). The whole sentence enacts a mounting wave.
> «пожирать пространство» — devouring the distance: «пожирая» is an imperfective gerund of «пожирать» ('to devour'). The quoted phrase 'devouring space' is a bit of Romantic cliché about a galloping team, set in quotation marks to flag its borrowed, literary flavour.

О, ему так хотелось поглядеть на нее, хоть мельком, хоть издали!  
Oh, how he longed to look at her, if only for an instant, if only from afar!
> Dative-subject longing: Another experiencer-in-the-dative frame: «ему так хотелось» ('he so longed'), with the wish as infinitive «поглядеть». «О» opening the line gives the inward exclamation its emotional surge.
> Concessive «хоть… хоть» — 'if only': Repeated «хоть» means 'at least, if only even': 'if only for an instant, if only from afar'. «мельком» ('in passing, for a glimpse') and «издали» ('from a distance') are fixed adverbs of manner.

«Она теперь с ним, ну вот и погляжу, как она теперь с ним, со своим прежним милым, и только этого мне и надо».  
"She is with him now — well, so I will just look at how she is now with him, with her old sweetheart, and that is all I need."
> «мне надо» + genitive object, emphatic «и»: «мне надо» is the dative-experiencer 'I need', and «этого» is genitive ('of that'). The «только… и» frame plus «и» means 'that and nothing else is all I need' — a tight idiom of sufficiency.
> «милый» as 'sweetheart': «милый» ('dear, sweet') is here substantivized to mean 'sweetheart, beloved one', and «прежний» ('former, of old') marks the officer as Grushenka's old flame. «своим» is the reflexive possessive, 'her own'.

И никогда еще не подымалось из груди его столько любви к этой роковой в судьбе его женщине, столько нового, не испытанного им еще никогда чувства, чувства неожиданного даже для него самого, чувства нежного до моления, до исчезновения пред ней.  
And never yet had so much love for this woman, fateful in his destiny, risen up out of his breast — so much that was new, a feeling he had never yet known, a feeling unexpected even to himself, a feeling tender to the point of prayer, to the point of vanishing utterly before her.
> Negation + genitive of quantity, fronted verb: «никогда… не подымалось» is negative concord ('never yet had there risen'); the quantity word «столько» governs the genitive «любви… чувства». The verb is fronted before its long subject, building suspense before the great surge of feeling lands.
> Past passive participle + instrumental agent: «испытанного» is a past passive participle (genitive, agreeing with «чувства»), 'never yet experienced', with the agent in the instrumental «им» ('by him'). The genitive participle threads through the appositive chain «столько нового… чувства неожиданного… чувства нежного».
> «до моления» — tender to the point of prayer: «моление» ('prayer, supplication') and «исчезновение» ('vanishing, disappearance') are abstract «-ение/-ие» nouns of an elevated cast. The «до» + genitive measures the tenderness by its extreme: love so tender it becomes worship and self-annihilation before her.

«И исчезну!» — проговорил он вдруг в припадке какого-то истерического восторга.  
"And vanish I will!" he said suddenly, in a fit of some hysterical rapture.
> Perfective future «исчезну»: «исчезну» is the perfective «исчезнуть» conjugated like a present, giving future meaning: 'and I will vanish!'. He completes the narrator's word «исчезновения» into a vow, the perfective stressing the single, total act.
> «припадок» — a fit, seizure: «припадок» is a fit, attack, or seizure (also the clinical word for an epileptic fit, charged in this novel). Paired with «истерический восторг» ('hysterical rapture'), it casts Mitya's exaltation as something close to pathology.

Скакали уже почти час.  
They had been galloping for nearly an hour.
> Subjectless plural + imperfective duration: «скакали» drops any subject pronoun (the verb ending already implies 'they'), and the imperfective marks duration: 'they had been galloping for nearly an hour'. «час» is the bare accusative of extent of time.

Митя молчал, а Андрей, хотя и словоохотливый был мужик, тоже не вымолвил еще ни слова, точно опасался заговорить, и только живо погонял своих «одров», свою гнедую, сухопарую, но резвую тройку.  
Mitya was silent, and Andrey, talkative peasant though he was, had likewise not yet uttered a single word, as though he were afraid to start speaking, and only kept his "nags" — his bay, lean, but lively troika — going at a brisk pace.
> Concessive «хотя и»: «хотя и… был» concedes a point — 'talkative peasant though he was'. The bookish inversion (predicate adjective before «был») heightens the concessive ring before the contrast «тоже не вымолвил».
> Negation + genitive «ни слова»: «не вымолвил ни слова» — 'did not utter a single word', with intensifying «ни» and the genitive «слова» under negation. The perfective «вымолвил» stresses that not one word got out.
> «одёр» — a nag, a sorry old horse: «одёр» (here genitive plural «одров», quotation-marked) is a contemptuous word for a worn-out old horse, a 'nag'. It is half-affectionate self-mockery from the driver, undercut at once by the praise «резвую тройку» ('a lively troika').
> «мужик» — peasant man: «мужик» is a peasant, a (male) commoner — neutral-to-earthy in this period. It situates Andrey socially against Mitya the «барин» and frames the master-and-driver exchange to come.

Как вдруг Митя в страшном беспокойстве воскликнул:  
When all at once Mitya, in terrible agitation, cried out:
> «как вдруг» + perfective rupture: «как вдруг» ('when all at once') is the standard narrative formula for a sudden break, and it pairs naturally with a perfective verb «воскликнул» ('cried out'), which snaps the silence with a single completed event.
> «в» + prepositional of state: «в страшном беспокойстве» ('in terrible agitation') uses «в» + the prepositional to name the emotional state enveloping the action — a frequent Russian way of housing feeling in a locative phrase.

— Андрей! А что, если спят?  
"Andrey! What if they are asleep?"
> «а что, если» + subjectless plural: «а что, если…?» is the colloquial 'and what if…?'. «спят» (3rd plural present, no pronoun) leaves the subject indefinite — 'what if they're asleep?'. The opening «а» ties the worry to the running anxiety.

Ему это вдруг вспало на ум, а до сих пор он о том и не подумал.  
It had suddenly leapt into his mind, when up to that point he had not given it a thought.
> Idiom «взбрести/всплыть на ум» here «вспало на ум»: «вспало на ум» ('it leapt/came into [his] mind') is an impersonal idiom: the neuter «вспало» with «это» as subject and the experiencer left implicit. The verb is bookish-old beside the everyday «пришло на ум».
> Negation + «о том»; emphatic «и»: «о том» is «о» + the prepositional «том» ('about that'). The «и» before «не подумал» means 'not even': 'he had not even thought about it'. The verb «подумать» here governs its topic with «о».

— Надо думать, что уж легли, Дмитрий Федорович.  
"It's to be supposed they've turned in by now, Dmitri Fyodorovich."
> Impersonal «надо думать» + reporting «что»: «надо думать» is an impersonal idiom, 'one must suppose, it's to be reckoned'. «что уж легли» reports the supposed fact, with «уж» ('already, by now') and the perfective «легли' ('have lain down, turned in').

Митя болезненно нахмурился: что, в самом деле, он прилетит… с такими чувствами… а они спят… спит и она, может быть, тут же… Злое чувство закипело в его сердце.  
Mitya knit his brows in pain: there he would come flying in… with feelings like these… and they would be asleep… and she asleep too, perhaps, right there… A spiteful feeling boiled up in his heart.
> Free indirect thought with mixed tense: The narration slips into Mitya's own racing thought: perfective future «прилетит» ('he'll come flying in') against present «спят / спит» — the dashes mark the broken, anxious leaps. «и она» fronts 'she too' for emotional weight.
> «закипеть» — to boil up: «закипело» (from «закипеть», 'to begin to boil') with the inceptive «за-» marks the sudden welling-up of a 'spiteful feeling'. The kitchen image of boiling over is a stock Russian metaphor for rising anger.

— Погоняй, Андрей, катай, Андрей, живо! — закричал он в исступлении.  
"Drive on, Andrey, push on, Andrey, be quick!" he shouted in a frenzy.
> Imperatives of urging: «погоняй» (drive on!) and «катай» (literally 'roll [them]', here 'push on!') are imperfective imperatives in -й, urging continued, repeated action. «живо!» ('quick! lively!') is an adverb used as a command.
> «исступление» — frenzy, ecstasy: «исступление» is a key Dostoevsky word: a state of being beside oneself, frenzy verging on ecstasy or madness. It recurs across this chapter («исступлённо», «исступлённой») as the keynote of Mitya's condition.

— А может, еще и не полегли, — рассудил, помолчав, Андрей. — Даве Тимофей сказывал, что там много их собралось…  
"But maybe they haven't turned in after all," Andrey reasoned after a silence. "Earlier Timofey was saying that a lot of them had gathered there…"
> «ещё не» + collective perfective «полегли»: «ещё… не полегли» means 'haven't turned in yet'. The prefix «по-» on «полегли» gives a distributive sense — the whole crowd lying down one after another. «ещё и» piles on 'maybe even after all'.
> «сказывал» — peasant 'was saying': «сказывать» is a folksy, dialectal imperfective for 'to say, tell' (standard «говорить/рассказывать»). Andrey's «сказывал», «даве», «зачали», «хоша» throughout mark his speech as rural and unlettered, a register Dostoevsky reproduces with care.

— На станции?  
"At the posting station?"
> Locative «на станции»: «на станции» is «на» + the prepositional for location, 'at the station'. Note that «станция» idiomatically takes «на», not «в» — Mitya's one-word question that Andrey then corrects to «у Пластуновых».

— Не в станции, а у Пластуновых, на постоялом дворе, вольная, значит, станция.  
"Not at the station, but at the Plastunovs', at the inn — a free station, that is."
> Corrective «не… а»: «не X, а Y» is the corrective coordination, 'not X but Y' — Andrey corrects the place. «у Пластуновых» is «у» + genitive plural of the family name, 'at the Plastunovs'', the idiom for 'at someone's place'.

— Знаю; так как же ты говоришь, что много? Где же много? Кто такие? — вскинулся Митя в страшной тревоге при неожиданном известии.  
"I know it; but what do you mean, a lot of them? Where are there a lot? Who are they?" Mitya started up in terrible alarm at the unexpected news.
> Insistent «же» in questions: The particle «же» peppers Mitya's rapid questions («как же», «где же»), adding pressing emphasis — 'but how can you say…', 'where on earth are there a lot?'. «кто такие?» is the idiom 'who are they?'.
> «вскинуться» — to start up sharply: «вскинулся» (reflexive «вскинуться») means to jerk up, start up, flare out — a sudden upward or outward movement of body or temper. It catches Mitya physically lurching at the unexpected news.

