# The Brothers Karamazov, The First and Rightful Lover

Братья Карамазовы · Fyodor Dostoevsky · Book VIII — Mitya

Source: https://1732studios.com/books/karamazov/b8-c7. Data: https://1732studios.com/books/karamazov/b8-c7.json.


Митя скорыми и длинными своими шагами подступил вплоть к столу.  
With his quick, long strides Mitya came right up to the table.
> Instrumental of manner: «Шагами» stands in the instrumental plural, here naming the means/manner of motion — 'with quick, long strides'. The whole phrase «скорыми и длинными своими шагами» is one agreeing instrumental cluster modifying «подступил».
> Prefixed motion verb, perfective: «Подступил» is the perfective of «подступать/подступить» (to step up to, approach), a directional prefix под- on a motion stem. It registers a single completed advance, sharpened by «вплоть к» ('right up to').
> Reflexive possessive свой: «Своими» is the reflexive possessive «свой», pointing the strides back to the clause's own subject (Mitya). Russian prefers «свой» over «его» whenever the possessor is the subject, avoiding the ambiguity English 'his' would leave.

— Господа, — начал он громко, почти крича, но заикаясь на каждом слове, — я… я ничего! Не бойтесь, — воскликнул он, — я ведь ничего, ничего, — повернулся он вдруг к Грушеньке, которая отклонилась на кресле в сторону Калганова и крепко уцепилась за его руку. — Я… Я тоже еду. Я до утра. Господа, проезжему путешественнику… можно с вами до утра? Только до утра, в последний раз, в этой самой комнате?  
"Gentlemen," he began loudly, almost shouting, yet stammering on every word, "I... I mean nothing by it! Don't be afraid," he exclaimed, "I really mean nothing, nothing at all" — and he suddenly turned to Grushenka, who had leaned aside in her chair toward Kalganov and was clutching his arm tightly. "I... I'm here too. I'll stay till morning. Gentlemen, may a passing traveler... may I stay with you till morning? Only till morning, this one last time, in this very room?"
> Imperfective gerund (деепричастие): «Заикаясь» is a present (imperfective) деепричастие in -ясь from «заикаться» — 'stammering', an action running simultaneously with «начал». It shares the main subject (he) and adds attendant circumstance, a hallmark of literary narration.
> The particle ведь: «Ведь» appeals to shared understanding — 'I really don't mean anything, you see / after all'. It softens and pleads, exactly the register of Mitya's anxious reassurance; English can only render it with intonation or a tag.
> Relative clause with который: «Которая» introduces a relative clause and agrees with «Грушеньке» in feminine gender and number, while taking nominative as the subject of its own clause. The two perfective verbs «отклонилась» / «уцепилась» mark her completed movements.
> Dative-subject impersonal with можно: An impersonal construction: «можно» ('is it permitted / may one') governs a dative experiencer, «проезжему путешественнику» — 'may a passing traveler...'. There is no nominative subject; the person affected stands in the dative.
> 'A passing traveler' — self-deprecation: «Проезжий» means 'passing through, in transit'; «проезжий путешественник» is a humble, slightly grandiose third-person way for Mitya to refer to himself, casting himself as a mere wayfarer begging a place for the night.

Это уже он докончил, обращаясь к толстенькому человечку, сидевшему на диване с трубкой.  
This last he finished by turning to address the plump little man sitting on the sofa with a pipe.
> Imperfective gerund of manner: «Обращаясь» (turning/addressing) is again a present деепричастие, simultaneous with «докончил» — 'he finished it by turning to...'. The dative «человечку» after «обращаться к» is governed by к.
> Affectionate-belittling diminutives: Both words carry diminutive suffixes: «толстенький» (-еньк-) softens 'fat' to 'plump, roly-poly', and «человечек» (-ек) shrinks 'man' to 'little man'. The pairing is faintly condescending, coloring how Mitya — and the narrator — sees the seated pan.
> Past active participle: «Сидевшему» is a past active participle from «сидеть», agreeing with «человечку» in dative — literally 'to the little man who was sitting'. It compresses a который-clause into one modifier, very common in 19th-century prose.

Тот важно отнял от губ своих трубку и строго произнес:  
That one gravely took the pipe from his lips and pronounced sternly:
> Demonstrative тот as 'that one': «Тот» (that, the farther one) stands alone as a pronoun, 'that one / the latter', tracking the man just introduced. Russian uses this топик-shifting тот constantly to keep referents straight without repeating the noun.
> Genitive after от; reflexive свой: «От» governs the genitive «губ» ('from his lips'), and «своих» is again the reflexive possessive tying the lips to the subject. Word order places «своих» after its noun, a slightly elevated, literary inversion.

— Пане, мы здесь приватно. Имеются иные покои.  
"Panie, we are here privately. There are other rooms to be had."
> Stilted, Polonized register: «Приватно» (a borrowing, 'privately') and «покои» (chambers, apartments — a bookish, slightly grand plural) give the pan's two short sentences an affected, foreign-tinged formality, part of the comic pretension Dostoevsky builds into his speech.

— Да это вы, Дмитрий Федорович, да чего это вы? — отозвался вдруг Калганов, — да садитесь с нами, здравствуйте!  
"Why, is that you, Dmitri Fyodorovich? What's all this?" Kalganov suddenly spoke up. "Sit down with us, hello!"
> Particle да and genitive чего: Opening «да» is a colloquial particle here meaning 'why, but, come now', not 'yes'. «Чего» is the genitive of «что», idiomatic in such exclamatory questions — 'what's all this with you?' — the texture of lively spoken Russian.
> Polite/plural imperative: «Садитесь» is the imperative of «садиться» with the polite/plural ending -тесь (the -ся verb keeps its reflexive clitic). 'Sit down' addressed with вы-politeness.

— Здравствуйте, дорогой человек… и бесценный! Я всегда уважал вас… — радостно и стремительно отозвался Митя, тотчас же протянув ему через стол свою руку.  
"Hello, my dear man... my precious one! I always respected you..." Mitya answered joyfully and impetuously, at once thrusting his hand to him across the table.
> Perfective past gerund: «Протянув» is a perfective past деепричастие in -в from «протянуть» — 'having stretched out / thrusting'. It names an action completed essentially at the moment of «отозвался», with «же» reinforcing 'at once'.
> 'Priceless, beyond price': «Бесценный» (без- 'without' + цена 'price') is an effusive term of endearment, 'precious, invaluable'. Heaped onto «дорогой человек», it conveys Mitya's overflowing, almost theatrical warmth.

— Ай, как вы крепко пожали! Совсем сломали пальцы, — засмеялся Калганов.  
"Ow, what a grip you've got! You've quite crushed my fingers," Kalganov laughed.
> Perfective for a vivid completed act: «Сломали» (perfective of «ломать/сломать», 'broke/crushed') views the squeeze as a single accomplished result — comic hyperbole: 'you've quite crushed my fingers'. The perfective is what makes it a finished, total event.

— Вот он так всегда жмет, всегда так! — весело отозвалась, еще робко улыбаясь, Грушенька, кажется вдруг убедившаяся по виду Мити, что тот не будет буянить, с ужасным любопытством и всё еще с беспокойством в него вглядываясь.  
"That's how he always squeezes, always like that!" Grushenka answered cheerfully, still smiling timidly, seeming all at once to have satisfied herself from Mitya's look that he would not make a scene, yet peering at him with dreadful curiosity and lingering unease.
> Stacked imperfective gerunds: The sentence hangs two present деепричастия on Grushenka — «улыбаясь» (smiling) and «вглядываясь» (peering) — framing her ongoing attendant states around the main verb «отозвалась». Such gerund chains are characteristic of dense literary description.
> Past active participle, reflexive: «Убедившаяся» is a past active participle of the -ся verb «убедиться» ('to convince oneself'), agreeing with Grushenka in feminine — 'having satisfied herself'. The retained -ся marks the middle/reflexive sense.
> Compound future with быть: «Не будет буянить» is the imperfective compound future: «будет» (future of быть) plus the imperfective infinitive «буянить» ('to make a scene, rampage') — 'he would not be making a scene'. The imperfective names an ongoing/anticipated behavior.

Было что-то в нем чрезвычайно ее поразившее, да и вовсе не ожидала она от него, что в такую минуту он так войдет и так заговорит.  
There was something in him that struck her enormously, and she had hardly expected that at such a moment he would come in and speak in just this way.
> Existential было + participle, fronted: The sentence opens with the predicate «Было что-то…» ('there was something'), and the participle «поразившее» (past active, neuter, agreeing with «что-то») trails after, 'something that had struck her'. The inverted weight — verb first, modifier last — is a deliberate literary rhythm.
> Negation reinforced by вовсе: «Вовсе не» is an emphatic negation — 'not at all, hardly'. The basic negator «не» sits before the verb «ожидала», intensified by «вовсе»; «от него» is genitive after от.
> Indefinite -то: a specific unknown: «Что-то» ('something') uses the clitic -то marking a referent that is real and specific but unidentified — there was a particular something in him she could not name. Contrast «что-нибудь», which would mean 'anything at all'.

— Здравствуйте-с, — сладко отозвался слева и помещик Максимов.  
"How d'you do, sir," came the sugary greeting from the left as well, from the landowner Maximov.
> The deferential particle -с: Maximov tacks the little particle «-с» onto his words («здравствуйте-с», «нет-с», «да-с»). It is a shortened form of «сударь» ('sir') and signals servile, old-fashioned politeness. There is no direct English equivalent, so we carry the cringing tone with an added 'sir' and with Maximov's whole fawning manner.

Митя бросился и к нему:  
Mitya rushed at him too:
> Reflexive -ся and additive particle и: «Бросился» (perfective «броситься», 'to rush/throw oneself') carries the reflexive -ся marking the self-directed motion. The particle «и» before «к нему» here means 'too, also' — he rushed at this one as well.

— Здравствуйте, и вы тут, как я рад, что и вы тут! Господа, господа, я… — Он снова обратился к пану с трубкой, видимо принимая его за главного здесь человека. — Я летел… Я хотел последний день и последний час мой провести в этой комнате, в этой самой комнате… где и я обожал… мою царицу!.. Прости, пане! — крикнул он исступленно, — я летел и дал клятву… О, не бойтесь, последняя ночь моя! Выпьем, пане, мировую! Сейчас подадут вино… Я привез вот это… Он вдруг для чего-то вытащил свою пачку кредиток. — Позволь, пане! Я хочу музыки, грому, гаму, всего что прежде… Но червь, ненужный червь проползет по земле, и его не будет! День моей радости помяну в последнюю ночь мою!..  
"Hello, you're here too — how glad I am that you're here as well! Gentlemen, gentlemen, I..." He turned again to the pan with the pipe, evidently taking him for the chief person here. "I came flying... I wanted to spend my last day and my last hour in this room, in this very room... where I too adored... my queen!.. Forgive me, panie!" he cried frantically. "I came flying and swore an oath... Oh, don't be afraid, it's my last night! Let us drink, panie, to peace between us! They'll bring the wine directly... I've brought this, look..." For some reason he suddenly pulled out his bundle of banknotes. "Allow me, panie! I want music, thunder, an uproar, everything as before... But a worm, a useless worm, will crawl over the earth and be gone! On this last night of mine I'll commemorate my day of joy!.."
> Imperfective gerund + принимать за: «Принимая» is a present деепричастие, 'taking him (for)'. The idiom «принимать кого-за кого» governs the accusative «главного человека» after «за» — 'mistaking him for the chief person here'.
> 'I came flying' — figurative: «Летел» (imperfective past of «лететь», to fly) is used figuratively for headlong haste, 'I came rushing/flying'. The imperfective unidirectional verb evokes the single, urgent sweep of his journey here.
> Negative imperative of a -ся verb: «Не бойтесь» is the negated polite imperative of «бояться» ('to fear'), a verb existing only in the -ся form. Russian negative commands typically take the imperfective, as here — a general 'don't be afraid'.
> First-person plural perfective as exhortation: «Выпьем» is the perfective future 1st-plural of «выпить» used hortatively — 'let us drink!'. Russian forms such 'let's' commands simply with the perfective future, no «давайте» needed.
> 'To drink to reconciliation': «Мировая» (from «мир», peace) is here a noun: a reconciliation, a settling of a quarrel. «Выпить мировую» is the set phrase 'to drink to peace / make up over a drink' — Mitya theatrically proposing to bury the hatchet with his rival.
> 'Thunder and uproar' — partitive genitive: «Я хочу музыки, грому, гаму» — the objects of «хочу» stand in the genitive (partitive, 'some / a lot of'). «Гам» is din, hubbub; «гром» thunder used for noise and revelry. The piled genitives convey Mitya's craving for riotous abandon.