— Да сказывал Тимофей, всё господа: из города двое, кто таковы — не знаю, только сказывал Тимофей, двое из здешних господ, да тех двое, будто бы приезжих, а может, и еще кто есть, не спросил я его толково. В карты, говорил, стали играть.  
"Well, Timofey was saying — all gentlefolk: two from town, who they are I don't know, only Timofey was saying two of the local gentry, and besides them two more, supposedly newcomers, and maybe there's somebody else too, I didn't question him properly. They've started in to play cards, he said."
> «господа» — gentlefolk: «господа» (plural of «господин») here means 'gentlefolk, the gentry' — people of the upper, leisured class, as opposed to «мужик». Andrey's «всё господа» ('all gentry') sizes up the card-players by rank, the social axis he reads the world by.
> Archaic «таковы» (short «таков»): «таковы» is the short predicative form of the bookish demonstrative «таков» ('such, of that sort'), here 'who they are (lit. what sort they are)'. The slightly elevated form mingles oddly with Andrey's rustic «сказывал», typical of peasant speech reaching for grander words.
> «играть в карты» — to play cards: «играть в карты» is the fixed phrase 'to play cards', with «в» + accusative naming the game. «стали играть» (perfective «стать» + imperfective infinitive) means 'they began to play'.

— В карты?  
"Cards?"

— Так вот, может, и не спят, коли в карты зачали. Думать надо, теперь всего одиннадцатый час в исходе, не более того.  
"So maybe they aren't asleep, if they've begun at cards. It's only just gone the stroke of eleven, no later than that, I'd reckon."
> Folk «коли» and «зачали»: «коли» is a colloquial/archaic «если» ('if'), and «зачали» a dialectal «начали» ('they began'). Both belong to Andrey's peasant idiom and would read as rustic-old to a 19th-century ear.

— Погоняй, Андрей, погоняй! — нервно вскричал опять Митя.  
"Drive on, Andrey, drive on!" Mitya cried again, on edge.
> Repeated imperative for urgency: The doubled imperfective imperative «погоняй… погоняй!» ('drive on… drive on!') uses repetition to convey frantic, sustained urging — Mitya cannot stop pressing the driver onward.

— Что это, я вас спрошу, сударь, — помолчав начал снова Андрей, — вот только бы не осердить мне вас, боюсь, барин.  
"There's a thing I'd ask you, sir," Andrey began again after a silence — "only I'd not want to anger you, I'm afraid, master."
> Apprehensive «бы… не» with dative agent: «только бы не осердить» uses «бы» + negated infinitive to voice a fear/wish — 'if only I don't anger you'. The doer appears in the dative «мне» ('for me to anger'), a characteristic infinitive-plus-dative construction.
> «осердить» — folksy 'to anger': «осердить» (for standard «рассердить», 'to make angry') is a colloquial, rustic variant tied to «сердце»/«сердиться». Another touch of Andrey's village speech as he gingerly broaches a delicate question.

— Чего тебе?  
"What is it?"
> Genitive in «чего тебе?»: «Чего тебе?» ('what [do you want]?') uses the genitive «чего» (of «что») with the dative «тебе», an elliptical idiom — literally 'of-what to-you?'. The genitive here reflects the partitive/wanting sense behind the dropped verb.

— Давеча Федосья Марковна легла вам в ноги, молила, барыню чтобы вам не сгубить и еще кого… так вот, сударь, что везу-то я вас туда… Простите, сударь, меня, так, от совести, может, глупо что сказал.  
"A while back Fedosya Markovna fell at your feet and begged you not to ruin the mistress and someone else besides… so there it is, sir, that I'm carrying you there… Forgive me, sir — it was just my conscience, maybe a foolish thing to say."
> «чтобы» + dative-infinitive of entreaty: After «молила» ('begged'), the purpose/wish clause uses «чтобы» with a negated infinitive and dative agent: «чтобы вам не сгубить» — 'that you not ruin'. «лечь в ноги» ('to fall at someone's feet') is the gesture of supplication.
> «барыня» and «сгубить»: «барыня» is the feminine of «барин» — the lady, mistress (here Grushenka). «сгубить» is an intense, folkish perfective for 'to ruin, destroy, be the death of' — stronger and more fateful than plain «погубить».
> «от совести» — out of conscience: «от совести» ('from/out of conscience') gives Andrey's motive with «от» + genitive of cause. It frames his risky words to his master as conscience-driven, a small moral self-justification before the larger talk of sin and hell.

Митя вдруг схватил его сзади за плечи.  
Mitya suddenly seized him by the shoulders from behind.
> «схватить за» + accusative: The grabbing idiom is «схватить кого-то за что-то» — 'to seize someone by [a body part]', with the part in the accusative after «за» («за плечи», by the shoulders). «сзади» ('from behind') adds the angle.

— Ты ямщик? Ямщик? — начал он исступленно.  
"You're a driver? A driver?" he began in a frenzy.
> Zero-copula identity question: «Ты ямщик?» needs no verb 'to be' in the present — nominative subject «ты» beside nominative predicate «ямщик» suffices. The bare, repeated noun gives the challenge its abrupt, frenzied force.

— Ямщик…  
"A driver…"

— Знаешь ты, что надо дорогу давать. Что ямщик, так уж никому и дороги не дать, дави, дескать, я еду! Нет, ямщик, не дави! Нельзя давить человека, нельзя людям жизнь портить; а коли испортил жизнь — наказуй себя… если только испортил, если только загубил кому жизнь — казни себя и уйди.  
"Then you know that one must give way. That just because you're a driver, that's no reason to give way to no one, to run them down — out of my road, I'm coming through! No, driver, don't run them down! You mustn't run a man down, you mustn't ruin people's lives; and if you have ruined a life — punish yourself… if only you've ruined it, if only you've destroyed somebody's life — execute yourself and go."
> Impersonal «надо» / «нельзя» + infinitive: Mitya's moral rule is cast impersonally: «надо… давать» ('one must give [way]') and «нельзя давить» ('one must not run down'). These subjectless modal predicates with an infinitive are the natural Russian shape for general obligation and prohibition.
> Folk «коли» + imperatives with «себя»: Conditional «коли испортил» ('if you've ruined') is answered by commands «наказуй / казни себя» ('punish / execute yourself'). «себя» is the reflexive pronoun (no nominative), turning the action back on the doer — the heart of Mitya's self-sentence.
> Reportative «дескать»: «дескать» flags reported or imagined speech with a tinge of mockery — 'as if to say…'. Mitya voices the careless driver's attitude: 'run them down, I'm coming through!'. «дави» is the imperative of «давить» ('to crush, run over').

Всё это вырвалось у Мити как бы в совершенной истерике.  
All this burst out of Mitya as though in utter hysteria.
> Reflexive «вырваться» + «у» + genitive: «вырвалось» (reflexive «вырваться», 'burst out') with «у Мити» ('out of Mitya', «у» + genitive) frames the outburst as something that escaped him, not something he did — the speech 'broke out of' him. «как бы» again hedges: 'as though in utter hysteria'.

Андрей хоть и подивился на барина, но разговор поддержал.  
Andrey, though astonished at his master, kept up the conversation.
> Concessive «хоть и… но»: «хоть и подивился, но… поддержал» — 'though he was astonished, he still kept up [the talk]'. The «хоть и… но» frame is the standard concessive pair; «подивился на барина» uses «на» + accusative, 'wondered at the master'.

— Правда это, батюшка Дмитрий Федорович, это вы правы, что не надо человека давить, тоже и мучить, равно как и всякую тварь, потому всякая тварь — она тварь созданная, вот хоть бы лошадь, потому другой ломит зря, хоша бы и наш ямщик… И удержу ему нет, так он и прет, прямо тебе так и прет.  
"True it is, dear Dmitri Fyodorovich, you're right that one mustn't run a man down, nor torment him either, no more than any living creature, for every creature is a creature created — take a horse, even; for another man drives one to ruin for nothing, like our driver here, say… And there's no holding him, so he just bears down, straight at you he bears down."
> «батюшка» as warm address: «батюшка» (literally 'little father') is a tender, deferential form of address from an inferior or elder — 'dear sir, good father'. Prefixed to the master's name-and-patronymic, it wraps Andrey's homily in folksy affection. (The same word also titles an Orthodox priest.)
> «тварь» — creature, the created thing: «тварь» here keeps its older, neutral sense of 'creature, a created being' (from «творить», 'to create'), not the modern abusive 'vermin/scum'. «тварь созданная» ('a created creature') voices a homely theology: every living thing is God's handiwork and not to be tormented.
> Peasant «хоша» and «переть»: «хоша» is a dialectal «хотя» ('although'), and «прёт» (from «переть») a coarse, vivid verb 'to push/barge ahead' — here a reckless driver who 'just bears down' on you. Both deepen the rustic colouring of Andrey's speech.

— Во ад? — перебил вдруг Митя и захохотал своим неожиданным коротким смехом. — Андрей, простая душа, — схватил он опять его крепко за плечи, — говори: попадет Дмитрий Федорович Карамазов во ад или нет, как по-твоему?  
"Into hell?" Mitya broke in suddenly and burst into his short, unexpected laugh. "Andrey, you simple soul," he seized him hard by the shoulders again, "tell me: will Dmitri Fyodorovich Karamazov go to hell or not, what do you think?"
> Perfective future + «как по-твоему»: «попадёт» is the perfective future of «попасть» ('will [he] end up, land'). «как по-твоему?» is the set idiom 'what do you think? / in your view?', «по» + dative «твоему». Mitya asks his own damnation as a yes-or-no.
> «захохотать» — to burst out laughing: «захохотал» (inceptive «за-» on «хохотать», 'to guffaw') is a sudden burst of loud laughter, paired with «коротким смехом» ('a short laugh') in the instrumental of manner. The jarring laugh marks Mitya's unstable, frenzied state.

— Не знаю, голубчик, от вас зависит, потому вы у нас… Видишь, сударь, когда сын божий на кресте был распят и помер, то сошел он со креста прямо во ад и освободил всех грешников, которые мучились. И застонал ад об том, что уж больше, думал, к нему никто теперь не придет, грешников-то. И сказал тогда аду господь: «Не стони, аде, ибо приидут к тебе отселева всякие вельможи, управители, главные судьи и богачи, и будешь восполнен так же точно, как был во веки веков, до того времени, пока снова приду». Это точно, это было такое слово…  
"I don't know, my dear; it depends on you, for you are to us… You see, sir, when the Son of God was crucified on the cross and died, He went down from the cross straight into hell and set free all the sinners who were suffering there. And hell groaned, thinking that now no one more would come to it, no sinners that is. And then the Lord said to hell: 'Do not groan, O hell, for from now on there shall come to you all manner of grandees, governors, chief justices, and rich men, and you shall be filled up just exactly as you have been from age to age, until the time when I come again.' That's just so — there was such a word…"
> «голубчик» — 'my dear, little dove': «голубчик» is the diminutive of «голубь» ('dove'), an affectionate, intimate term of endearment — 'my dear (little) one'. Used by Andrey to his master, it crosses rank in a moment of tenderness, the suffix carrying pure warmth.
> Vocative «аде», archaic «приидут», «отселева»: The Lord's speech is thick with Church Slavonic: the vocative «аде» ('O hell'), the archaic perfective future «приидут» (modern «придут», 'will come'), and «отселева» ('from henceforth'). The bookish «ибо» ('for') seals the solemn, scriptural register.
> The ranks bound for hell: The legend names the powerful: «вельможи» (grandees, magnates), «управители» (governors, stewards), «главные судьи» (chief judges), «богачи» (rich men). The folk gospel pointedly fills hell with the mighty and wealthy — a quiet peasant subversion of earthly rank.
> Second-person future + short passive participle: «будешь восполнен» is the compound (imperfective) future of «быть» plus a short past passive participle — 'you shall be filled up', addressed to hell. «во веки веков» ('unto ages of ages') is the liturgical formula again.

— Народная легенда, великолепно! Стегни левую, Андрей!  
"A folk legend — magnificent! Lash the left one, Andrey!"
> Perfective imperative «стегни»: «стегни» is the perfective imperative of «стегнуть» ('to lash, whip once'), commanding a single crack of the whip — 'lash the left one!'. «левую» is the feminine accusative ('the left-hand [horse]'), with «лошадь» understood.

— Так вот, сударь, для кого ад назначен, — стегнул Андрей левую, — а вы у нас, сударь, всё одно как малый ребенок… так мы вас почитаем… И хоть гневливы вы, сударь, это есть, но за простодушие ваше простит господь.  
"So there, sir, that's who hell is meant for," Andrey lashed the left-hand horse, "but you, sir, with us you're for all the world like a little child… that's how we reckon you… And though you are hot-tempered, sir, that there's no denying, still for your simple heart the Lord will forgive you."
> Short passive participle «назначен» + «для» + genitive: «назначен» is the short past passive participle of «назначить» ('appointed, meant'), predicating with an implied «есть»: 'for whom hell is meant'. «для кого» is «для» + genitive of «кто», naming the beneficiary/target.
> Idiom «всё одно» — 'all the same, just like': «всё одно как…» is a colloquial 'just like, for all the world like' — Andrey likens his master to «малый ребёнок» ('a little child'). The simile, with «как», prepares the gentle theology that the simple-hearted will be forgiven.
> «за» + accusative of cause; word order: «за простодушие» ('for your simple-heartedness', «за» + accusative) gives the ground of forgiveness, fronted before the verb «простит» and the subject «господь» for emphasis. «простодушие» — 'simplicity of heart, guilelessness' — is a prized virtue in the novel's moral world.

— А ты, ты простишь меня, Андрей?  
"And you, will you forgive me, Andrey?"
> Emphatic doubled pronoun «ты, ты»: The repeated «ты, ты» foregrounds the addressee against the preceding talk of God's forgiveness — 'and you, you…?'. Since the verb ending already marks person, the pronoun's presence and repetition is pure emphasis. «простишь» is perfective future.

— Мне что же вас прощать, вы мне ничего не сделали.  
"What have I to forgive you for? You've done nothing to me."
> Dative + infinitive of 'why should I': «мне… прощать» is the dative-experiencer plus infinitive idiom expressing 'what is there for me to forgive?'. With «что же» ('what on earth') it brushes the request aside. «вас» is the polite/accusative object.
> Negative concord «ничего не»: «ничего не сделали» is negative concord: the ни-word «ничего» (genitive of «ничто») together with «не» on the verb, 'you have done nothing to me'. «мне» is the dative of the person affected.

— Нет, за всех, за всех ты один, вот теперь, сейчас, здесь, на дороге, простишь меня за всех? Говори, душа простолюдина!  
"No, for everyone, for everyone — you alone, right now, this instant, here, on the road — will you forgive me for everyone? Speak, soul of a common man!"
> Repetition + «за» + accusative: «за всех» ('for everyone', «за» + accusative of «все') is hammered three times, the repetition mounting toward Mitya's plea for a universal absolution. «ты один» ('you alone') singles Andrey out as the one to grant it.
> «простолюдин» — a common man: «простолюдин» is a person of the common people, a plebeian (as against «господа»). Mitya's address «душа простолюдина!» ('soul of a common man!') romanticizes Andrey's lowly status as the very source of an authentic, God-given power to forgive.

— Ох, сударь! Боязно вас и везти-то, странный какой-то ваш разговор…  
"Oh, sir! I'm afraid even to be driving you — there's something strange in this talk of yours…"
> «Боязно» — it's frightening: An impersonal predicative adverb from «бояться» (to fear): 'it is frightening / I'm afraid to'. Folksy and a touch archaic, it frames the fear as a state that comes over the speaker rather than something he does.
> The emphatic clitic «-то»: Here «-то» is not the indefinite suffix but the topic-marking clitic that leans on «везти» ('to drive [you]'), nudging it into focus — 'to be driving you, of all things'. It gives the driver's complaint its colloquial, hand-wringing tone.
> «Сударь» — 'sir': A deferential term of address used by social inferiors to gentlemen, already old-fashioned by the 1870s and gone after the Revolution. The driver's «сударь» marks the gulf in rank between a peasant coachman and his fare.

Но Митя не расслышал.  
But Mitya did not hear him.
> Perfective «расслышать» under negation: The perfective «расслышать» ('to catch / make out' a sound) names a single failed act of hearing; negated, it states that the catching never happened. The prefix рас- adds the nuance of hearing something out distinctly, so 'did not make out' rather than merely 'did not hear'.

Он исступленно молился и дико шептал про себя.  
He was praying in a frenzy and whispering wildly to himself.
> Imperfective past for ongoing action: Both «молился» (was praying) and «шептал» (was whispering) are imperfective pasts, painting two simultaneous, durative actions as the standing background of the scene. The aspect is what renders them 'was praying… and whispering' rather than two finished events.
> «Исступленно» — in a frenzy: From «исступление», a state of being beside oneself, ecstatic or frenzied. It is a key Dostoevskian word for the heightened, self-lacerating intensity of his characters, and recurs in this very chapter («исступленно восклицал»).
> «Про себя» — to oneself: A fixed phrase, «про» plus the reflexive «себя», meaning 'silently, inwardly, to oneself'. Note it is the prepositional idiom, not the reflexive pronoun's ordinary object use.

— Господи, прими меня во всем моем беззаконии, но не суди меня. Пропусти мимо без суда твоего… Не суди, потому что я сам осудил себя; не суди, потому что люблю тебя, господи! Мерзок сам, а люблю тебя: во ад пошлешь, и там любить буду и оттуда буду кричать, что люблю тебя во веки веков… Но дай и мне долюбить… здесь, теперь долюбить, всего пять часов до горячего луча твоего… Ибо люблю царицу души моей. Люблю и не могу не любить. Сам видишь меня всего. Прискачу, паду пред нею: права ты, что мимо меня прошла… Прощай и забудь твою жертву, не тревожь себя никогда!  
"Lord, receive me in all my lawlessness, but do not judge me. Let me pass by without Thy judgment… Judge me not, for I have judged myself; judge me not, for I love Thee, Lord! Vile I am, yet I love Thee: send me to hell, and there too I will love, and from there I will cry out that I love Thee for ever and ever… But grant that I too may love my fill… here, now, love my fill — only five hours until Thy hot ray… For I love the queen of my soul. I love and cannot help loving. Thou seest me wholly. I will come galloping, I will fall down before her: thou art right to have passed me by… Farewell and forget thy victim, never trouble thyself over me again!"
> Perfective imperatives of urgent plea: Mitya's prayer strings together perfective imperatives — «прими» (receive), «пропусти» (let pass), «не суди» (judge not), «дай» (grant) — each begging a single, decisive act of God rather than a habit. Perfective commands ask for the deed done once and for all.
> «Беззаконие» — lawlessness, iniquity: A bookish, biblical noun in -ие ('without-law-ness'), straight from the Psalms ('blot out my transgressions'). The prepositional «во всем моем беззаконии» casts Mitya's confession in the cadence of liturgical Russian.
> Double negation: 'cannot not love': «Не могу не любить» stacks two «не»s — 'I am unable not to love' — a Russian idiom of compulsion meaning 'I cannot help loving'. Here the two negatives do not cancel into negative concord but genuinely double, yielding a strong positive.
> «Во веки веков» — for ever and ever: The Church-Slavonic doxological formula ('unto the ages of ages') that closes Orthodox prayers. Mitya, vowing to love God even from hell, borrows the liturgy's most absolute expression of eternity.
> Compound imperfective future: «любить буду» and «буду кричать» are imperfective futures built on «буду» plus an infinitive: he will go on loving and crying out, endlessly. The aspect insists on continuation — fitting for a love that outlasts even damnation.
> «Ибо» — for, because: An archaic, bookish causal conjunction ('for'), the register of Scripture and sermon, far loftier than everyday «потому что». It threads through this prayer to sustain its scriptural solemnity.
> «Царица души моей» — queen of my soul: A grandiose, courtly periphrasis for Grushenka. The inverted possessive «души моей» (genitive, 'of my soul', after the noun) heightens the rhetorical pitch, in the manner of poetry and prayer.
> Short-form adjective «права»: «Права» is the feminine short form of «правый», used predicatively: 'thou art right'. Short adjectives are the bookish, predicative form (one cannot say «правая ты» here), stating an absolute judgment.
> «Твою» where Russian expects «свою»: Strictly, a possessive pointing back to the subject 'thou' should be reflexive «свою»; Mitya's «твою жертву» ('thy victim') is an expressive, slightly irregular choice that throws emphasis on the addressee. The pull between «свой» and «твой/его» is a recurring point of nuance.
> «Прискачу» and «паду» — galloping in, falling down: Two vivid perfective futures: «прискачу» ('I'll come galloping', from скакать, to gallop) and the elevated «паду» ('I'll fall', a bookish variant of упаду). The choice of «паду» over «упаду» lifts the falling-down before Grushenka into an almost ritual prostration.