Он почти задохся; он многое, многое хотел сказать, но выскочили одни странные восклицания.  
He was almost out of breath; he had so very much he wanted to say, but only these strange exclamations came tumbling out.
> одни = 'only'; topic-comment order: «Одни» here means 'only, nothing but', not 'one' — 'only strange exclamations jumped out'. The verb «выскочили» leads and the new-information subject «восклицания» follows, the comment landing last for emphasis.
> 'He gasped / lost his breath': «Задохся» (perfective «задохнуться», to choke / catch one's breath) is an older masculine past form (modern «задохнулся»). It pictures Mitya breathless with the rush of feeling he cannot get into words.

Пан неподвижно смотрел на него, на пачку его кредиток, смотрел на Грушеньку и был в видимом недоумении.  
The pan looked at him without stirring, at his bundle of banknotes, looked at Grushenka, and was plainly at a loss.
> Prepositional after в for a state: «В недоумении» ('in perplexity, at a loss') puts the noun in the prepositional after «в», a common idiom for being in a mental state. «Видимом» agrees in the prepositional — 'in plain perplexity'.
> Imperfective for sustained gaze: The repeated imperfective «смотрел» (was looking) renders a steady, ongoing stare — at Mitya, at the banknotes, at Grushenka — the imperfective's natural job for process and duration.

— Ежели поволит моя крулева… — начал было он.  
"If my krulewa will permit it..." he began.
> Polonized speech: ежели / поволит / крулева: The pan's line is comically half-Polish: «ежели» is an archaic/folk 'if', «поволит» mangles 'позволит' (will permit) toward Polish, and «крулева» is Polish 'królowa' (queen) where Russian has «королева». Dostoevsky spells his accent into the words themselves.
> The particle было: an interrupted start: «Начал было» uses the particle «было», which marks an action begun but checked or not carried through — 'he started to (but)…'. It sets up the interruption by Grushenka in the next line.

— Да что крулева, это королева, что ли? — перебила вдруг Грушенька. — И смешно мне на вас, как вы все говорите. Садись, Митя, и что это ты говоришь? Не пугай, пожалуйста. Не будешь пугать, не будешь? Коли не будешь, так я тебе рада…  
"What's this 'krulewa' — do you mean 'queen,' or what?" Grushenka suddenly broke in. "It makes me laugh, the way you all talk. Sit down, Mitya, and what is it you're going on about? Don't frighten anyone, please. You won't frighten us, will you? If you won't, then I'm glad of you..."
> The questioning tag что ли: «Что ли» is a colloquial dubitative tag, 'or what? / is it?', expressing Grushenka's puzzled guess at the foreign «крулева». The interrogative particle «ли» here lives inside this fixed spoken phrase.
> Dative-subject impersonal: «Смешно мне» is impersonal: the neuter predicative «смешно» with the dative experiencer «мне» — 'it amuses me / I find it funny'. No nominative subject; the feeling is framed as happening to her.
> Familiar singular imperative: «Садись» is the ты-imperative of «садиться» (vs. polite «садитесь» to Kalganov earlier). Grushenka's switch to the intimate singular, plus the bare name «Митя», marks her closeness to him.
> Folksy conditional with коли… так: «Коли» is a colloquial/archaic 'if', paired with resumptive «так» ('then') — 'if you won't, then I'm glad of you'. «Я тебе рада» uses the short adjective «рада» with a dative — 'I am glad (at) you'.

— Мне, мне пугать? — вскричал вдруг Митя, вскинув вверх свои руки. — О, идите мимо, проходите, не помешаю!.. — И вдруг он совсем неожиданно для всех и, уж конечно, для себя самого бросился на стул и залился слезами, отвернув к противоположной стене свою голову, а руками крепко обхватив спинку стула, точно обнимая ее  
"Me — me frighten anyone?" Mitya suddenly cried out, flinging up his hands. "Oh, pass me by, walk on past, I won't get in your way!.." And suddenly, quite unexpectedly to everyone and, of course, to himself most of all, he threw himself onto a chair and dissolved into tears, turning his head to the opposite wall and gripping the back of the chair tightly with his arms, as though he were embracing it.
> Dative + infinitive of indignant rhetoric: «Мне пугать?» is a dative-experiencer pattern with a bare infinitive, an incredulous rhetorical question — 'Me, frighten anyone?!' The dative «мне» names the one supposedly to do it, the infinitive left hanging in protest.
> Imperatives and perfective future: «Идите», «проходите» are polite-plural imperatives ('go past, walk on'), while «не помешаю» is the perfective future 1st-singular of «помешать» — 'I won't get in the way'. The shift from command to promise rides entirely on the verb forms.
> Chained gerunds with точно: After the perfective «залился слезами» ('burst into tears' — instrumental «слезами'), the sentence stacks a perfective gerund «обхватив» (having gripped) and an imperfective «обнимая» (embracing), the latter under «точно» 'as if'. The participial pile-up is pure literary narration.

— Ну вот, ну вот, экой ты! — укоризненно воскликнула Грушенька. — Вот он такой точно ходил ко мне, — вдруг заговорит, а я ничего не понимаю. А один раз так же заплакал, а теперь вот в другой — экой стыд! С чего ты плачешь-то? Было бы еще с чего? — прибавила она вдруг загадочно и с каким-то раздражением напирая на свое словечко.  
"Now, now, what a fellow you are!" Grushenka exclaimed reproachfully. "This is just how he used to come to me — he'd start talking all of a sudden and I'd understand nothing. And once he cried just like this, and now here's a second time — for shame! What is it you're crying about? As if there were anything to cry about!" she added, suddenly enigmatic, leaning with a kind of irritation on her little phrase.
> Folk exclamatory экой: «Экой» (= «экий») is a colloquial exclamatory 'what a…!' — «экой ты!» = 'what a one you are!', «экой стыд!» = 'what a shame!'. It is a folksy, affectionate-scolding marker typical of Grushenka's earthy speech.
> Emphatic clitic -то: The hyphenated «-то» on «плачешь-то» emphasizes the known topic — 'what are you crying about, then?'. This is the topic-highlighting -то, distinct from the indefinite -то of «кто-то»; Grushenka leans on it for insistence.
> Conditional particle бы as 'as if': «Было бы… с чего» uses past «было» plus «бы» for an irrealis dismissal — 'as if there were anything to (cry about)'. The бы-construction here voices skepticism rather than a true condition.
> словечко — a knowing 'little word': «Словечко» is the diminutive of «слово», here a 'pointed little word/phrase'. «Напирать на» means to lean/press on it — Grushenka stresses her loaded phrase «было бы с чего» with cryptic, irritated meaning the reader is meant to feel.

— Я… я не плачу… Ну, здравствуйте! — повернулся он в один миг на стуле и вдруг засмеялся, но не деревянным своим отрывистым смехом, а каким-то неслышным длинным, нервозным и сотрясающимся смехом.  
"I... I'm not crying... Well, hello!" He whirled around on the chair in an instant and suddenly laughed, but not with his usual wooden, abrupt laugh — with some inaudible, drawn-out, nervous, shuddering laughter.
> Contrastive не… а with instrumental: The pattern «не X, а Y» ('not X, but Y') opposes two ways of laughing, both in the instrumental «смехом» (laughed 'with' a laugh). «А» is the contrastive coordinator, and the long agreeing strings of adjectives are typical literary characterization.
> Indefinite какой-то: «Каким-то» (instrumental of «какой-то») means 'some sort of', a vague qualifier the narrator uses to grope at the strange new quality of the laugh — specific yet not quite namable, the -то of the unknown-but-real.

— Ну вот, опять… Ну, развеселись, развеселись! — уговаривала его Грушенька. — Я очень рада, что ты приехал, очень рада, Митя, слышишь ты, что я очень рада? Я хочу, чтоб он сидел здесь с нами, — повелительно обратилась она как бы ко всем, хотя слова ее видимо относились к сидевшему на диване. — Хочу, хочу! А коли он уйдет, так и я уйду, вот что! — прибавила она с загоревшимися вдруг глазами.  
"There, there it is again... Come, cheer up, cheer up!" Grushenka coaxed him. "I'm very glad you've come, very glad, Mitya, do you hear me, that I'm very glad? I want him to sit here with us," she announced imperiously, as if addressing them all, though her words were plainly aimed at the man sitting on the sofa. "I want it, I want it! And if he leaves, then I'll leave too, so there!" she added, her eyes suddenly blazing.
> Reflexive imperative, perfective: «Развеселись» is the ты-imperative of perfective «развеселиться» ('to cheer up', -ся middle/change-of-state). The doubling is coaxing insistence — 'come, cheer up, cheer up!'.
> чтобы + past-form for a willed outcome: After «хочу» ('I want'), Russian requires «чтоб(ы)» plus a past-form verb «сидел» — the irrealis of will, 'I want that he sit / I want him to sit'. You cannot use an infinitive when the subject of the wish differs from the wisher.
> Substantivized past active participle: «Сидевшему» (past active participle of «сидеть») here stands without a noun, functioning as 'the one sitting (on the sofa)' in the dative after «к». Participles freely become nouns in literary Russian.
> Conditional коли… так with perfective futures: «Коли… так» frames a real condition, and both verbs are perfective futures: «уйдёт» / «уйду» (from «уйти», a prefixed motion verb) — 'if he leaves, then I'll leave too'. The completed-departure sense is carried entirely by the perfective.

— Что изволит моя царица — то закон! — произнес пан, галантно поцеловав ручку Грушеньки. — Прошу пана до нашей компаньи! — обратился он любезно к Мите Митя опять привскочил было с видимым намерением снова разразиться тирадой, но вышло другое.  
"Whatever my queen pleases — that is the law!" pronounced the pan, gallantly kissing Grushenka's little hand. "I beg the pan to join our company!" he said amiably, turning to Mitya. Mitya started up again, with the evident intention of bursting into another tirade, but something else came out.
> Correlative что… то: A correlative construction: «что…» ('whatever') in the subordinate clause answered by «то» ('that') in the main — 'whatever my queen wishes, that is law'. This тот/то-with-relative pattern is a staple of sententious, proverbial phrasing.
> Perfective gerund of accompanying act: «Поцеловав» is a perfective past деепричастие ('having kissed'), the gallant gesture accompanying his pronouncement. «Ручку» is the diminutive of «рука» — kissing her 'little hand', courtly and tender.
> Polonisms: прошу пана, до, компаньи: The pan's invitation is Polish-flavored: «прошу пана» calques Polish 'proszę pana' (please, sir), and «до нашей компаньи» uses «до» where standard Russian would say «в нашу компанию» — Polish 'do' meaning 'to/into'. The accent is sewn into the syntax.
> Particle было with prefixed verb: «Привскочил было» — the perfective «привскочить» (to half-start up) plus «было» again marks an aborted action: he began to leap up but 'something else came out'. The diminutive prefix при-/-вс- softens the movement to a small jerk.