— Мокрое! — крикнул Андрей, указывая вперед кнутом.  
"Mokroe!" Andrey called out, pointing ahead with his whip.
> Imperfective gerund «указывая»: «Указывая» ('pointing') is a present (imperfective) деепричастие describing an action going on at the same moment as the main verb «крикнул» — Andrey calls out while pointing. It must share the main subject, here Andrey.

Сквозь бледный мрак ночи зачернелась вдруг твердая масса строений, раскинутых на огромном пространстве.  
Through the pale gloom of the night there suddenly loomed black a solid mass of buildings, spread out over an enormous space.
> «Зачернелась» — loomed up black: An ingressive perfective from «чернеть» (to show black) with the inceptive prefix за- and reflexive -ся: 'suddenly began to stand out black'. The single verb compresses 'there loomed up a black mass', a favorite Dostoevskian way of letting a sight appear out of the dark.
> Past passive participle «раскинутых»: «Раскинутых» ('spread out') is a past passive participle in -тый from «раскинуть», agreeing in the genitive plural with «строений» (buildings). It packs a whole relative clause — 'buildings that had been spread out' — into one modifier.
> Inverted word order for suspense: The sentence withholds its subject: adverbial 'through the pale gloom' first, then the verb «зачернелась», then at last «масса строений». This topic-comment ordering lets the dark mass emerge as the new information at the end, mimicking how it surfaces to the eye.

Село Мокрое было в две тысячи душ, но в этот час всё оно уже спало, и лишь кое-где из мрака мелькали еще редкие огоньки.  
The village of Mokroe had some two thousand souls, but at that hour the whole of it was already asleep, and only here and there did a few scattered lights still flicker out of the darkness.
> «Огоньки» — little lights: The diminutive plural of «огонь» (fire/light): faint, scattered little lights. The -ок suffix here conveys smallness and a touch of the picturesque, suiting the few flickers in the sleeping dark.
> Imperfective «мелькали» for flickering: The imperfective past «мелькали» ('kept flickering') renders a repeated, intermittent action — lights glimmering here and there. Aspect, not any adverb, supplies the sense of recurrence.

— Гони, гони, Андрей, еду! — воскликнул как бы в горячке Митя.  
"Drive, drive, Andrey, I'm coming!" Mitya exclaimed, as though in a fever.
> Imperative «гони» — drive on!: «Гони» is the imperative of «гнать» (to drive hard, urge on); doubled for urgency. The verb properly means to chase or drive animals, so applied to the horses it is 'whip them on, race!'.
> «В горячке» — in a fever: «Горячка» is feverish delirium (from «горячий», hot). «Как бы в горячке» — 'as if in a fever' — diagnoses Mitya's exalted, delirious state, a recurring physical metaphor for his frenzy this night.

— Не спят! — проговорил опять Андрей, указывая кнутом на постоялый двор Пластуновых, стоявший сейчас же на въезде и в котором все шесть окон на улицу были ярко освещены.  
"They're not asleep!" Andrey said again, pointing with his whip at the Plastunovs' inn, which stood right there at the entrance to the village and in which all six windows facing the street were brightly lit.
> Participle and relative clause stacked: The inn is described twice over: by the past active participle «стоявший» ('which stood', from стоять) and by a «который»-clause ('in which all six windows…'). Pairing a participle with a который-relative is a hallmark of dense 19th-century literary syntax.
> «Постоялый двор» — coaching inn: A roadside inn with stabling where travelers and their horses put up for the night, the staging-post of pre-railway Russia. Pickier than the bare «трактир», it is the social hub where this whole scene plays out.
> Periphrastic passive «были освещены»: «Были ярко освещены» joins «быть» to the short-form past passive participle «освещены» ('were brightly lit'), the standard way Russian forms a stative passive. The short form, not the long «освещённые», is what makes it a predicate stating a result.

— Не спят! — радостно подхватил Митя, — греми, Андрей, гони вскачь, звени, подкати с треском. Чтобы знали все, кто приехал! Я еду! Сам еду! — исступленно восклицал Митя.  
"They're not asleep!" Mitya took it up joyfully. "Make a racket, Andrey, drive at a gallop, ring the bells, come thundering up. Let everyone know who's arrived! I'm coming! I am coming, too!" Mitya cried out in a frenzy.
> A volley of imperatives: Mitya fires off a chain of commands — «греми» (make a din), «гони» (drive hard), «звени» (jingle the bells), «подкати» (roll up). The perfective «подкати» caps the imperfective triad: keep up the racket, then sweep up to the door in one grand arrival.
> «Чтобы» + past form for purpose: «Чтобы знали все» — 'so that everyone should know' — is the purpose construction: «чтобы» fused from «что» + «бы», taking the past-tense form «знали» to express a willed, not-yet-real outcome. It is the irrealis mood folded into a subordinating conjunction.
> «Сам еду!» — the chapter's title: The emphatic «сам» ('myself, in person') with «еду» ('I'm coming') gives the chapter its name: not merely 'I'm coming' but 'I myself am coming!' — Mitya proclaiming his own arrival like a returning lord, half exultant, half doomed.

Андрей пустил измученную тройку вскачь и действительно с треском подкатил к высокому крылечку и осадил своих запаренных полузадохшихся коней.  
Andrey set the worn-out troika at a gallop and did indeed come thundering up to the high porch and reined in his lathered, half-winded horses.
> «Полузадохшиеся» — half-suffocated: A compound from «полу-» ('half') + the past active participle of «задохнуться» (to choke, gasp for breath): horses 'half-winded', nearly suffocated by the killing pace. The piled-up «измученную… запаренных полузадохшихся» drives home the cruelty of the ride.
> «Осадил» — reined in: From «осадить», to check or pull up horses sharply (also 'to put someone in their place'). Paired with «пустил… вскачь» (set off at a gallop) it frames the arrival: full tilt, then a hard stop at the porch.

Митя соскочил с телеги, и как раз хозяин двора, правда уходивший уже спать, полюбопытствовал заглянуть с крылечка, кто это таков так подкатил.  
Mitya jumped down from the cart, and just then the keeper of the inn, who was in fact already on his way to bed, grew curious to peer down from the porch at who it could be that had come driving up like this.
> «Соскочил» — jumped down: Perfective «соскочить» (с- 'off' + скочить 'leap'): a single quick leap down from the cart. The prefix с- adds the 'off/down from' direction.
> Active participle «уходивший»: «Уходивший спать» ('who was on his way to bed') is a past active participle of «уходить», agreeing with «хозяин». Imperfective here, it pictures an action still in progress — the keeper caught mid-departure when the cart rolls up.
> «Кто это таков» — who on earth this might be: A colloquial, somewhat old-fashioned turn: «таков» is the short form of «такой», so 'who this one is (such as he is)'. It conveys the keeper's nosy 'who could this be?' better than a plain «кто это».

— Трифон Борисыч, ты?  
"Trifon Borisych, is that you?"

Хозяин нагнулся, вгляделся, стремглав сбежал с крылечка и в подобострастном восторге кинулся к гостю.  
The keeper bent down, peered closely, came rushing headlong down from the porch, and in obsequious rapture flung himself toward his guest.
> «Стремглав» — headlong: An old fused adverb ('head-first, at full tilt'), now bookish, conveying a reckless rush downward. It colors the keeper's fawning dash with comic, undignified haste.
> «Подобострастный» — servile, obsequious: «Подобострастие» is cringing, fawning servility. The phrase 'in obsequious rapture' captures the innkeeper's whole nature — flattery in proportion to a guest's money, set up to be exposed as cynical self-interest.
> Chain of perfective pasts: Four perfective verbs in a row — «нагнулся, вгляделся, сбежал, кинулся» — march the action forward event by event: bent, peered, ran down, flung himself. This is narrative aspect at work, each completed move advancing the scene.

— Батюшка, Дмитрий Федорыч! Вас ли вновь видим?  
"Dear Dmitri Fyodorych! Is it you we see again?"
> «Батюшка» — dear father / good sir: Literally a diminutive of «батя» (father), «батюшка» is both an affectionate address to a priest and, as here, a warm deferential 'dear sir' to a social superior. From the fawning keeper it drips with calculated tenderness.
> Question particle «ли» and «вновь»: The enclitic «ли» fronts the focused «вас» ('is it you we see again?'), a more emphatic, deferential question than plain intonation. «Вновь» ('anew, again') is the elevated bookish counterpart of «снова» — together a flowery, ingratiating greeting.

Этот Трифон Борисыч был плотный и здоровый мужик, среднего роста, с несколько толстоватым лицом, виду строгого и непримиримого, с мокринскими мужиками особенно, но имевший дар быстро изменять лицо свое на самое подобострастное выражение, когда чуял взять выгоду.  
This Trifon Borisych was a thickset, hale peasant of middling height, with a somewhat fleshy face, of stern and unbending look — especially with the peasants of Mokroe — but possessed of the gift of changing his face in a flash to the most obsequious expression whenever he scented some profit to be had.
> «Мужик» — peasant: The standard 19th-century word for a male peasant, neutral but class-bound. Trifon Borisych is a «мужик» who has clawed his way into petty wealth — the very type of the post-emancipation rural exploiter Dostoevsky sketches in the next paragraphs.
> Participle «имевший» heading a clause: «Но имевший дар быстро изменять лицо» ('but possessed of the gift of quickly changing his face') is a past active participle of «иметь» that carries a long, syntactically heavy modifier. Such participial branching lets Dostoevsky hang a whole character-sketch off the single noun «мужик».
> Genitive of description «виду строгого»: «Виду строгого и непримиримого» ('of a stern and unbending look') is a genitive of quality describing the man, parallel to «среднего роста» ('of middling height'). Russian routinely attaches such bare-genitive descriptive phrases to a person.
> «Толстоватый» — somewhat fat: The suffix -оват- softens an adjective to 'rather, somewhat': «толстоватый» = 'a bit fleshy'. It is the hedging suffix that lets the narrator paint without overstating — a fleshy-ish, not grossly fat, face.

Ходил по-русски, в рубахе с косым воротом и в поддевке, имел деньжонки значительные, но мечтал и о высшей роли неустанно.  
He went about in the Russian fashion, in a side-fastened shirt and a long peasant coat; he had a tidy little sum of money, but dreamed tirelessly of some higher station.
> «Деньжонки» — a tidy little sum: An expressive diminutive of «деньги» (money). Here -онк- is not pejorative but knowing and folksy — 'a nice little wad', hinting that the 'little' money is in fact «значительные» (considerable). The suffix winks at the gap between the modest word and the real hoard.
> Imperfective «мечтал» for a standing trait: The imperfective past «мечтал» ('kept dreaming, used to dream') with «неустанно» ('tirelessly') states an ongoing disposition, not one occasion. Imperfective aspect is the natural vehicle for a character's habitual inner life.

Половина с лишком мужиков была у него в когтях, все были ему должны кругом.  
More than half the peasants were in his clutches; the whole lot of them were in debt to him all round.
> «В когтях» — in his clutches: «Когти» are an animal's claws or talons; 'in his claws' paints Trifon as a bird of prey gripping the peasants. The image keys the whole passage about debt-bondage.
> Dative of the creditor: «ему должны»: «Должны ему» — 'in debt to him' — uses the dative «ему» for the one owed. «Должен» ('obliged, owing') governs the dative of the person to whom the debt is due, a small but pervasive pattern of indebtedness in the case system.

Он арендовал у помещиков землю и сам покупал, а обработывали ему мужики эту землю за долг, из которого никогда не могли выйти.  
He rented land from the landowners and bought some himself, and the peasants worked this land for him against a debt they could never climb out of.
> Relative «который» in the genitive: In «долг, из которого… не могли выйти» the relative «который» takes the genitive because the preposition «из» governs it ('a debt out of which they could never climb'). The pronoun agrees with «долг» in gender/number but its case is set by its own role.

Был он вдов и имел четырех взрослых дочерей; одна была уже вдовой, жила у него с двумя малолетками, ему внучками, и работала на него как поденщица.  
He was a widower and had four grown daughters; one was already a widow herself, living with him together with two small children, his grandchildren, and working for him like a day-laborer.
> Short adjective «вдов» as predicate: «Вдов» is the masculine short form ('widowed') of «вдовый», predicating a state of the subject. The fronted «был он вдов» (verb–subject–predicate) is a bookish, slightly archaic rhythm typical of biographical summary.
> Animate accusative after «четыре»: «Четырёх взрослых дочерей» shows the numeral 'four' governing its noun: «дочерей» is genitive-form, and «четырёх» itself takes the animate accusative (= genitive) because daughters are animate. Numerals and animacy together reshape the whole phrase.
> «Малолетки» and «поденщица»: «Малолетки» are little children (мало- 'few/small' + лет 'years'); «поденщица» is a female day-laborer (from «по дню», by the day), hired and paid daily. The daughter works «как поденщица» — like a hired hand in her own father's house, an image of his pitiless thrift.

Другая дочка-мужичка была замужем за чиновником, каким-то выслужившимся писаречком, и в одной из комнат постоялого двора на стенке можно было видеть в числе семейных фотографий, миниатюрнейшего размера, фотографию и этого чиновничка в мундире и в чиновных погонах.  
Another daughter — a peasant girl by upbringing — was married to a clerk, some little copying scribe who had worked his way up, and in one of the rooms of the inn one could see, on the wall, among the family photographs, a photograph of the very smallest size of this little official in his uniform and his official epaulettes.
> «Писаречек» — a wretched little scribe: A double-diminutive of «писарь» (copying-clerk): «писарёк» → «писаречек», dripping condescension. «Каким-то выслужившимся писаречком» ('some little jumped-up scribe') belittles the son-in-law as a nobody who has merely 'served his way up'.
> Reflexive participle «выслужившийся»: From «выслужиться» ('to rise / earn promotion by service'), a -ся verb, this past active participle keeps its reflexive clitic: 'who had worked his way up'. The -ся here marks the middle, self-benefiting sense of clawing one's way upward.
> Superlative «миниатюрнейший»: «Миниатюрнейшего» is the bookish synthetic superlative in -ейший ('of the very smallest size'). The lofty superlative attached to a tiny photograph of a petty clerk is gently ironic, the narrator deflating the family's pretensions.

Две младшие дочери, в храмовой праздник али отправляясь куда в гости, надевали голубые или зеленые платья, сшитые по-модному, с обтяжкою сзади и с аршинным хвостом, но на другой же день утром, как и во всякий день, подымались чем свет и с березовыми вениками в руках выметали горницы, выносили помои и убирали сор после постояльцев.  
The two younger daughters, on a church holiday or when setting out somewhere on a visit, would put on blue or green dresses cut in the fashionable style, close-fitting behind and with a yard-long train, but the very next morning, just as on any other day, they would be up at first light and, with birch besoms in their hands, would sweep out the rooms, carry out the slops, and clear away the litter the lodgers had left.
> «Али» — dialectal 'or': «Али» is a folksy, peasant variant of «или» ('or'), heard throughout the innkeeper's and narrator's rustic register here («али отправляясь», later «али вот девки»). It instantly signals village speech.
> Gerund «отправляясь» framing a habit: «Отправляясь куда в гости» ('when setting out on a visit somewhere') is an imperfective gerund giving the recurring circumstance under which the daughters dressed up. Paired with the imperfective «подымались» ('would get up') it sustains the habitual, iterative picture of their days.
> «Чем свет» — at first light: A set idiom (literally 'with what is light') meaning 'at the crack of dawn, before daybreak'. «Подымались чем свет» — they were up at first light, every working day.
> «Аршинный хвост» — a yard-long train: An «аршин» is an old Russian measure of about 71 cm; «аршинный хвост» is a train (literally 'tail') of dress 'an arshin long'. The fashionable bustle and trailing skirt mark the daughters' citified pretensions against their peasant labor.

Несмотря на приобретенные уже тысячки, Трифон Борисыч очень любил сорвать с постояльца кутящего и, помня, что еще месяца не прошло, как он в одни сутки поживился от Дмитрия Федоровича, во время кутежа его с Грушенькой, двумя сотнями рубликов с лишком, если не всеми тремя, встретил его теперь радостно и стремительно, уже по тому одному, как подкатил ко крыльцу его Митя, почуяв снова добычу.  
For all the thousands he had already amassed, Trifon Borisych dearly loved to fleece a guest who was on a spree, and remembering that not a month had yet passed since, in a single day and night, he had profited off Dmitri Fyodorovich — during his carousal with Grushenka — to the tune of well over two hundred roubles, if not all of three, he met him now joyfully and eagerly, scenting fresh prey from the mere way Mitya had come driving up to his porch.
> «Несмотря на» + accusative: «Несмотря на» ('despite, for all') is a fixed preposition governing the accusative — here «приобретённые тысячки» ('the thousands already amassed'), with a past passive participle modifying the noun. It opens the long sentence on a concessive note.
> «Сорвать» — to fleece: «Сорвать с кого-то» (literally 'to tear off someone') is colloquial for extracting money, 'to fleece'. With «постояльца кутящего» ('a guest on a spree') it names Trifon's true trade: skinning carousers. «Кутящего» is a present active participle of «кутить» (to revel) used as a noun-modifier.
> Sly money diminutives: «Рублики» (little roubles), «тысячки» (little thousands), and «сотнями» — the narrator borrows the innkeeper's coaxing diminutives for sums that are in fact large. The mismatch between the cosy suffixes and 'well over two hundred roubles, if not three' is quietly satirical.
> Perfective gerund «почуяв»: «Почуяв снова добычу» ('having scented fresh prey') is a perfective past деепричастие from «почуять» (to scent), naming a completed action just prior to the main verb «встретил». The predatory metaphor is sealed by this hunting word.

— Батюшка, Дмитрий Федорович, вас ли вновь обретаем?  
"Dear Dmitri Fyodorovich, is it you we behold once more?"
> «Обретаем» — do we behold/find: «Обретать» ('to find, attain') is markedly bookish and ecclesiastical, far loftier than «находить». This second, even more florid greeting ('is it you we behold once more') outdoes the earlier «видим», laying the obsequiousness on thick.

— Стой, Трифон Борисыч, — начал Митя, — прежде всего самое главное: где она?  
"Wait, Trifon Borisych," Mitya began. "First of all, the main thing: where is she?"
> Dropped copula: «где она?»: 'Where is she?' is simply «где она» — no verb 'to be' in the present tense. Russian omits the present copula entirely, so the bare adverb and pronoun carry the whole question.
> «Она» — the unnamed 'she': Mitya cannot bring himself to name Grushenka; the whole drive resolves into a single «она» — 'where is she?'. The bare pronoun, repeated, conveys his obsession more than any name could.

— Аграфена Александровна? — тотчас понял хозяин, зорко вглядываясь в лицо Мити, — да здесь и она пребывает.  
"Agrafena Alexandrovna?" The keeper understood at once, peering keenly into Mitya's face. "Why, yes, she is here, she's staying right here."
> «Пребывает» — abides, is present: «Пребывать» ('to abide, dwell, be present') is an elevated, almost liturgical verb for plain «быть» or «находиться». «Да здесь и она пребывает» dresses a simple 'yes, she's here' in the innkeeper's affected courtliness.
> Gerund «вглядываясь»: «Зорко вглядываясь в лицо Мити» ('peering keenly into Mitya's face') is an imperfective gerund running parallel to «понял»: the keeper understands while peering. The reflexive «вглядываться» (в- 'into' + the -ся middle) means to peer intently.

— С кем, с кем?  
"With whom, with whom?"
> Instrumental «с кем» — with whom: «С кем» puts the interrogative «кто» in the instrumental after «с» ('with'): 'with whom?'. The preposition «с» of accompaniment always governs the instrumental, and the doubling «с кем, с кем?» conveys Mitya's jealous urgency.

— Гости проезжие-с… Один-то чиновник, надоть быть из поляков, по разговору судя, он-то за ней и послал лошадей отсюдова; а другой с ним товарищ его али попутчик, кто разберет; по-штатски одеты…  
"Travelers passing through, sir… One of them an official, a Pole he must be, by the way he talks; it was him that sent the horses for her from here; and the other one with him, a comrade of his or a fellow-traveler, who's to say; dressed in plain clothes…"
> The deferential clitic «-с»: «-с» (the «слово-ер», a worn-down «сударь» = 'sir') tacks onto words to signal servility or respect — «проезжие-с» = 'passing through, sir'. Sprinkled through the innkeeper's and waiters' speech in Dostoevsky, it is the sound of a social inferior bowing in every phrase.
> «Надоть быть» — must be, I reckon: «Надоть» is a dialectal «надо» ('one must'); «надоть быть» = 'must be / probably' (cf. «надо полагать»). The whole speech is steeped in this peasant phonology — «отсюдова» for «отсюда», «хоша» for «хотя» — marking the keeper as folk, not gentry.
> Gerund «судя» — judging by: «По разговору судя» ('to judge by the way he talks') uses the imperfective gerund «судя», which has frozen into the set phrase «судя по» ('judging by'). It is a gerund that survives even in everyday speech.