— Выпьем, пане! — оборвал он вдруг вместо речи, Все рассмеялись.  
"Let us drink, panie!" he broke off suddenly, instead of making a speech. Everyone laughed.
> Вместо + genitive: «Вместо» ('instead of') governs the genitive «речи» — 'instead of a speech'. A neat genitive-of-substitution: the toast bursts out where the oration was expected.
> Inceptive perfective with рас-: «Рассмеялись» (perfective «рассмеяться») denotes the onset of laughing — 'burst out laughing' — the prefix рас- adding an ingressive, spreading sense to the -ся verb «смеяться».

— Господи! А я думала, он опять говорить хочет, — нервозно воскликнула Грушенька. — Слышишь, Митя, — настойчиво прибавила она, — больше не вскакивай, а что шампанского привез, так это славно. Я сама пить буду, а наливки я терпеть не могу. А лучше всего, что сам прикатил, а то скучища… Да ты кутить, что ли, приехал опять? Да спрячь деньги-то в карман! Откуда столько достал?  
"Lord! And I thought he wanted to start talking again," Grushenka exclaimed nervously. "Listen, Mitya," she added insistently, "don't jump up like that anymore — but it's splendid that you've brought champagne. I'll drink some myself; I can't bear the fruit liqueurs. But best of all is that you've come yourself, or it was deadly dull here... So have you come to make a spree of it again, then? Put that money back in your pocket! Wherever did you get so much?"
> Genitive of negation: Under the negated «не могу терпеть» ('I can't stand'), the object «наливки» appears in the genitive rather than accusative — the genitive of negation. It is fronted for emphasis: 'the fruit-liqueur, I can't bear'.
> Compound future + emphatic сама: «Пить буду» is the imperfective compound future ('I'll be drinking'), with «буду» following the infinitive for emphasis. «Сама» is the intensifier 'myself' agreeing in feminine — 'I'll drink it myself'.
> Earthy, colloquial texture: Grushenka's speech bristles with folk color: «наливка» (a sweet fruit liqueur), «скучища» (the augmentative -ища of «скука» — 'deadly, crushing boredom'), and the emphatic clitic in «деньги-то». The diction paints her plain, lively origins.
> Conjunction а то 'or else': «А то» means 'otherwise, or else' — best of all that he came himself, 'or else it was deathly dull'. It is a common colloquial connective pivoting on an unstated counterfactual.

Митя, у которого в руке всё еще скомканы были кредитки, очень всеми и особенно панами замеченные, быстро и конфузливо сунул их в карман.  
Mitya, who still had the crumpled banknotes in his hand — much noticed by everyone, and especially by the pans — quickly and sheepishly stuffed them into his pocket.
> Short passive participle as predicate: «Скомканы» is the short-form past passive participle of «скомкать» ('to crumple'), agreeing with «кредитки» in plural — '(the banknotes) were crumpled'. The short passive plus «были» states a resulting condition, the standard periphrastic passive.
> Long passive participle with instrumental agents: «Замеченные» is the long past passive participle ('noticed'), and its agents «всеми» / «панами» stand in the instrumental — 'noticed by everyone, especially by the pans'. The instrumental of agent is how Russian names the doer in a passive.
> кредитки — paper banknotes: «Кредитка» (from «кредитный билет», 'credit note') is the everyday word for a paper rouble banknote of the period. Mitya's loose, crumpled wad of them is what so visibly catches the company's — and the Poles' — attention.

Он покраснел.  
He blushed.
> Inceptive perfective покраснеть: «Покраснел» is the perfective of «краснеть/покраснеть» — the prefix по- marks the change of state, 'he turned red, blushed'. A single completed event punctuating the scene.

В эту самую минуту хозяин принес откупоренную бутылку шампанского на подносе и стаканы.  
At that very moment the landlord brought in an uncorked bottle of champagne on a tray, with glasses.
> Past passive participle as attribute; genitive of content: «Откупоренную» is a long past passive participle ('uncorked') agreeing with «бутылку» in accusative. «Шампанского» is a genitive of content/material — 'a bottle of champagne'.

Митя схватил было бутылку, но так растерялся, что забыл, что с ней надо делать.  
Mitya seized the bottle, but was so flustered that he forgot what to do with it.
> Particle было: a thwarted grab: «Схватил было» again uses «было» to mark an action begun but not completed in its intent — he seized the bottle but then froze, forgetting what to do. The perfective «схватил» gives the sharp snatch, «было» the frustration of it.
> Result clause так… что: «Так… что» ('so… that') links degree to result: 'so flustered that he forgot'. «Растерялся» is a perfective -ся verb of becoming bewildered; the что-clause states the consequence.

Взял у него ее уже Калганов и разлил за него вино.  
Kalganov took it from him and poured out the wine on his behalf.
> Verb-first inversion; у + genitive of source: The sentence fronts the verb «взял» before the subject «Калганов», a marked literary order that throws the action forward. «У него» (genitive after «у») marks the person from whom it was taken — 'took it from him'.
> за + accusative 'on behalf of': «За него» here means 'for him, in his stead' (за + accusative) — Kalganov poured the wine in place of the helpless Mitya. The same «за» elsewhere means 'behind' or 'for' depending on case and sense.

— Да еще, еще бутылку! — закричал Митя хозяину и, забыв чокнуться с паном, которого так торжественно приглашал выпить с ним мировую, вдруг выпил весь свой стакан один, никого не дождавшись.  
"More, another bottle!" Mitya shouted to the landlord, and, forgetting to clink glasses with the pan whom he had so solemnly invited to drink to peace with him, he suddenly drained his whole glass alone, without waiting for anyone.
> Perfective gerund + reflexive infinitive: «Забыв» is a perfective past деепричастие ('having forgotten'), and «чокнуться» (to clink glasses, a -ся reciprocal verb) its infinitive complement. «С паном» uses instrumental after «с» for accompaniment — 'forgetting to clink with the pan'.
> Relative который in the accusative: «Которого» is the relative pronoun in the accusative (animate, hence genitive-shaped) — object of «приглашал», 'whom he had so solemnly invited'. The clause folds the earlier toast back into the narration.
> Negative concord + genitive after a gerund: «Никого не дождавшись» — the ни-pronoun «никого» (genitive) and the negator «не» co-occur (negative concord), with the perfective gerund «дождавшись» ('having waited for'): 'without waiting for anyone'. «Дождаться» governs the genitive of what one waits for.

Всё лицо его вдруг изменилось.  
His whole face suddenly changed.
> Reflexive of change-of-state: «Изменилось» is the perfective -ся verb «измениться» ('to change', intransitive), the -ся giving the middle, non-agentive sense — his face changed of itself. Contrast «изменить» (to change something / to betray).

Вместо торжественного и трагического выражения, с которым он вошел, в нем явилось как бы что-то младенческое.  
In place of the solemn and tragic expression with which he had come in, something almost childlike appeared in him.
> Relative в котором/с которым: «С которым» — the relative «который» in the instrumental after «с», modifying «выражения» — 'the expression with which he had come in'. «Вошёл» is the perfective of «входить/войти», a prefixed motion verb of completed entry.
> Substantivized neuter adjective: «Что-то младенческое» — the neuter adjective «младенческое» ('infantile, babyish') stands as a noun governed by «что-то», 'something childlike'. «Как бы» softens it to 'as it were'. Adjectives readily nominalize in the neuter for such abstractions.

Он вдруг как бы весь смирился и принизился.  
He suddenly seemed wholly humbled and subdued.
> Paired perfective reflexives: Both «смирился» («смириться», to humble oneself) and «принизился» («принизиться», to become abased) are perfective -ся verbs of change of state, marking a sudden completed inner shift. «Весь» = 'wholly, all over'.

Он смотрел на всех робко и радостно, часто и нервно хихикая, с благодарным видом виноватой собачонки, которую опять приласкали и опять впустили.  
He looked at them all timidly and joyfully, giggling often and nervously, with the grateful air of a guilty little dog that has been petted and let back in again.
> Imperfective gerund of attendant manner: «Хихикая» is a present деепричастие from «хихикать» ('to giggle, titter'), describing the ongoing manner of his looking — 'giggling often and nervously'. Simultaneous, subject-shared, adverbial.
> Relative clause, agentless 3rd-plural: «Которую» is the relative in the accusative (the little dog 'which they had petted and let back in'). The unstated 3rd-person-plural subjects «приласкали»/«впустили» work like an English passive — a common way Russian leaves the agent vague.
> собачонка — a pitiable little dog: «Собачонка» is an expressive diminutive of «собака», a small, scruffy, pitiable dog (the suffix -онк- adds a shade of contempt or pathos). The image — a 'guilty little dog' let back in — defines Mitya's abject, fawning mood.

Он как будто всё забыл и оглядывал всех с восхищением, с детскою улыбкой.  
It was as if he had forgotten everything and was gazing round at them all with delight, with a childlike smile.
> Aspect contrast: perfective + imperfective: «Забыл» (perfective, a completed 'had forgotten') sets the state, then «оглядывал» (imperfective, 'was gazing round') paints the ongoing action against it — the two aspects working in tandem, settled result plus living process.
> Instrumental of accompaniment; archaic ending: «С восхищением» / «с детскою улыбкой» — instrumental after «с» for accompanying manner. Note the bookish long-form instrumental «детскою» (vs. modern «детской»), a 19th-century literary flavor.

На Грушеньку смотрел беспрерывно смеясь и придвинул свой стул вплоть к самому ее креслу.  
At Grushenka he gazed, laughing without pause, and he drew his chair right up against her armchair.
> Imperfective gerund of simultaneity: «Смеясь» (present деепричастие of «смеяться», a -ся verb) accompanies «смотрел» — 'gazed, laughing continuously'. The reflexive verb keeps its -сь in the gerund, here softened to -ясь after the vowel.
> Perfective придвинуть; intensifier самому: «Придвинул» (perfective, prefix при- = 'up to, toward') is a single completed drawing-near. «К самому её креслу» uses «самый» as an intensifier — 'right up against her very armchair'. «Свой» again the reflexive possessive.

Помаленьку разглядел и обоих панов, хотя еще мало осмыслив их.  
Little by little he made out the two pans as well, though he had as yet given little thought to them.
> Concessive хотя + perfective gerund: «Хотя… осмыслив» pairs the concessive conjunction «хотя» ('although') with a perfective gerund — 'though having as yet little grasped them'. Russian readily lets «хотя» govern a gerund rather than a full clause in compact literary style.
> 'Little by little': «Помаленьку» is a colloquial adverb (from «маленький») meaning 'gradually, bit by bit, little by little'. It sets the unhurried, dreamy pace of Mitya's slow taking-in of the two Poles.

Пан на диване поражал его своею осанкой, польским акцентом, а главное — трубкой.  
The pan on the sofa impressed him by his bearing, by his Polish accent, and above all by his pipe.
> Instrumental of cause/respect: The three nouns «осанкой», «акцентом», «трубкой» stand in the instrumental — the instrumental of the respect in which something strikes one: 'impressed him by his bearing, his accent, his pipe'. Again the archaic «своею» for «своей».
> осанка — carriage, bearing: «Осанка» means one's physical bearing or deportment — the dignified, self-important way the seated pan holds himself. It is precisely the affected grandeur the narrator keeps gently mocking.

«Ну что же такое, ну и хорошо, что он курит трубку», — созерцал Митя.  
"Well, what of it — and a good thing, too, that he smokes a pipe," Mitya contemplated.
> Particle же in an exclamatory dismissal: «Что же такое» = 'well what of it, so what'; the particle «же» adds the resigned, brushing-aside emphasis Russian loves in such phrases. It marks Mitya's blissful refusal to be bothered by anything.
> созерцать — to contemplate: «Созерцать» is a lofty, almost contemplative-religious verb, 'to contemplate, gaze upon in reverie'. Applied to drunken Mitya musing about a pipe, it is gently ironic, inflating his blurry staring into philosophical 'contemplation'.