— Что же, кутят? Богачи?  
"What, are they on a spree? Are they rich men?"
> «Кутить» — to go on a spree: «Кутить» is to carouse, revel, blow money on drink and pleasure — the verb at the heart of these Mokroe chapters. «Что же, кутят?» — Mitya, planning his own grand kutezh, wants to know if the rivals are already at it.
> The particle «же» in «что же»: «Же» here adds insistent, pressing emphasis — 'well, what then, are they on a spree?'. These tiny modal particles, which English can only render with stress, are the very texture of Dostoevsky's clipped dialogue.

— Какое кутят! Небольшая величина, Дмитрий Федорович.  
"On a spree, indeed! Small fry, Dmitri Fyodorovich."
> «Какое!» — as if! nothing of the sort: An exclamatory «какое» used to dismiss the premise outright: 'On a spree? Hardly!'. This idiomatic, scornful «какое (там)!» rejects what was just asked.
> «Небольшая величина» — small fry: Literally 'a not-large quantity/personage', an ironic put-down meaning a person of no consequence. The keeper sizes up the Pole and his comrade as nobodies, contrasting them with the lavish Mitya he hopes to milk.

— Небольшая? Ну, а другие?  
"Small fry? Well, and the others?"

— Из города эти, двое господ… Из Черней возвращались, да и остались… Один-то, молодой, надоть быть родственник господину Миусову, вот только как звать забыл… а другого, надо полагать, вы тоже знаете: помещик Максимов, на богомолье, говорит, заехал в монастырь ваш там, да вот с родственником этим молодым господина Миусова и ездит…  
"From the town, these two gentlemen… They were on their way back from Cherny, and stopped over… One of them, the young one, must be a relation of Mr. Miusov, only I've forgotten what he's called… and the other, I should suppose you know him too: the landowner Maximov; he came by your monastery there, he says, on a pilgrimage, and now he's going about with this young relation of Mr. Miusov…"
> «Надо полагать» — one must suppose: A set impersonal phrase, 'one must suppose / presumably', alongside the keeper's «надоть быть» and «кто разберет» ('who can make it out'). The speech is built of such hedging fillers, the cautious manner of a man feeling out his profit.
> «Как звать» — what he's called: «Как (его) звать» (literally 'how to call him') is the ordinary impersonal way to ask or report a name. The infinitive «звать» with no subject is the idiom — 'I've forgotten what he's called'.

— Только и всех?  
"Is that all of them?"
> «Только и всех?» — is that the lot?: An elliptical, colloquial 'Is that all of them?', with the verb 'to be' dropped and «и» ('even/just') intensifying «всех» (genitive, 'of them all'). The genitive after the implied 'none more' is the genitive of negation lurking under the question.

— Только.  
"That's all."

— Стой, молчи, Трифон Борисыч, говори теперь самое главное: что она, как она?  
"Wait, hush, Trifon Borisych, now tell me the main thing: what is she like, how is she?"
> Imperatives «стой, молчи»: «Стой» (stop! from стоять) and «молчи» (be quiet! from молчать) are imperfective imperatives — a demand to cease and hold, not to perform a one-off act. Imperfective commands of this 'stop/keep still' kind are the natural choice for halting someone mid-action.
> Verbless «что она, как она?»: Two copula-less questions — 'what (is) she, how (is) she?' — with no verb, pure pronoun + interrogative. The clipped, breathless form conveys Mitya's anxious craving for any word of Grushenka's state.

— Да вот давеча прибыла и сидит с ними.  
"Why, she arrived a while ago and is sitting with them."
> «Давеча» — a while ago: A folksy, dated adverb meaning 'a little while back, earlier today'. It belongs to the same rustic stratum as «намедни» ('the other day') a few lines later — markers of the keeper's vernacular.

— Весела? Смеется?  
"Is she merry? Is she laughing?"
> Short adjective «весела»: «Весела» is the feminine short form of «весёлый» ('merry'), used predicatively — 'is she merry?'. The reflexive «смеётся» ('is she laughing?', from смеяться, a -ся-only verb) follows. Two terse, copula-free questions sketch Mitya's hope.

— Нет, кажись, не очень смеется… Даже скучная совсем сидит, молодому человеку волосы расчесывала.  
"No, it seems she's not laughing much… She's even sitting quite downcast; she was combing the young man's hair."
> «Кажись» — it seems, like: A colloquial, frozen form of «кажется» ('it seems') reduced to a filler, 'I reckon, seemingly'. It softens the keeper's report and marks his uneducated speech.
> Imperfective «расчёсывала» for a scene in progress: The imperfective past «расчёсывала» ('was combing') depicts Grushenka caught in the middle of an action — combing the young man's hair — rather than a finished deed. The aspect freezes the tableau Mitya is about to spy on.

— Это поляку, офицеру?  
"That would be the Pole, the officer?"
> Dative «поляку, офицеру»: '(Was it) to the Pole, the officer?' — «поляку» and «офицеру» stand in the dative as the indirect object of the combing (расчёсывала кому-то волосы, 'combed someone's hair for them'). The dative marks the person to whom the hair is being done.

— Да какой же он молодой, да и не офицер он вовсе; нет, сударь, не ему, а миусовскому племяннику этому, молодому-то… вот только имя забыл.  
"What young man is he, and he's no officer at all; no, sir, not him, but this nephew of Miusov's, the young one… only I've forgotten the name."
> Contrastive «а» after a negation: «Не ему, а миусовскому племяннику» ('not to him, but to Miusov's nephew') uses «а» — the corrective 'but rather' after a denial. This «не X, а Y» pattern is «а»'s sharpest job: replacing what was just negated with the true alternative.
> Emphatic «-то» on «молодому»: «Молодому-то» ('the young one, that is') uses the topic-emphasizing clitic «-то» to single out and confirm the referent already in play. It is the same colloquial highlighter seen earlier, not the indefinite suffix.

— Калганов?  
"Kalganov?"

— Именно Калганов.  
"Kalganov, that's it exactly."
> «Именно» — exactly, precisely: «Именно Калганов» — 'Kalganov, precisely'. «Именно» confirms and pinpoints, 'that's the very one'. A small word of emphatic agreement that closes the back-and-forth over the forgotten name.

— Хорошо, сам решу. В карты играют?  
"Good, I'll decide for myself. Are they playing cards?"
> Perfective future «решу» with «сам»: «Сам решу» — 'I'll decide for myself' — is a perfective future (the present-form endings of «решить» yield future meaning), naming one decisive future act. «Сам» ('myself') asserts Mitya's intent to take the matter in hand.

— Играли, да перестали, чай отпили, наливки чиновник потребовал.  
"They were playing, but they've left off; they've had their tea, and the official has called for cordial."
> Imperfective vs perfective: «играли… перестали»: The aspect pair tells the little story: imperfective «играли» ('they were playing', the background process) gives way to perfective «перестали» ('they stopped', the completed event). Russian narrates by switching aspects rather than tenses.

— Стой, Трифон Борисыч, стой, душа, сам решу. Теперь отвечай самое главное: нет цыган?  
"Wait, Trifon Borisych, wait, my dear, I'll decide for myself. Now answer me the main thing: are there no gypsies?"
> «Душа» as a term of endearment: «Стой, душа» — Mitya addresses the innkeeper as «душа» ('soul', i.e. 'my dear, dear heart'). Calling someone «душа (моя)» is a warm, intimate Russian endearment, here flung out in his exalted, expansive mood.
> Genitive of negation: «нет цыган»: «Нет цыган?» ('are there no gypsies?') — the existential «нет» ('there is/are not') forces its noun into the genitive: «цыган» is genitive plural. With «нет / не было», the thing that is absent must stand in the genitive, never the nominative.

— Цыган теперь вовсе не слышно, Дмитрий Федорович, согнало начальство, а вот жиды здесь есть, на цимбалах играют и на скрипках, в Рождественской, так это можно бы за ними хоша и теперь послать. Прибудут.  
"There's no hearing of any gypsies at all now, Dmitri Fyodorovich; the authorities have driven them off. But there are Jews here who play on the cymbals and the fiddles, over in Rozhdestvenskaya, so one could send for them even now. They'll come."
> Conditional softening «можно бы»: «Можно бы… послать» ('one could send') adds the particle «бы» to «можно» to soften it into a tentative possibility — 'it would be possible / one might'. The «бы» turns a flat statement into a polite, hedged suggestion.

— Послать, непременно послать! — вскричал Митя. — А девок можно поднять как тогда, Марью особенно, Степаниду тоже, Арину. Двести рублей за хор!  
"Send for them, send for them without fail!" cried Mitya. "And the girls can be roused, the same as last time — Marya especially, Stepanida too, Arina. Two hundred roubles for a chorus!"
> Infinitive as emphatic command: A bare infinitive «послать!» ('to send!') flung out as an order — 'send for them, without fail!'. The naked infinitive functions as a forceful, impersonal imperative, all the more urgent for dispensing with a subject.
> «Девки» — wenches, peasant girls: «Девка» is a plain, earthy word for a young peasant woman, coarser than «девушка». «Поднять девок» ('to rouse the girls') means to get the village singing-girls up for the spree — the chorus Mitya is paying for.

— Да за этакие деньги я всё село тебе подыму, хоть и полегли теперь дрыхнуть. Да и стоят ли, батюшка Дмитрий Федорович, здешние мужики такой ласки, али вот девки? Этакой подлости да грубости такую сумму определять! Ему ли, нашему мужику, цигарки курить, а ты им давал. Ведь от него смердит, от разбойника. А девки все, сколько их ни есть, вшивые. Да я своих дочерей тебе даром подыму, не то что за такую сумму, полегли только спать теперь, так я их ногой в спину напинаю да для тебя петь заставлю. Мужиков намедни шампанским поили, э-эх!  
"For money like that I'll rouse you the whole village, even if they've all turned in to snore by now. But are they even worth such kindness, dear Dmitri Fyodorovich, the peasants hereabouts — or the girls, for that matter? To squander such a sum on creatures so base and coarse! As if the likes of our peasant ought to be smoking cigarettes — and yet you gave them to them. Why, he stinks, the cutthroat. And the girls, every last one of them, are crawling with lice. Now my own daughters I'll rouse you for nothing, never mind such a sum: they've only just turned in to sleep, so I'll boot them in the back to get them up and make them sing for you. And only the other day you were treating the peasants to champagne — eh-eh!"
> «Дрыхнуть» — to crash, snore away: A crude, dismissive verb for sleeping — 'to be dead to the world, snoring'. The keeper's contempt for his own villagers («полегли дрыхнуть», 'they've flopped down to snore') seeps through his choice of words.
> «Стоить» + genitive, with «ли»: «Стоят ли… такой ласки» — 'are they even worth such kindness?'. The verb «стоить» ('to be worth') governs the genitive «ласки», and the particle «ли» frames the rhetorical yes/no question. The genitive of worth plus «ли» gives a sneering 'and are they worth it?'.
> Dative «ему ли» of (un)fitness: «Ему ли… цигарки курить» — 'is it for him to smoke cigars?', dative + «ли» + infinitive, an indignant idiom meaning 'as if the likes of him deserve…'. The dative «ему» names the one supposedly entitled, and «ли» turns it scornful.
> Impersonal «смердит»: «От него смердит» ('he stinks', literally 'from him there is a stench') is impersonal — no subject, the source marked by «от» + genitive. «Смердеть» is an archaic, biblical-flavored 'to reek' (cf. Smerdyakov's very name). «Разбойник» ('brigand, cutthroat') heaps on the contempt.
> Concessive «сколько ни» — however many: «Все, сколько их ни есть» ('all of them, however many there are') uses «ни» in a concessive clause — 'no matter how many'. Here «ни» does not negate but generalizes, sweeping in the whole lot.
> «Напинаю ногой в спину»: 'I'll boot them in the back' — «напинать» (to give a kicking, from пинать, to kick) with «ногой» (instrumental, 'with my foot'). The brutal image of kicking his own sleeping daughters awake to sing exposes the keeper's casual domestic cruelty.

Трифон Борисыч напрасно сожалел Митю: он тогда у него сам с полдюжины бутылок шампанского утаил, а под столом сторублевую бумажку поднял и зажал себе в кулак.  
Trifon Borisych pitied Mitya for nothing: he had himself filched a good half-dozen bottles of champagne off him that time, and had picked up a hundred-rouble note from under the table and clenched it in his fist.
> Ironic word order with «напрасно»: «Напрасно сожалел Митю» ('pitied Mitya for nothing / in vain') fronts «напрасно» for irony — the narrator immediately undercuts the keeper's show of pity. The fronting of the adverb signals the comment to come: his sympathy was a sham.
> «Утаить» and «зажать» — pilfered and pocketed: Two perfective verbs of sly appropriation: «утаить» (to conceal, hold back secretly) a half-dozen bottles, and «зажать… в кулак» (to clench in one's fist) a hundred-rouble note. The narrator dryly catalogues the theft beneath the man's fawning.

Так и осталась она у него в кулаке.  
And so it had stayed there, in his fist.
> Emphatic «так и» with topic-fronting: «Так и осталась она у него в кулаке» — 'and so it just stayed there in his fist'. The «так и» ('and so it indeed/just') underscores the outcome, while leading with the verb keeps the note (the topic «она») trailing — a wry closing beat.

— Трифон Борисыч, растряс я тогда не одну здесь тысячку. Помнишь?  
"Trifon Borisych, I scattered more than one little thousand here that time. Do you remember?"
> «Растрясти» — to scatter, blow: «Растрясти» literally 'to shake apart/loose'; of money, to fling it about, squander it. With the diminutive «тысячку» ('a little thousand') it has a rueful, boastful ring — 'I shook loose more than one little thousand here'.

— Растрясли, голубчик, как вас не вспомнить, три тысячки у нас небось оставили.  
"You scattered them, my dear — how could one not remember you, you left a good three thousand with us, I daresay."
> «Голубчик» — my dear (little dove): A tender diminutive from «голубь» ('dove'), 'my dear, darling'. The keeper's «голубчик» is flattery in caressing form — coaxing affection lavished on the wealthy guest whose money he means to have.
> «Как не вспомнить» — how could one not: «Как вас не вспомнить» ('how could one not remember you') is a rhetorical infinitive with «не» meaning 'of course one remembers'. The «как не + infinitive» frame turns a negation into emphatic affirmation.
> «Небось» — I daresay, I'll bet: A folk modal particle (worn down from «не бойся», 'fear not') meaning 'I daresay, surely, I'll wager'. «Три тысячки… небось оставили» — 'you left a good three thousand, I'll be bound' — adds the keeper's sly, knowing nudge.

— Ну, так и теперь с тем приехал, видишь?  
"Well, that's what I've come for again now, you see?"
> Instrumental «с тем» — for that purpose: «С тем приехал» — 'I've come with that (in mind) / for that very thing'. «Тем» is the instrumental of «то», after «с»; the phrase «с тем, чтобы» means 'for the purpose of'. Here, elliptically, 'that's what I've come for'.

И он вынул и поднес к самому носу хозяина свою пачку кредиток.  
And he pulled out and held right up to the keeper's nose his wad of banknotes.
> «Кредитки» — banknotes: «Кредитка» is a credit note, a paper rouble bill («кредитный билет»); «пачка кредиток» is a wad of them. Mitya thrusting his bundle of banknotes 'right up to the keeper's nose' is the spark that lights the man's greed.

— Теперь слушай и понимай: через час вино придет, закуски, пироги и конфеты — всё тотчас же туда наверх. Этот ящик, что у Андрея, туда тоже сейчас наверх, раскрыть и тотчас же шампанское подавать… А главное — девок, девок, и Марью чтобы непременно…  
"Now listen and understand: in an hour the wine will come, with savories, pies, and sweets — all of it straight upstairs, at once. That box there, on Andrey's cart, goes upstairs at once too; open it and start serving the champagne immediately… But the main thing — the girls, the girls, and Marya without fail…"
> Imperfective imperatives «слушай, понимай»: «Слушай и понимай» ('listen and understand') are imperfective imperatives — an injunction to keep attending, an open-ended 'be listening', not a single act. The -й ending follows the vowel-final stem.
> Elliptical «чтобы» command: «И Марью чтобы непременно…» trails off, but «чтобы» + an understood past form is the construction for an indirect order ('see to it that Marya is here without fail'). Even truncated, the «чтобы» signals a willed, must-happen outcome.

Он повернулся к телеге и вытащил из-под сиденья свой ящик с пистолетами.  
He turned to the cart and dragged out from under the seat his box with the pistols.
> Compound preposition «из-под» + genitive: «Из-под сиденья» ('out from under the seat') is the compound preposition «из-под» governing the genitive «сиденья». Russian fuses 'from' + 'under' into one word to express extraction from beneath something.

— Расчет, Андрей, принимай! Вот тебе пятнадцать рублей за тройку, а вот пятьдесят на водку… за готовность, за любовь твою… Помни барина Карамазова!  
"Your pay, Andrey, take it! Here's fifteen roubles for the troika, and here's fifty for drink… for your readiness, for your love… Remember the master Karamazov!"
> Imperative «помни» + animate accusative: «Помни барина Карамазова!» ('Remember the master Karamazov!') — imperfective imperative «помни» (keep me in memory) with «барина» in the animate accusative (= genitive form). The lordly self-naming, «барин Карамазов», is pure theatrical grandeur.

— Боюсь я, барин… — заколебался Андрей, — пять рублей на чай пожалуйте, а больше не приму. Трифон Борисыч свидетелем. Уж простите глупое слово мое…  
"I'm afraid, master…" Andrey hesitated. "Give me five roubles for a tip, but more I won't take. Trifon Borisych is my witness. Forgive my foolish words…"
> Perfective future «не приму»: «Больше не приму» ('I won't take more') is a perfective future from «принять» — a firm, single resolve, 'I will not accept it'. Perfective future is the aspect of a decided, once-and-for-all refusal.
> Imperative «простите» softened by «уж»: «Уж простите глупое слово моё» ('forgive my foolish words') — the polite plural imperative «простите» with the particle «уж», which here softens and pleads, 'do please forgive'. «Уж» lends the apology a humble, coaxing warmth.

— Чего боишься, — обмерил его взглядом Митя, — ну и черт с тобой, коли так! — крикнул он, бросая ему пять рублей. — Теперь, Трифон Борисыч, проводи меня тихо и дай мне на них на всех перво-наперво глазком глянуть, так чтоб они меня не заметили. Где они там, в голубой комнате?  
"What are you afraid of?" Mitya measured him with a look. "Well, the devil take you, then, if that's how it is!" he cried, tossing him five roubles. "Now, Trifon Borisych, see me in quietly and let me first of all steal a peep at the whole lot of them, so that they don't notice me. Where are they in there, in the blue room?"
> «Чёрт с тобой» — the devil take you: A set exclamation, literally 'the devil (be) with you', meaning 'to hell with you / have it your way'. The instrumental «с тобой» ('with you') is fossilized in the idiom; Mitya flings it out half in exasperation, half in careless good humor.
> «Глазком глянуть» — to steal a peep: «Глазком» is the instrumental diminutive of «глаз» ('with a little eye'); «глянуть» a quick perfective 'to glance'. The phrase «глазком глянуть» means to take a furtive peep — Mitya wants one stolen look before they see him.
> Purpose «чтоб… не заметили»: «Так чтоб они меня не заметили» ('so that they shouldn't notice me') is the purpose clause «чтоб» (= чтобы) + negated past form «не заметили». The construction expresses a willed negative outcome — that the noticing not happen.

Трифон Борисыч опасливо поглядел на Митю, но тотчас же послушно исполнил требуемое: осторожно провел его в сени, сам вошел в большую первую комнату, соседнюю с той, в которой сидели гости, и вынес из нее свечу.  
Trifon Borisych gave Mitya a wary look, but at once obediently did as he was asked: he led him cautiously into the entry, went himself into the large front room next to the one in which the guests were sitting, and carried out a candle from it.
> Substantivized participle «требуемое»: «Исполнил требуемое» — 'did what was asked'. «Требуемое» is a present passive participle of «требовать» (to demand), here used as a neuter noun ('the thing required'). Such substantivized participles are a compact, bookish way to say 'that which was demanded'.
> «Сени» — the entry passage: «Сени» (always plural) is the unheated entrance hall or passage of a traditional Russian house, between the porch and the living rooms. The keeper leads Mitya «в сени» and then into the front room — the spatial choreography of the coming ambush of a glance.
> Correlative «той, в которой»: «С той, в которой сидели гости» ('next to the one in which the guests were sitting') pairs the demonstrative «той» (instrumental, after «с») with a relative «в которой» (prepositional, after «в»). The тот…который correlative threads the rooms together, each pronoun taking its own case.