Несколько обрюзглое, почти уже сорокалетнее лицо пана с очень маленьким носиком, под которым виднелись два претоненькие востренькие усика, нафабренные и нахальные, не возбудило в Мите тоже ни малейших пока вопросов.  
The pan's somewhat flabby, nearly forty-year-old face, with its very small nose, beneath which could be seen two exceedingly thin, sharp little mustaches, waxed and impudent, raised not the slightest question in Mitya either, for now.
> Mocking diminutive cascade: The portrait is built from belittling diminutives: «носик» (little nose), «усики» (little mustache), and later «паричок» (little wig), «височки» (little temple-locks). The piled -ик/-ок suffixes shrink and ridicule the pretentious pan into something faintly absurd.
> Genitive of negation with ни малейших: Under negated «не возбудило», the object goes genitive: «ни малейших… вопросов» ('not the slightest questions'), with «ни» intensifying — the genitive of negation reinforced by negative concord.
> Intensifying пре- and 'waxed' mustaches: The prefix «пре-» on «претоненькие» / «востренькие» intensifies — 'exceedingly thin, very sharp'. «Нафабренные» means waxed/blackened with «фабра» (mustache-wax), a dandy's grooming — pretentious detail underscoring the pan's vanity.

Даже очень дрянненький паричок пана, сделанный в Сибири, с преглупо зачесанными вперед височками, не поразил особенно Митю: «Значит, так и надо, коли парик», — блаженно продолжал он созерцать.  
Even the pan's wretched little wig, made in Siberia, with its temple-locks combed absurdly forward, did not particularly strike Mitya: "If he wears a wig, then it must be the thing to do," he went on contemplating blissfully.
> Contemptuous diminutives + intensifier: «Дрянненький» (from «дрянь», trash) is a doubly-suffixed contemptuous diminutive, 'wretched, shabby little'; «паричок» a mocking 'little wig'; «преглупо» = «пре-» + 'stupidly', 'most absurdly'. The lexis drips disdain even as Mitya feels none.
> Elliptical коli-clause; impersonal надо: Mitya's lazy thought: «так и надо» is impersonal ('that's how it should be'), and «коли парик» is an elliptical conditional, 'if (it's) a wig (then so be it)'. Colloquial «коли» and the dropped verb mimic drunken, easy reasoning.

Другой же пан, сидевший у стены, более молодой, чем пан на диване, смотревший на всю компанию дерзко и задорно и с молчаливым презрением слушавший общий разговор, опять-таки поразил Митю только очень высоким своим ростом, ужасно непропорциональным с паном, сидевшим на диване.  
The other pan, who sat by the wall, younger than the pan on the sofa, who surveyed the whole company with insolent bravado and listened to the general conversation with silent contempt — he too struck Mitya only by his very great height, dreadfully out of proportion with the pan sitting on the sofa.
> A chain of past active participles: Three past active participles — «сидевший» (sitting), «смотревший» (looking), «слушавший» (listening) — pile up as agreeing modifiers of the second pan, each replacing a который-clause. This dense participial stacking is quintessential Dostoevskian description.
> Comparative with более and чем: «Более молодой» is the analytic (attributive) comparative — 'younger' — and «чем» introduces the standard of comparison. Russian could also say «моложе»; the periphrastic «более + adjective» is the bookish attributive option.
> Instrumental of respect again: «Поразил… ростом» — the instrumental «ростом» names what struck Mitya, 'by his height'. «Высоким своим ростом» is one agreeing instrumental cluster; «своим» the reflexive possessive.

«Коли встанет на ноги, будет вершков одиннадцати», — мелькнуло в голове Мити.  
"If he stood up, he'd be eleven vershoks," flashed through Mitya's head.
> Measuring height in вершки: A «вершок» is an old Russian unit (about 4.4 cm). Heights were quoted as so many «вершки» above two arshins (a standard base), so 'eleven вершки' means a very tall man — roughly six foot three. We keep the original unit in our rendering and gloss it here.
> Real conditional with perfective futures: «Коли встанет… будет» is a colloquial real conditional — both verbs perfective future ('if he stands up, he'll be…'). «Вершков одиннадцати» is the genitive-of-measure construction with the numeral, the noun governed in the genitive plural.

Мелькнуло у него тоже, что этот высокий пан, вероятно, друг и приспешник пану на диване, как бы «телохранитель его», и что маленький пан с трубкой, конечно, командует паном высоким.  
It flashed across him too that this tall pan was probably the friend and henchman of the pan on the sofa, a sort of "bodyguard" to him, and that the little pan with the pipe was, of course, the one who commanded the tall one.
> Impersonal мелькнуло + что-clause: «Мелькнуло, что…» is an impersonal flash-of-thought construction ('it flashed (across him) that…'), the subordinate «что»-clause as logical subject. «У него» (genitive after «у») locates the thought in him.
> Predicate nouns, dative attribute: Note «приспешник пану» — the bookish dative «пану» as 'henchman to the pan'. The predicate nouns «друг», «приспешник», «телохранитель» (nominative) describe the tall pan, and «командует паном» takes the instrumental after «командовать».
> приспешник — henchman, accomplice: «Приспешник» is a pejorative 'henchman, lackey, accomplice' — someone who serves another's (often shady) ends. Mitya casts the tall pan as the seated one's hireling, sketching a little criminal hierarchy in his tipsy imagination.

Но и это всё казалось Мите ужасно как хорошо и бесспорно.  
But all this, too, struck Mitya as terribly fine and beyond all dispute.
> Dative experiencer with казаться: «Казалось Мите» — the verb «казаться» ('to seem') takes a dative experiencer, 'seemed to Mitya'. The predicatives «хорошо»/«бесспорно» are neuter/invariable, matching the impersonal frame; «ужасно как» = 'awfully, terribly' colloquially intensifies.

В маленькой собачке замерло всякое соперничество.  
In the little dog every trace of rivalry had died away.
> Locative fronting; verb-then-subject: The prepositional phrase «в маленькой собачке» (in the little dog) opens the sentence as topic, the verb «замерло» follows, and the subject «соперничество» lands last as the new information — classic topic-comment ordering.
> Mitya as 'the little dog': The narrator now calls Mitya himself «маленькая собачка», carrying forward the guilty-dog image of s34. The metaphor has hardened into his epithet for the moment — every flicker of rivalry has died in this fawning creature.

В Грушеньке и в загадочном тоне нескольких фраз ее он еще ничего не понял; а понимал лишь, сотрясаясь всем сердцем своим, что она к нему ласкова, что она его «простила» и подле себя посадила.  
Of Grushenka and the enigmatic tone of several of her phrases he understood nothing as yet; he understood only, his whole heart shaking, that she was kind to him, that she had "forgiven" him and seated him at her side.
> Aspect + negation pivot: «Ничего не понял» (perfective, with negative concord «ничего… не») = 'understood nothing (completely)'; then «понимал лишь» (imperfective) shifts to the ongoing partial grasp he did have. The aspect switch is the whole point: no finished comprehension, only a dim continuing one.
> Imperfective gerund + instrumental: «Сотрясаясь» is a present деепричастие of the -ся verb «сотрясаться» ('to shake, tremble'), with «всем сердцем» in the instrumental of means — 'trembling with his whole heart'. «Своим» the reflexive possessive.
> Short adjective predicate ласкова: «Ласкова» is the short feminine form of «ласковый» ('tender, affectionate'), used predicatively after the zero copula — 'she is kind (to him)'. The short form is the bookish, predicate-only option carrying a present state.

Он был вне себя от восхищения, увидев, как она хлебнула из стакана вино.  
He was beside himself with rapture when he saw her take a sip of wine from her glass.
> Perfective gerund framing perception: «Увидев» (perfective past gerund of «увидеть', 'having seen') sets the moment of perception, and «как она хлебнула» ('how she took a sip', perfective «хлебнуть») is its content. The gerund pins the rapture to the instant he saw it.
> Idiom: вне себя: «Вне себя» (literally 'outside oneself') is the set idiom 'beside oneself', with «от восхищения» (genitive after «от») giving the cause — 'beside himself with rapture'. «Хлебнула» (to gulp/sip) is a homely, vivid verb of drinking.

Молчание компании как бы вдруг, однако, поразило его, и он стал обводить всех ожидающими чего-то глазами: «Что же мы, однако, сидим, что же вы ничего не начинаете, господа?» — как бы говорил осклабленный взор его.  
The silence of the company suddenly struck him, however, and he began to run his eyes over them all expectantly: "What are we sitting about for, though — why don't you start something, gentlemen?" his grinning gaze seemed to say.
> Particle же + однако in lively question: «Что же… однако» layers two discourse particles: «же» insists ('what on earth'), «однако» adds 'however, yet'. Together they voice Mitya's impatient inner prompt — why are we just sitting here?
> Present active participle in the instrumental: «Ожидающими» is a present active participle from «ожидать» ('expecting'), agreeing with «глазами» in the instrumental — 'with eyes expecting something'. «Чего-то» is the genitive object (ждать/ожидать + genitive), -то marking a vague specific.
> Bookish осклабленный / взор: «Взор» is an elevated, literary word for 'gaze' (vs. plain «взгляд»), and «осклабленный» is a past passive participle from «осклабиться» — 'grinning, showing the teeth', faintly animal. The pairing lends his grinning look a vivid, slightly grotesque tinge.

— Да вот он всё врет, и мы тут всё смеялись, — начал вдруг Калганов, точно угадав его мысль и показывая на Максимова.  
"He keeps telling tall tales, and we've all been laughing," Kalganov suddenly began, as if guessing his thought, and pointing at Maximov.
> Perfective + imperfective gerunds together: Two gerunds of different aspect: perfective «угадав» ('as if having guessed', a prior completed act under «точно») and imperfective «показывая» ('pointing', simultaneous). The aspect pairing distinguishes the finished guess from the ongoing gesture.
> врать — to fib, talk nonsense: «Врать» is a colloquial 'to lie / tell tall tales / talk rubbish', lighter than the grave «лгать». With «всё» ('keeps') it means Maximov is reeling off harmless whoppers — 'he keeps spinning yarns'.

Митя стремительно уставился на Калганова и потом тотчас же на Максимова.  
Mitya stared eagerly at Kalganov and then at once at Maximov.
> Perfective reflexive of fixed gaze: «Уставился» (perfective «уставиться», -ся middle) means to fix one's stare, a single completed riveting of the eyes. «На + accusative» gives the target; the structure repeats for the two men.

— Врет? — рассмеялся он своим коротким деревянным смехом, тотчас же чему-то обрадовавшись, — ха-ха!  
"Tall tales?" He burst out with his short, wooden laugh, instantly delighted by something. "Ha-ha!"
> Perfective gerund with dative object: «Обрадовавшись» is a perfective past gerund of «обрадоваться» (-ся, 'to become glad'), which governs the dative «чему-то» — 'delighted at once by something'. The verb's joy is directed at a dative cause.
> Instrumental of the cognate object: «Рассмеялся… смехом» — laughed 'with a laugh', the instrumental «смехом» as a cognate instrument. «Своим коротким деревянным» is one agreeing instrumental string painting his characteristic 'short, wooden laugh'.

— Да. Представьте, он утверждает, что будто бы вся наша кавалерия в двадцатых годах переженилась на польках; но это ужасный вздор, не правда ли?  
"Yes. Imagine, he insists that in the twenties our whole cavalry supposedly married Polish women; but that's dreadful nonsense, isn't it?"
> Reported doubt: будто бы + collective verb: «Будто бы» ('supposedly, as if') flags the claim as hearsay Kalganov doubts. «Переженилась» (perfective «пережениться», the prefix пере- = 'all of them, one after another') takes a singular collective verb agreeing with «кавалерия» — the whole cavalry 'married off'.
> жениться на + prepositional; tag не правда ли: «Жениться на ком» governs the prepositional «на польках» ('married Polish women'). «Не правда ли?» is the standard tag question, 'isn't that so?', inviting agreement — here, that it's all nonsense.