Затем потихоньку ввел Митю и поставил его в углу, в темноте, откуда бы он мог свободно разглядеть собеседников ими не видимый.  
Then he quietly led Mitya in and set him in the corner, in the dark, from where he could freely study the company without himself being seen.
> A chain of perfectives: Both verbs are perfective past («ввести», «поставить»), so each names a single completed act — led-in, then set-down — moving the narrative forward step by step. The imperfective would have given process or habit; here we feel two discrete clicks of action.
> Purpose with «бы» + past form: The particle «бы» joined to the past «мог» builds an irrealis 'so that he might / from where he could' clause — a purpose construction, not a real past. Russian's single subjunctive is always past-form + «бы».
> Present passive participle «видимый»: «видимый» is the rare present passive participle of «видеть» ('seen'); with «не» it means 'unseen', and the agent «ими» ('by them') stands in the instrumental — exactly the case Russian uses for the doer of a passive. A compact, bookish way to say 'without himself being seen by them'.

Но Митя недолго глядел, да и не мог разглядывать: он увидел ее, и сердце его застучало, в глазах помутилось.  
But Mitya did not look for long, nor was he able to keep studying them: he caught sight of her, and his heart began to pound, and everything went dim before his eyes.
> Aspect doing the storytelling: The imperfectives «глядел» and «разглядывать» frame looking as a process he could not sustain, while the perfective «увидел» ('caught sight of') is the sudden completed flash that interrupts it. The pair «глядеть/увидеть» is a textbook aspectual contrast: ongoing gaze versus instantaneous perception.
> Inceptive «за-»: the pounding begins: The prefix «за-» on «стучать» (to knock/pound) gives «застучать», a perfective marking the onset of an action — 'began to pound'. Russian often signals the start of a process this way rather than with a separate verb 'to begin'.
> Impersonal 'it went dim': «помутилось» is a subjectless, neuter -ся verb: literally 'it grew murky in [his] eyes'. There is no nominative subject at all — a classic Russian impersonal of bodily sensation, the language framing experience as something that simply happens to a person.

Она сидела за столом сбоку, в креслах, а рядом с нею, на диване, хорошенький собою и еще очень молодой Калганов; она держала его за руку и, кажется, смеялась, а тот, не глядя на нее, что-то громко говорил, как будто с досадой, сидевшему чрез стол напротив Грушеньки Максимову.  
She was sitting off to the side at the table, in an armchair, and beside her, on the sofa, sat Kalganov — a good-looking young man, very young still; she was holding him by the hand and seemed to be laughing, while he, not looking at her, was saying something loudly, as if out of vexation, to Maximov, who sat across the table opposite Grushenka.
> The contrastive «а» twice over: «а» is the mild adversative 'and/while' that shifts the camera to a new subject rather than opposing it: first to Kalganov beside her, then to him not looking at her. English needs 'while' or a comma; Russian threads the tableau together with this untranslatable hinge.
> Gerund «не глядя»: «глядя» is the imperfective present деепричастие of «глядеть» — an indeclinable verb-adverb naming the attendant circumstance 'not looking at her'. It shares the subject of the main clause (he), the hallmark of literary narration packing a second action into one breath.
> Past participle agreeing in the dative: «сидевшему» is the past active participle of «сидеть» ('who was sitting'), here in the dative to agree with «Максимову» — the person he was speaking to. The whole heavy modifier precedes the name, a bookish который-clause compressed into a single declined word.
> Archaic «чрез» for «через»: «чрез» ('across, over') is the elevated, contracted doublet of modern «через» — a non-pleophonic, bookish form that flavours the 19th-century prose without changing the sense: 'across the table'.
> «хорошенький собою»: pretty to look at: The diminutive adjective «хорошенький» ('nice-looking, pretty') with the instrumental «собою» ('in himself, of his person') is a set idiom describing someone's looks. The -еньк- suffix lends a light, almost doting touch, fitting for the very young Kalganov.

Максимов же чему-то очень смеялся.  
Maximov, for his part, was laughing very hard at something.
> The particle «же» of return: «же» here marks a shift back to a previously mentioned figure — 'Maximov, for his part / as for Maximov'. It is one of Russia's tiny modal particles that English can only render with stress or a phrase, knitting the narrative's attention from one person to the next.
> Laughing AT something — dative + «-то»: «смеяться» governs the dative for what one laughs at, and «чему-то» is its dative ('at something'); the clitic «-то» marks a specific but unidentified cause — some particular thing, though we are not told what. The verb itself exists only in the -ся form.

На диване сидел он, а подле дивана, на стуле, у стены, какой-то другой незнакомец.  
On the sofa he sat, and beside the sofa, on a chair against the wall, was some other stranger.
> Fronting for focus: The neutral order would be 'он сидел на диване'; placing «на диване» first and the pronoun «он» at the end weights the new information — the seating — and keeps the camera panning the room. Free word order lets Russian arrange given-before-new without changing the grammar.
> «какой-то»: some unidentified one: «какой-то» ('some sort of, a certain') marks the stranger as real but unknown to Mitya — the «-то» series naming a specific-but-unidentified referent. The repeated 'some / какой-то' through this scene keeps the whole company hazy and threatening to him.
> Bookish «подле» (beside): «подле» ('beside, next to', + genitive) is an archaic, literary preposition for «рядом с» or «около». It belongs to the elevated period register that flavours Dostoevsky's narration.

Тот, который сидел на диване развалясь, курил трубку, и у Мити лишь промелькнуло, что это какой-то толстоватый и широколицый человечек, ростом, должно быть, невысокий и как будто на что-то сердитый.  
The one who sat sprawled on the sofa was smoking a pipe, and all that flickered through Mitya's mind was that this was some rather stout, broad-faced little fellow, short in stature, it seemed, and looking as though he were angry about something.
> Correlative «тот, который»: «тот» ('that one') sets up the relative «который» ('who') — 'the one who sat'. «который» agrees with «тот» in gender and number but takes nominative as the subject of its own clause; the comma-set relative is the standard way Russian appends a defining description.
> Gerund «развалясь»: lolling back: «развалясь» is the perfective past деепричастие of «развалиться» (to sprawl, loll), in its -сь variant — 'having sprawled / sprawled back'. The single word paints his posture as the attendant circumstance of his sitting.
> Impersonal 'it flickered through Mitya': Another subjectless perfective: «промелькнуло» ('flashed by') with «у Мити» ('at Mitya') and a «что»-clause. The thought is not something Mitya actively forms but something that darts through him — the impersonal frame rendering a half-conscious impression.
> Hedging and belittling suffixes: «толстоватый» softens 'fat' to 'rather stout' with the approximative -оват- suffix, and «человечек» is the diminutive of «человек» — a 'little fellow', faintly dismissive. Both suffixes color Mitya's quick, unflattering glance at the man.
> «должно быть»: it must be / probably: A frozen impersonal parenthetical, «должно быть» means 'must be, presumably' — Mitya guessing the man's height rather than knowing it. It is set off as commentary, marking the whole impression as conjecture.

Товарищ же его, другой незнакомец, показался Мите что-то уж чрезвычайно высокого роста; но более он ничего не мог разглядеть.  
His companion, the other stranger, struck Mitya as somehow quite extraordinarily tall; but beyond that he could make out nothing.
> Dative experiencer: 'struck Mitya as': «показаться» ('to seem') sends its experiencer to the dative — «Мите» is 'to Mitya'. The companion is the nominative subject of seeming; the impression belongs to the dative person, the recurring Russian pattern for how things appear to someone.
> Genitive of measure: «высокого роста» ('of tall stature') is a genitive describing a quality of measure — height expressed as a genitive attribute, like «человек высокого роста». «чрезвычайно» ('extraordinarily') intensifies it.
> Negative concord: «ничего … не мог» stacks the negative pronoun «ничего» with the negator «не» on the verb — Russian's obligatory double negation, where two negatives make one. Note also «ничего» in the genitive, the object of a negated verb sliding into the genitive of negation.

Дух у него захватило.  
His breath caught in his throat.
> Impersonal 'his breath caught': A fixed impersonal idiom: literally 'it caught the breath at him' — «дух» is the accusative object, «у него» ('at him') the possessor, and the verb is neuter with no nominative subject. Russian frames the seizing of breath as an event that befalls a person, not something he does.
> «дух захватило»: breathtaking: A common idiom for being so overcome — by fear, awe, or excitement — that one's breath fails. Here «дух» is not 'spirit' but simply 'breath', preserved in this set phrase.

И минуты он не смог выстоять, поставил ящик на комод и прямо, холодея и замирая, направился в голубую комнату к собеседникам.  
He could not hold out even a minute longer; he set the box down on the chest of drawers and went straight, growing cold and faint within, into the blue room toward the company.
> Genitive of negation with fronting: Under negation the object «минуту» becomes genitive «минуты» ('not [even] a minute'), and fronting it before «он не смог» throws emphasis onto how briefly he could endure. The «и» here is the emphatic 'even', not 'and'.
> Paired gerunds of inner state: Two imperfective present деепричастия — «холодея» ('growing cold') and «замирая» ('going numb / faint') — name the simultaneous inner sensations as he advances. Stacked gerunds like these are a signature of Dostoevsky's feverish narration.
> «в» + accusative for motion toward: «направился» (set off toward) is a perfective -ся motion verb, and «в голубую комнату» takes the accusative because the preposition «в» expresses motion into a place; the same phrase in the prepositional («в комнате») would mean static location.

— Ай! — взвизгнула в испуге Грушенька, заметив его первая.  
"Ah!" shrieked Grushenka in fright, the first to notice him.
> Perfective gerund «заметив»: «заметив» is the perfective past деепричастие of «заметить» ('having noticed') — a prior, completed action explaining the shriek. «первая» ('first', feminine) agrees with Grushenka: she, the first to spot him, cries out.
> «в испуге»: prepositional of state: «в испуге» ('in fright') uses «в» + prepositional to express the emotional state accompanying the action — a fixed adverbial of manner. The noun «испуг» names a sudden startle rather than lasting fear.
> «взвизгнуть»: to let out a shriek: An expressive perfective verb for a single sharp, high cry — a squeal or shriek. The «вз-» prefix plus the -ну- suffix mark a sudden, momentary outburst, vividly conveying Grushenka's involuntary startle.
---

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.