— На польках? — подхватил опять Митя и уже в решительном восхищении.  
"Polish women?" Mitya caught it up again, now in downright rapture.
> Prepositional of state; verbless echo: The fragment «уже в решительном восхищении» (prepositional after «в», 'now in decided rapture') is a verbless characterizing tag attached to «подхватил». Such elliptic state-phrases keep the narration brisk and impressionistic.

Калганов очень хорошо понимал отношения Мити к Грушеньке, догадывался и о пане, но его всё это не так занимало, даже, может быть, вовсе не занимало, а занимал его всего более Максимов.  
Kalganov understood very well the relations between Mitya and Grushenka, and he guessed about the pan too, but none of it interested him much — perhaps did not interest him at all — for what interested him most of all was Maximov.
> Contrastive а with focus reordering: The contrastive «а» pivots from what did not interest Kalganov to what did, and the second clause inverts to verb-first «занимал его… Максимов» so the new focus «Максимов» lands last. «Всего более» = 'most of all' (genitive «всего» with comparative).
> догадываться о + prepositional: «Догадываться о ком/чём» ('to guess, surmise about') governs the prepositional «о пане». The imperfective «догадывался» suggests an ongoing, dawning intuition rather than a single realization.

Попал он сюда с Максимовым случайно и панов встретил здесь на постоялом дворе в первый раз в жизни.  
He had come here with Maximov by chance, and he had met the pans here at the inn for the first time in his life.
> Animate accusative = genitive: «Панов» is the accusative plural of «пан», identical to the genitive because the noun is animate — 'met the pans'. This animacy rule keeps object and subject distinct under Russian's free word order.

Грушеньку же знал прежде и раз даже был у нее с кем-то; тогда он ей не понравился.  
Grushenka he had known before, and had even once been to see her with someone; on that occasion she had not taken to him.
> Topicalizing же; object fronted: «Грушеньку» is fronted as the new topic and marked by the contrastive particle «же» ('as for Grushenka, he had known her before'). The accusative animate «Грушеньку» leads, the subject «он» dropped — pure topic-comment management.
> нравиться with dative experiencer: «Понравиться» reverses English logic: the dative «ей» is the one who likes (or here, with «не», doesn't), and the grammatical subject «он» is what is liked — 'she did not take to him'. The dative-experiencer pattern is everywhere in the novel's inner life.

Но здесь она очень ласково на него поглядывала; до приезда Мити даже ласкала его, но он как-то оставался бесчувственным.  
But here she looked at him very kindly; before Mitya's arrival she had even been making much of him, but he somehow remained unmoved.
> до + genitive of time-before: «До приезда Мити» ('before Mitya's arrival') — «до» governs the genitive «приезда», and «Мити» is the genitive of the verbal noun's subject. A compact way to anchor an event before another.
> Imperfective chain; predicate instrumental: The imperfectives «поглядывала»/«ласкала» render her repeated, ongoing coaxing, against which «оставался бесчувственным» uses the instrumental predicate «бесчувственным» after «оставаться» — 'he remained unmoved'. Verbs of remaining-in-a-state take the instrumental complement.

Это был молодой человек, лет не более двадцати, щегольски одетый, с очень милым беленьким личиком и с прекрасными густыми русыми волосами.  
He was a young man, no more than twenty, foppishly dressed, with a very sweet, fair little face and beautiful thick light-brown hair.
> Genitive of approximate age: «Лет не более двадцати» ('no more than twenty years') uses the genitive plural «лет» governed by the numeral phrase, with «не более» ('no more than') framing approximation. Age is regularly expressed with this genitive-of-quantity idiom.
> Diminutive prettiness; щегольски: «Беленький» (-еньк- diminutive of 'white/fair') and «личико» (the endearing diminutive of «лицо», 'face') paint Kalganov's youthful prettiness with tenderness. «Щегольски» (from «щёголь», a dandy) means 'foppishly, in dandy fashion'.

Но на этом беленьком личике были прелестные светло-голубые глаза, с умным, а иногда и глубоким выражением, не по возрасту даже, несмотря на то что молодой человек иногда говорил и смотрел совсем как дитя и нисколько этим не стеснялся, даже сам это сознавая.  
But in that fair little face were lovely pale-blue eyes, with an intelligent and at times even profound expression, beyond his years, even though the young man sometimes spoke and looked exactly like a child and was not in the least embarrassed by it, even being aware of it himself.
> Concessive несмотря на то что: «Несмотря на то что» is the full concessive conjunction 'despite the fact that / even though', opening the subordinate clause. «Дитя» is the archaic/bookish word for 'child' (vs. «ребёнок»), an old neuter noun.
> Negation нисколько + instrumental cause: «Нисколько… не стеснялся» — «нисколько» ('not at all') reinforces the negated «не», negative concord again. «Стесняться» (-ся, 'to be embarrassed by') governs the instrumental «этим» — 'not in the least embarrassed by it'.
> Imperfective gerund of attendant awareness: «Сознавая» is a present деепричастие from «сознавать» ('to be aware'), 'even being aware of it himself', simultaneous with the main clause. «Сам» intensifies — he himself knew it. A final gerund rounding off the portrait.

Вообще он был очень своеобразен, даже капризен, хотя всегда ласков.  
On the whole he was very singular, even capricious, though always gentle.
> «своеобразен» — singular, peculiar: From «свой» (one's own) + «образ» (form, image): literally 'of his own cast', hence idiosyncratic, peculiar, having a character all his own. Here it is the short predicative form (cf. «своеобразный»).
> A chain of short adjectives: «своеобразен», «капризен», «ласков» are all short-form adjectives, used predicatively after «был». The short form is more bookish and states a characterizing quality, very much the texture of Dostoevsky's narratorial description.

Иногда в выражении лица его мелькало что-то неподвижное и упрямое: он глядел на вас, слушал, а сам как будто упорно мечтал о чем-то своем.  
Sometimes there flickered in the expression of his face something fixed and stubborn: he would look at you, listen, and yet seem all the while to be obstinately dreaming of something of his own.
> Neuter «что-то» governing a neuter verb: The indefinite «что-то» ('something') takes neuter singular agreement, so the verb «мелькало» and the modifiers «неподвижное и упрямое» all stand in the neuter. The «-то» marks a specific-but-unnamed thing flickering in his face.
> Contrastive «а» and the past imperfective: The mild adversative «а» hinges 'he looked... and yet meanwhile dreamed', a shift of perspective rather than flat opposition. The string of imperfective pasts («глядел, слушал, мечтал») paints habitual, ongoing behaviour, not single events.
> «своё» — his own private world: The reflexive possessive «свой» here is nominalized to neuter «своё»: 'something of his own', some private preoccupation belonging to himself. A small word that conveys his self-enclosed inwardness.

То становился вял и ленив, то вдруг начинал волноваться, иногда, по-видимому, от самой пустой причины.  
Now he would turn listless and lazy, now he would suddenly grow agitated, sometimes, it appeared, from the most trifling cause.
> The correlative «то... то...»: «то... то...» means 'now... now...', alternating between two states. Both verbs are imperfective («становился», «начинал волноваться»), framing recurrent mood-swings rather than one occasion.
> Short adjectives as predicate: After «становился» the qualities appear as short forms «вял», «ленив» (from «вялый», «ленивый»), the bookish predicative shape for a state one falls into.
> «от» + genitive for cause: «от» governs the genitive and here marks cause: 'from the most trifling cause'. «самой пустой причины» is feminine genitive singular, with «самой» ('very, most') and «пустой» ('empty, trivial') agreeing.

— Вообразите, я его уже четыре дня вожу с собою, — продолжал он, немного как бы растягивая лениво слова, но безо всякого фатовства, а совершенно натурально. — Помните, с тех пор, как ваш брат его тогда из коляски вытолкнул и он полетел. Тогда он меня очень этим заинтересовал, и я взял его в деревню, а он всё теперь врет, так что с ним стыдно. Я его назад везу…  
"Imagine, I've been dragging him about with me for four days now," he went on, drawing his words out a little, lazily, but without any swagger, quite naturally. "Do you remember, ever since your brother shoved him out of the carriage that time and he went flying? He interested me very much by that, then, and I took him off to the country, but now he tells nothing but tall tales, so that I'm ashamed to be with him. I'm taking him back..."
> Imperative «Вообразите»: Polite/plural imperative of «вообразить» (to imagine): 'just imagine!'. The «-те» ending marks address to more than one person or a polite singular — Kalganov speaking to the company.
> «возить» — to cart about: «вожу» is from multidirectional «возить» (to convey, transport, back and forth), suiting the repeated dragging-about over four days. «с собою» (with myself) uses the reflexive «себя» in the instrumental.
> «фатовство» — foppish swagger: From «фат», a fop or coxcomb: «безо всякого фатовства» means 'without any dandyish affectation'. A period word marking the narrator's eye for social posturing; note «безо» for «без» before a consonant cluster.
> Perfective «вытолкнул» — a single shove: «вытолкнул» (prefixed perfective of «толкать», to push) names one completed act of shoving out, against the imperfective backdrop. «из коляски» is «из» + genitive, 'out of the carriage'.
> «коляска» — open carriage: A light open carriage or calash, the kind a gentleman rides in. Maximov being shoved from one is part of the comic indignity recalled here.

— Пан польской пани не видзел и муви, что быть не мо́гло, — заметил пан с трубкой Максимову.  
"The pan never saw a Polish lady and says what could not be," remarked the pan with the pipe to Maximov.
> «не могло» — genitive-free negation in past: 'what could not be': impersonal-flavoured negation, «не» before «могло» (neuter past of «мочь»). The stressed «мо́гло» is marked in the text to render the Pole's foreign stress placement.

Пан с трубкой говорил по-русски порядочно, по крайней мере гораздо лучше, чем представлялся.  
The pan with the pipe spoke Russian tolerably well — at any rate much better than he pretended to.
> «по-русски» — the adverb of language: The «по-...-ски» pattern forms adverbs of manner/language: «по-русски» means 'in Russian, Russian-fashion'. «порядочно» ('decently, tolerably') modifies how well he spoke.
> Comparative «лучше» + «чем»: «лучше» is the suppletive comparative of «хороший» (good), intensified by «гораздо» ('far, much'). «чем» introduces the standard of comparison; «представлялся» is reflexive 'pretended/made himself out to be'.

Русские слова, если и употреблял их, коверкал на польский лад.  
Russian words, if he did use them, he mangled in the Polish fashion.
> Topicalized object, «если и»: «Русские слова» is fronted as the topic (accusative object of «коверкал»), with the verb arriving late — classic topic-comment ordering. «если и» means 'even if', conceding that he used such words at all.
> «коверкать на ... лад» — to mangle in the manner of: «коверкать» is to distort or mangle (speech); «на польский лад» means 'in the Polish manner/way'. The idiom «на ... лад» fixes the style or fashion of doing something.

— Да ведь я и сам был женат на польской пани-с, — отхихикнулся в ответ Максимов.  
"Why, I myself was married to a Polish lady, sir," Maximov tittered in reply.
> Particles «да ведь» and emphatic «и сам»: «да» opens with a conversational 'why', «ведь» appeals to shared knowledge ('after all, you know'), and «и сам» ('I myself, for my part') adds personal emphasis — three small markers layering Maximov's eager, self-inserting tone.
> «женат на» + prepositional: A man is «женат на ком» (married 'on/to' someone) with «на» + prepositional. «-с» tacked onto «пани-с» is the servile particle (see culture note) marking Maximov's deferential speech.
> «отхихикнулся» — tittered out: A vivid coinage on «хихикать» (to titter) with prefix «от-» and reflexive «-ся»: he gave a little answering giggle. Dostoevsky loves such expressive, faintly ridiculous verbs for Maximov's giggling.

— Ну, так вы разве служили в кавалерии? Ведь это вы про кавалерию говорили. Так разве вы кавалерист? — ввязался сейчас Калганов.  
"Well, did you serve in the cavalry, then? It was the cavalry you were talking about. So were you a cavalryman?" Kalganov broke in at once.
> «разве» — incredulous question: «разве» opens a question coloured with surprise or doubt ('do you mean to say...?, really?'). Kalganov is half-disbelieving that this giggling old man could have been a soldier.
> «про» + accusative — 'about': Colloquial «про» + accusative ('about, concerning') is the everyday alternative to «о» + prepositional. «это вы ... говорили» fronts «это» to foreground that it was the cavalry he had been discussing.
> «ввязаться» — to butt in: «ввязаться» (perfective, reflexive) literally 'to get oneself tied into', here 'broke into the conversation, butted in'. The «-ся» gives the sense of entangling oneself in something.

— Да, конечно, разве он кавалерист? ха-ха! — крикнул Митя, жадно слушавший и быстро переводивший свой вопросительный взгляд на каждого, кто заговорит, точно бог знает что ожидал от каждого услышать.  
"Yes, of course — was he a cavalryman? Ha-ha!" cried Mitya, who was listening greedily and quickly shifting his questioning gaze to each person who spoke, as though God knows what he expected to hear from each of them.
> Past active participles as a single modifier: «слушавший» and «переводивший» are past active participles (in «-вший») agreeing with «Митя» — 'who was listening and shifting'. They compress two который-clauses into adjective-like modifiers, a hallmark of literary narration.
> «кто» + perfective future «заговорит»: The relative «кто» introduces 'whoever spoke up'; «заговорит» is perfective (here a vivid future-for-iterative), naming the inceptive act of beginning to speak. Mitya's gaze darts to each new speaker.
> «точно бог знает что» — as if heaven knows what: «точно» here means 'as if, as though'; «бог знает что» is a frozen idiom 'goodness/God knows what'. Together: 'as though he expected God knows what to hear'. A recurring colouring of Mitya's overwrought expectancy.

— Нет-с, видите-с, — повернулся к нему Максимов, — я про то-с, что эти там пане́нки… хорошенькие-с… как оттанцуют с нашим уланом мазурку… как оттанцевала она с ним мазурку, так тотчас и вскочит ему на коленки, как кошечка-с… беленькая-с… а пан-ойц и пани-матка видят и позволяют… и позволяют-с… а улан-то назавтра пойдет и руку предложит… вот-с… и предложит руку, хи-хи! — хихикнул, закончив, Максимов.  
"No, sir — you see, sir," Maximov turned to him, "what I mean, sir, is that those little panienki over there... the pretty ones, sir... once they dance a mazurka with one of our lancers... once she's danced the mazurka through with him, she hops straight up onto his knees like a little kitten, sir... a fair little thing, sir... and the pan-father and the pani-mother look on and allow it... they allow it, sir... and the next day the lancer goes and offers his hand... there it is, sir... offers his hand, hee-hee!" Maximov tittered as he finished.
> «паненки» — Polish young ladies: From Polish 'panienki', diminutive of 'panna' (young unmarried lady). Maximov uses the exotic Polish word for the pretty girls; the stress mark «пане́нки» again flags non-Russian pronunciation.
> Diminutive-affectionate «-еньк-» adjectives: The suffix «-еньк-» softens and endears: «хорошенькие» ('pretty little') and «беленькая» ('nice and fair'). Maximov's speech drips with these cooing forms, conveying his lecherous relish.
> «вскочит» — perfective for a sudden leap: «вскочит» (perfective future of «вскочить», to leap up) gives the abrupt, completed hop onto the soldier's knees; «и» here is the emphatic 'and just'. «ему на коленки» — «на» + accusative for motion onto, with dative «ему» of the person.
> «пан-ойц», «пани-матка» — father and mother (Polish): Polish-flavoured compounds: 'ojciec' (father) and 'matka' (mother) yoked to пан/пани — 'the master-father and mistress-mother' looking on. Maximov mimics the Polish household even while telling the tale in Russian.

— Пан — лайдак! — проворчал вдруг высокий пан на стуле и переложил ногу на ногу.  
"The pan is a scoundrel!" the tall pan on the chair suddenly muttered, and crossed one leg over the other.
> «лайдак» — scoundrel (Polish): From Polish 'łajdak', a rogue or blackguard. The tall pan spits it out at Maximov; Grushenka immediately picks up the foreign word in s75, mocking it.
> «переложить ногу на ногу» — to cross one's legs: The fixed phrase for crossing one leg over the other. «переложил» is perfective (re-laid, shifted), capturing the single deliberate gesture of disdain.

Мите только бросился в глаза огромный смазной сапог его с толстою и грязною подошвой.  
All that caught Mitya's eye was his enormous greased boot with its thick, dirty sole.
> Dative «Мите» + «броситься в глаза»: The idiom «броситься в глаза» ('to catch one's eye, leap out') puts the experiencer in the dative: «Мите» — to Mitya. The grammatical subject is «сапог» (the boot), which is what did the catching; an experiencer-first framing typical of Russian.
> «смазной сапог» and old instrumental endings: «смазной сапог» is a greased (oil-treated) boot, a heavy peasant-style boot. Note the archaic long instrumental endings «-ою»: «толстою» and «грязною» — the older literary variant of «-ой». («подошвой» here shows the ordinary modern «-ой»; the archaic variant would be «подошвою».)

Да и вообще оба пана были одеты довольно засаленно.  
And on the whole both pans were dressed rather greasily.
> Short passive participle «одеты»: «одеты» is the short past passive participle of «одеть» (to dress), joining «были» to state a result: 'were dressed'. «довольно засаленно» ('rather greasily') is the adverb describing the shabby state.
> «засаленный» — greasy, grubby: From «сало» (grease, fat) with prefix «за-»: soiled with grease, threadbare-shiny. The detail quietly punctures the two Poles' aristocratic pretensions.

— Ну вот, и лайдак! Чего он бранится? — рассердилась вдруг Грушенька.  
"There, so he's a scoundrel! What's he abusing him for?" Grushenka suddenly grew angry.
> Colloquial «чего» for 'why': «чего» (genitive of «что») here is informal for «почему» / «зачем» — 'what's he abusing him for?'. «бранится» is the reflexive «браниться» (to swear, abuse), an inherently «-ся» verb.
> «рассердиться» — to flare into anger: Perfective reflexive 'grew angry, lost her temper' (prefix «рас-» on «сердиться»). The single completed inception of anger fits Grushenka's sudden flares of temper through this scene.

— Пани Агриппина, пан видзел в польском краю хлопок, а не шляхетных паней, — заметил пан с трубкой Грушеньке.  
"Pani Agrippina, the pan saw peasant girls in the Polish land, not well-born ladies," the pan with the pipe remarked to Grushenka.
> Genitive after negation «а не»: «а не шляхетных паней» stands in the genitive plural under the contrastive negation — 'and not noble ladies'. The genitive of negation marks the absent, denied object.

— Можешь на́ то раховаць! — презрительно отрезал высокий пан на стуле.  
"You can count on that!" the tall pan on the chair cut in scornfully.
> «раховаць» — 'you can count on that' (Polish): Polish 'rachować' (to reckon, count): 'you can count on that'. «на́ то» ('on that') carries the retracted stress of the preposition, again rendering the Polish accent on the page.
> «отрезать» — to retort curtly: Literally 'to cut off', figuratively to snap out a sharp, clipped reply. «презрительно отрезал» — he cut in scornfully, the verb itself conveying the curtness.

— Вот еще! Дайте ему говорить-то! Люди говорят, чего мешать? С ними весело, — огрызнулась Грушенька.  
"What next! Let him talk! When people are talking, why interfere? They're good company," Grushenka snapped.
> «Вот еще!» — 'What next!': A dismissive exclamation of indignant refusal: 'the idea!, what next!'. Grushenka brushes aside the pan's contempt and defends Maximov's right to talk.
> «дать» + dative + infinitive; emphatic «-то»: «Дайте ему говорить» — 'let him talk', with «дать» governing dative «ему» plus infinitive. The clitic «-то» on «говорить-то» emphasizes the verb as the contested point: 'just let him talk, will you'.
> «огрызнуться» — to snap back: Perfective reflexive 'snapped, snarled back' (related to «грызть», to gnaw). A vivid, faintly animal verb for Grushenka's quick retort.

— Я не мешаю, пани, — значительно заметил пан в паричке с продолжительным взглядом ко Грушеньке и, важно замолчав, снова начал сосать свою трубку.  
"I am not interfering, pani," the pan in the wig observed pointedly, with a lingering look at Grushenka, and, falling gravely silent, he began once more to suck at his pipe.
> «паричок» — a little wig: Diminutive of «парик» (wig): «в паричке» = 'in his little wig'. The dismissive diminutive deflates the pan's dignity even as he tries to look grave; the wig itself marks him as a shabby pretender.
> Perfective gerund «замолчав»: «замолчав» is a perfective past gerund (in «-в») of «замолчать» (to fall silent): 'having fallen gravely silent, he began...'. The gerund stacks a prior completed action onto the main clause, sharing its subject — characteristic literary compression.
> Old fuller preposition «ко»: «ко» is the fuller variant of «к» used before consonant clusters (here «ко Грушеньке» before the proper name) — a slightly elevated, period flavour. (The preposition before «продолжительным взглядом» is the ordinary «с», not «со».)

— Да нет, нет, это пан теперь правду сказал, — загорячился опять Калганов, точно бог знает о чем шло дело. — Ведь он в Польше не был, как же он говорит про Польшу? Ведь вы же не в Польше женились, ведь нет?  
"No, no, the pan has just told the truth," Kalganov flared up again, as though God knows what were at stake. "After all, he's never been to Poland — so how can he talk about Poland? You weren't married in Poland, were you, now?"
> «загорячиться» — to flare up: Perfective reflexive with inceptive «за-»: 'began to get heated, flared up'. From «горячий» (hot); the prefix «за-» catches the onset of Kalganov's excitement.
> Piled-up particles «ведь» and «же»: «ведь» (after all, you know) appeals to shared sense, «же» insists, and the tag «ведь нет?» seeks confirmation ('isn't that so?'). The cluster reproduces Kalganov's breathless, button-holing insistence.
> «как же» — indignant 'how on earth': «как же» intensifies the question: 'how then/how on earth can he talk about Poland?'. The «же» loads the rhetorical force, expecting the answer 'he can't'.

— Нет-с, в Смоленской губернии-с. А только ее улан еще прежде того вывез-с, супругу-то мою-с, будущую-с, и с пани-маткой, и с тантой, и еще с одною родственницей со взрослым сыном, это уж из самой Польши, из самой… и мне уступил. Это один наш поручик, очень хороший молодой человек. Сначала он сам хотел жениться, да и не женился, потому что она оказалась хромая…  
"No, sir, in the Smolensk province, sir. Only her hussar had carried her off even before that, sir — my future wife, that is, sir — along with the pani-mother, and an aunt, and another female relation with a grown son; that was straight from Poland itself, from Poland itself... and he gave her up to me. He was one of our lieutenants, a very fine young man. At first he meant to marry her himself, but then he didn't, because she turned out to be lame..."
> «супруга» — wife (elevated) with hedging tags: «супруга» is the formal, slightly genteel word for 'wife'. Maximov hangs his tics on it — emphatic «-то», deferential «-с» — then corrects himself with «будущую-с» ('my future [wife], that is, sir'), since she was not yet his.
> «оказаться» + predicate adjective: «оказаться» (to turn out to be) here links to the long-form (nominative) adjective «хромая» ('lame', fem.) — 'she turned out lame'. The predicate adjective is nominative here, not instrumental. A characterizing verb of revelation that drives the comic anti-climax.

— Так вы на хромой женились? — воскликнул Калганов.  
"So you married a lame woman?" exclaimed Kalganov.
> Adjective as noun: «на хромой»: «хромой» ('lame') is used substantivally, declined as a feminine adjective in the prepositional after «на» — 'you married a lame [woman]?'. Russian freely turns adjectives into nouns when the referent is clear.

— На хромой-с. Это уж они меня оба тогда немножечко обманули и скрыли. Я думал, что она подпрыгивает… она всё подпрыгивала, я и думал, что она это от веселости…  
"A lame one, sir. They both deceived me a little at the time and kept it hidden. I thought she was skipping... she kept skipping along, and I thought it was out of high spirits..."
> Particle «уж» and stacked qualifiers: «уж» (a worn-down «уже») adds a resigned, confiding emphasis 'well, you see'. Note the heap of adverbial softeners — «тогда», «немножечко» (a teeny bit), «оба» (both) — that gentle, evasive padding so typical of Maximov.
> «немножечко» — a teeny little bit: A doubly diminutive form: «немного» → «немножко» → «немножечко». Each suffix shrinks and softens further; Maximov uses the most coaxing form to minimize the deception.
> «всё» + imperfective for continuous action: Adverbial «всё» here means 'kept on, all the while'; with imperfective «подпрыгивала» (kept giving little hops) it stresses repeated, ongoing motion. The aspect is the joke: he saw constant skipping and mistook it for gaiety.

— От радости, что за вас идет? — завопил каким-то детски звонким голосом Калганов.  
"Out of joy at marrying you?" Kalganov cried in a sort of childishly ringing voice.
> «идти за» — to marry (of a woman): «идти за кого» ('to go [in marriage] for someone') is the idiom for a woman marrying a man — «что за вас идет» = 'that she was marrying you'. «От радости» (from joy) is «от» + genitive of cause.
> «завопить» and «детски звонкий»: «завопить» is inceptive perfective 'to start wailing/crying out'. «детски звонким голосом» — 'in a childishly ringing voice', the instrumental of manner; «детски» is a short adverb 'child-like', underscoring Kalganov's youthful, unguarded glee.

— Да-с, от радости-с. А вышло, что совсем от иной причины-с. Потом, когда мы обвенчались, она мне после венца в тот же вечер и призналась и очень чувствительно извинения просила, чрез лужу, говорит, в молодых годах однажды перескочила и ножку тем повредила, хи-хи!  
"Yes, sir, out of joy, sir. But it turned out to be from quite another cause, sir. Afterward, when we'd been married, she confessed to me that very evening, after the ceremony, and asked my pardon very feelingly: as a girl, she said, she'd once jumped over a puddle and so injured her little leg, hee-hee!"
> Archaic «чрез» and diminutive «ножка»: «чрез» is the bookish/Church-Slavonic doublet of «через» ('over, across'), an elevated touch in plain speech. «ножку» is the affectionate diminutive of «нога» (leg/foot) — 'her little leg' — softening the confession of her lameness.
> Genitive object «извинения просила»: «просить» governs the genitive of what is sought: «извинения просила» = 'begged pardon'. The word order, with object before verb, gives the old-fashioned, slightly mincing cadence of Maximov's account.

Калганов так и залился самым детским смехом и почти упал на диван.  
Kalganov fairly dissolved into the most childlike laughter and almost fell over onto the sofa.
> «залиться смехом» — to dissolve in laughter: The idiom «залиться смехом» (literally 'to be flooded with laughter') means to burst into, dissolve into laughter. «самым детским» — 'the most childlike', superlative with «самый» — keeps Kalganov's boyishness in view.

Рассмеялась и Грушенька.  
Grushenka laughed too.
> Inversion: verb before subject: The verb «рассмеялась» (burst out laughing, perfective) precedes its subject «Грушенька», with «и» meaning 'too'. Fronting the verb throws the new information — the laughter — first, then names who joins in: tight narrative rhythm.

Митя же был на верху счастья.  
As for Mitya, he was at the height of bliss.
> Topic-shifting «же»: Here «же» is not the insistent particle but the contrastive topic-marker 'as for...': 'As for Mitya, he was...'. It pivots attention from the laughing pair to Mitya.
> «на верху счастья» — at the height of bliss: An idiom 'at the very top of happiness, on the pinnacle of bliss'. «на верху» (on the top of) + genitive «счастья». The phrase quietly foreshadows how high — and how precarious — Mitya's joy stands tonight.

— Знаете, знаете, это он теперь уже вправду, это он теперь не лжет! — восклицал, обращаясь к Мите, Калганов. — И знаете, он ведь два раза был женат — это он про первую жену говорит — а вторая жена его, знаете, сбежала и жива до сих пор, знаете вы это?  
"You know, you know, now he's telling the truth, now he isn't lying!" Kalganov exclaimed, turning to Mitya. "And you know, he's been married twice — it's his first wife he's talking about — but his second wife, you know, ran off and is alive to this day. Did you know that?"
> Emphatic repetition and «вправду»: Kalganov repeats «это он теперь» for breathless emphasis. «вправду» ('truly, for real') contrasts with «не лжет» (isn't lying) — the imperfective present «лжёт» (from «лгать», to lie) names habitual lying now suspended.
> Short adjective «жива» as predicate: «жива» is the short form of «живой» (alive), predicative: 'is alive'. The short form is the normal way to say someone is alive; «до сих пор» means 'to this day, still'.

— Неужто? — быстро повернулся к Максимову Митя, выразив необыкновенное изумление в лице.  
"Is that so?" Mitya turned quickly to Maximov, his face expressing extraordinary astonishment.
> «Неужто?» — 'Is that so?, really?': A colloquial, slightly archaic variant of «неужели», expressing surprised disbelief. Mitya's astonished single word; the «-то» form is folksier and warmer than «неужели».
> Perfective gerund «выразив»: «выразив» is the perfective past gerund of «выразить» (to express): 'having expressed extraordinary astonishment in his face'. The gerund attaches the simultaneous-prior facial reaction to the main act of turning, «повернулся».

— Да-с, сбежала-с, я имел эту неприятность, — скромно подтвердил Максимов. — С одним мусью-с. А главное, всю деревушку мою перво-наперво на одну себя предварительно отписала. Ты, говорит, человек образованный, ты и сам найдешь себе кусок. С тем и посадила. Мне раз один почтенный архиерей и заметил: у тебя одна супруга была хромая, а другая уж чресчур легконогая, хи-хи!  
"Yes, sir, she ran off, sir — I had that unpleasantness," Maximov confirmed modestly. "With a certain monsieur, sir. And the main thing was, she first of all had my whole little estate signed over to herself alone, in advance. You, she says, are an educated man, you'll find yourself a crust well enough. And with that she packed me off. A worthy bishop once remarked to me: one of your wives was lame, and the other was a bit too light on her feet, hee-hee!"
> «мусью» — a mangled 'monsieur': «мусью» is a popular, half-mocking russification of French 'monsieur', used for a Frenchman or a dandy aping French manners. Maximov's wife ran off 'with a certain monsieur'; the deformed word carries condescension.
> «деревушка» — pitiful little estate: «деревушка» is the diminutive (here pejorative-affectionate) of «деревня» (village/estate) — his poor little property. «на одну себя» ('onto herself alone') uses the reflexive «себя»; «отписать» is the legal 'to sign/make over (in writing)'.
> «чересчур легконогая» — 'a bit too light-footed': «легконогая» literally 'light-footed', a coinage punning on the lame first wife: the second was 'too light on her feet', i.e. apt to run off. «чресчур» is the colloquial spelling of «чересчур» ('too, excessively').
> «перво-наперво» — first of all: A folksy reduplicated adverb meaning 'first and foremost, before anything else'. The colloquial doubling marks Maximov's homely, rambling storytelling register.

— Послушайте, послушайте! — так и кипел Калганов, — если он и лжет — а он часто лжет — то он лжет, единственно чтобы доставить всем удовольствие: это ведь не подло, не подло? Знаете, я люблю его иногда. Он очень подл, но он натурально подл, а? Как вы думаете? Другой подличает из-за чего-нибудь, чтобы выгоду получить, а он просто, он от натуры… Вообразите, например, он претендует (вчера всю дорогу спорил), что Гоголь в «Мертвых душах» это про него сочинил. Помните, там есть помещик Максимов, которого высек Ноздрев и был предан суду: «за нанесение помещику Максимову личной обиды розгами в пьяном виде» — ну помните? Так что ж, представьте, он претендует, что это он и был и что это его высекли! Ну может ли это быть? Чичиков ездил, самое позднее, в двадцатых годах, в начале, так что совсем годы не сходятся. Не могли его тогда высечь. Ведь не могли, не могли?  
"Listen, listen!" Kalganov fairly boiled over. "Even if he is lying — and he often lies — he lies solely to give everyone pleasure: now, that isn't base, is it, isn't base? You know, I'm fond of him sometimes. He's very base, but he's base in a natural way, eh? What do you think? Another man plays the rogue for some reason, to get some advantage out of it, but he does it simply, out of his very nature... Imagine, for instance, he claims (he argued about it the whole way yesterday) that Gogol wrote about him in 'Dead Souls.' Do you remember, there's a landowner Maximov in it whom Nozdryov thrashed and was put on trial 'for inflicting personal injury with birch-rods upon the landowner Maximov while drunk' — you remember? Well, then, just imagine — he claims it was he, and that it was he who got the thrashing! Now, can that be? Chichikov did his traveling, at the very latest, in the twenties, at the beginning, so the years don't fit at all. He couldn't have been thrashed then. He couldn't have been, could he, could he?"
> Multidirectional «ездил» for ranging travel: «ездил» is the multidirectional motion verb (from «ездить»), fitting Chichikov's roaming about the country buying dead souls, not a single trip. «в двадцатых годах» — 'in the twenties', «в» + prepositional for the decade.
> «не могли» + perfective infinitive; pleading repetition: «не могли ... высечь» = 'could not have thrashed him', negated «мочь» + perfective infinitive of the single completed act. The doubled tag «ведь не могли, не могли?» reproduces Kalganov's anxious appeal for agreement.

Трудно было представить, из-за чего так горячился Калганов, но горячился он искренно.  
It was hard to imagine why Kalganov was getting so worked up, but worked up he was, and sincerely.
> Impersonal «трудно было представить»: A subjectless impersonal construction: «трудно было» ('it was hard') + infinitive, with no nominative subject. «из-за чего» ('on account of what, why') uses «из-за» + genitive for cause.
> Concessive inversion for emphasis: Russian echoes the verb and re-fronts it — 'but worked up he was, and sincerely' — using inversion («горячился он») to underline the concession. The repeated «горячился» drives home that the excitement, however baffling, was real.

Митя беззаветно входил в его интересы.  
Mitya entered into his interests wholeheartedly.
> «беззаветно» — wholeheartedly, selflessly: From «без» + «завет» (covenant, reserve): without reservation, utterly devotedly. «входил в его интересы» ('entered into his concerns') with «беззаветно» shows Mitya throwing himself, in his exalted mood, into Kalganov's silly enthusiasm.

— Ну, да ведь коли высекли! — крикнул он хохоча.  
"Well, but suppose they did thrash him!" he cried, roaring with laughter.
> Folksy «коли» — 'if/since they did': «коли» is a colloquial, slightly archaic conjunction for «если» ('if, since'). With «да ведь» it gives a rollicking 'well, but suppose they did thrash him!'. The impersonal «высекли» (3rd pl., 'they thrashed') leaves the agents unnamed.
> Imperfective gerund «хохоча»: «хохоча» is the present imperfective gerund of «хохотать» (to roar with laughter): 'he cried, roaring with laughter' — a simultaneous attendant action sharing Mitya's subject.

— Не то чтобы высекли-с, а так, — вставил вдруг Максимов.  
"It wasn't exactly that they thrashed me, sir, but something of the sort," Maximov suddenly put in.
> «не то чтобы..., а...» — 'not exactly..., but...': The construction «не то чтобы X, а Y» hedges: 'not so much that they thrashed [me], but rather...'. «а так» trails off vaguely ('but sort of...'), Maximov's characteristic evasion — and the «чтобы» here carries the irrealis past «высекли».

— Как так? Или высекли, или нет?  
"How do you mean? Either they thrashed you or they didn't?"
> «или ..., или ...» — exclusive 'either/or': The correlative «или ..., или ...» forces a yes-or-no: 'either they thrashed you, or they didn't'. Kalganov demands Maximov stop hedging and commit to one of the two.

— Ктура годзина, пане? (который час?) — обратился со скучающим видом пан с трубкой к высокому пану на стуле.  
"Ktura godzina, panie? (what time is it?)" the pan with the pipe asked the tall pan on the chair, with a bored air.

Тот вскинул в ответ плечами: часов у них у обоих не было.  
The other shrugged his shoulders in reply: neither of them had a watch.
> Genitive of negation with «не было»: In a negated existential, the absent thing goes in the genitive: «часов ... не было» = 'there was no watch'. «у них у обоих» doubles the «у»-phrase ('on them, on both of them') to say neither possessed one.
> «вскинуть плечами» — to give a shrug: «вскинуть» (to jerk/throw up) + instrumental «плечами» (shoulders): a sharp shrug. The instrumental here is the body-part used in the gesture, the normal pattern for shrugging, nodding, etc.

— Отчего не поговорить? Дайте и другим говорить. Коли вам скучно, так другие и не говори, — вскинулась опять Грушенька, видимо нарочно привязываясь.  
"Why shouldn't they talk? Let others talk too. If you're bored, that's no reason others shouldn't speak," Grushenka flared up again, plainly picking a quarrel on purpose.
> «отчего не» + infinitive — 'why not...?': «отчего» ('why, for what reason') + negated infinitive «не поговорить» forms a rhetorical 'why shouldn't [they] talk?'. The dative subject is implied; the perfective «поговорить» means 'have a [bit of a] chat'.
> Dative «вам скучно»; folksy imperative «не говори»: «вам скучно» is the dative-experiencer 'you are bored'. «другие ... не говори» uses a generalized 2nd-sg imperative for a 3rd-person collective ('then let others not speak'), a homely, ungrammatical-sounding folk turn fitting Grushenka's provocation.
> Imperfective gerund «привязываясь»: «привязываясь» is the present imperfective gerund of «привязываться» (here 'to pick on, fasten a quarrel onto'): 'plainly picking a quarrel on purpose'. The reflexive «-ся» verb plus gerund paints her ongoing, deliberate needling.

У Мити как бы в первый раз что-то промелькнуло в уме.  
Something seemed to dawn on Mitya, as if for the first time.
> «у Мити» + «промелькнуло» — something dawned: The «у» + genitive «у Мити» frames the experiencer ('in Mitya, with Mitya'), while «что-то промелькнуло» ('something flashed') makes the vague thought the grammatical subject. «как бы» ('as if') softens it into a half-formed intuition — the first dim stirring of suspicion.

На этот раз пан ответил уже с видимою раздражительностью:  
This time the pan answered with evident irritation:
> Old instrumental «с видимою раздражительностью»: «с» + instrumental of manner: 'with evident irritability'. The «-ою» ending on «видимою» is the archaic full instrumental of «-ая» adjectives, lending the narration a 19th-century literary cast.

— Пани, я ниц не мувен против, ниц не поведзялем. (Я не противоречу, я ничего не сказал).  
"Pani, I say nothing against it, I said nothing. (I am not contradicting, I said nothing.)"

— Ну да хорошо, а ты рассказывай, — крикнула Грушенька Максимову. — Что ж вы все замолчали?  
"Well, all right, then — and you, go on with your story," Grushenka cried to Maximov. "Why have you all fallen silent?"
> Imperfective imperative «рассказывай»: «рассказывай» is the imperfective imperative of «рассказывать» — 'go on telling, carry on with your story'. The imperfective command invites continued or general action, unlike a perfective «расскажи» (tell it through). «а ты» fronts the addressee contrastively.
> «что ж» — reproachful 'why on earth': «что ж» (= «что же») gives a chiding 'why ever have you all fallen silent?'. «замолчали» is perfective, the completed lapse into silence she is scolding.

— Да тут и рассказывать-то нечего-с, потому всё это одни глупости, — подхватил тотчас Максимов с видимым удовольствием и капельку жеманясь, — да и у Гоголя всё это только в виде аллегорическом, потому что все фамилии поставил аллегорические: Ноздрев-то ведь был не Ноздрев, а Носов, а Кувшинников — это уже совсем даже и не похоже, потому что он был Шкворнев. А Фенарди действительно был Фенарди, только не итальянец, а русский, Петров-с, и мамзель Фенарди была хорошенькая-с, и ножки в трико хорошенькие-с, юпочка коротенькая в блестках, и это она вертелась, да только не четыре часа, а всего только четыре минутки-с… и всех обольстила…  
"Why, there's nothing to tell, sir, since it's all nonsense," Maximov took it up at once with evident pleasure, simpering a little, "and besides, in Gogol it's all only in an allegorical form, since he made all the surnames allegorical: Nozdryov wasn't Nozdryov at all, but Nosov, and Kuvshinnikov — well, that's not even alike, since he was Shkvornyov. But Fenardi really was Fenardi, only not an Italian, but a Russian, Petrov, sir, and Mademoiselle Fenardi was a pretty thing, sir, with pretty little legs in tights, sir, and a short little spangled skirt, and she was the one who spun round — only not for four hours, but altogether just four little minutes, sir... and she enchanted everyone..."
> «нечего» + infinitive — 'there's nothing to tell': The negative «нечего» ('there is nothing to') + infinitive «рассказывать» forms a subjectless 'there's nothing to tell'. The clitic «-то» on «рассказывать-то» foregrounds the verb; the implied dative subject is impersonal.
> «жеманиться» — to simper, mince: «жеманиться» (here as gerund «жеманясь») is to be affected, coy, to simper. «капельку» ('a wee drop', diminutive of «капля») softens it: Maximov puts on a little coy modesty as he takes up the tale.
> Diminutives of theatrical glamour: «ножки» (little legs), «юпочка» (little skirt, from French 'jupe'), «коротенькая» (short little) — a shimmer of diminutives evoking the spangled circus-dancer Mlle Fenardi. Maximov's leering relish surfaces in every «-очк-/-еньк-».
> Genitive singular after «четыре»: Numerals 2-4 take the genitive singular: «четыре часа», «четыре минутки» — 'four hours', 'four little minutes'. The diminutive «минутки» deflates the boast; «всего только» means 'only just'.

— Да за что высекли-то, высекли-то тебя за что? — вопил Калганов.  
"But what were you thrashed for — what were you thrashed for?" Kalganov kept wailing.
> «за что» + emphatic «-то», chiastic repetition: «за что» ('what for, on what account') brackets the sentence in an impatient chiasmus, with the clitic «-то» nailing «высекли» as the burning point. Kalganov's mounting exasperation lives in the repetition itself.
> «вопить» — to wail, howl: «вопить» is to cry out shrilly, to wail or bawl. The imperfective past «вопил» ('kept wailing') stresses Kalganov's repeated, near-hysterical badgering of the question.

— За Пирона-с, — ответил Максимов.  
"On account of Piron, sir," answered Maximov.

— За какого Пирона? — крикнул Митя.  
"On account of what Piron?" cried Mitya.
> Animate accusative = genitive: «какого Пирона»: «Пирон» is an animate masculine noun, so its accusative after «за» borrows the genitive form «Пирона», and «какого» agrees. Mitya's incredulous 'on account of what Piron?' shows the animacy rule in action.

— За французского известного писателя, Пирона-с. Мы тогда все вино пили в большом обществе, в трактире, на этой самой ярмарке. Они меня и пригласили, а я перво-наперво стал эпиграммы говорить: «Ты ль это, Буало, какой смешной наряд». А Буало-то отвечает, что он в маскарад собирается, то есть в баню-с, хи-хи, они и приняли на свой счет. А я поскорее другую сказал, очень известную всем образованным людям, едкую-с:  
"On account of the famous French writer, Piron, sir. We were all drinking wine then, in a large party, at a tavern, at that very fair. They invited me, and first of all I began reciting epigrams: 'Is that you, Boileau — what a comical getup.' And Boileau answers that he's getting ready for a masquerade — that is, for the bathhouse, sir, hee-hee — and they took it as aimed at themselves. So I quickly recited another, a very well-known one, biting, sir, familiar to all educated people:
> Interrogative particle «ль»: «ль» is the reduced form of the yes/no particle «ли», here in verse: «Ты ль это» = 'Is that you?'. Fronting «ты» and following it with «ль» throws the focus onto the addressee — bookish and poetic.

Ты Сафо, я Фаон, об этом я не спорю, Но, к моему ты горю, Пути не знаешь к морю.  
You're Sappho, I'm Phaon — I'll not dispute that part, / But here is, to my sorrow, the trouble in your heart: / The way down to the sea you cannot chart.
> Genitive object under negation; «к» + dative: «Пути не знаешь» — the negated «знать» takes the genitive «пути» ('you do not know the way'). «к моему горю» ('to my sorrow') and «к морю» ('to the sea') both use «к» + dative; the rhyme горю/морю drives the verse.

Они еще пуще обиделись и начали меня неприлично за это ругать, а я как раз, на беду себе, чтобы поправить обстоятельства, тут и рассказал очень образованный анекдот про Пирона, как его не приняли во французскую академию, а он, чтоб отмстить, написал свою эпитафию для надгробного камня:  
They took even greater offense and began abusing me indecently for it, and just then, to my own misfortune, in order to set things right, I went and told a very erudite anecdote about Piron — how he wasn't admitted to the French Academy, and how, to avenge himself, he composed his own epitaph for his gravestone:
> Purpose «чтобы» + infinitive: «чтобы» + infinitive «поправить» expresses purpose: 'in order to set things right'. Because the subject (Maximov) is the same in both clauses, the infinitive — not the past-form irrealis — is used after «чтобы».
> Archaic «отмстить» and «надгробный камень»: «отмстить» is the Church-Slavonic-flavoured form of «отомстить» (to avenge), without the inserted vowel — a solemn, bookish ring. «эпитафия ... для надгробного камня» = an epitaph for the gravestone; «свою» (reflexive 'his own') points the epitaph back to Piron himself.

Ci-gît Piron qui ne fut rien Pas même académicien.  
Ci-gît Piron qui ne fut rien / Pas même académicien.

Они взяли да меня и высекли.  
And they up and thrashed me.
> «взять да (и)» — the resolve construction: «взять да и» + a verb expresses an abrupt, unexpected decision to act: 'they up and thrashed me'. The «взяли» is not literal taking; it conveys 'they just went and...'. A vivid colloquial idiom of sudden action.

— Да за что же, за что?  
"But what for, what for?"
> Insistent «же» with «за что»: «за что же» ('but what for, on earth') adds the insistent particle «же» to the doubled question. The compression — verbless, repeated — captures Kalganov's frantic demand for a reason.

— За образование мое. Мало ли из-за чего люди могут человека высечь, — кротко и нравоучительно заключил Максимов.  
"For my education. There are plenty of reasons people may thrash a man for," Maximov concluded meekly and sententiously.
> «мало ли» — 'no end of, you never know': «мало ли» (literally 'is it little?') is an idiom meaning 'there's no telling, plenty of reasons': «мало ли из-за чего» = 'there are any number of reasons why'. The «ли» fossilized into this expression of open-ended possibility.
> «кротко», «нравоучительно» — meek and moralizing: «кротко» ('meekly', from «кроткий», a gently spiritual word elsewhere in the novel) and «нравоучительно» ('sententiously, moralizingly') together skewer Maximov: he caps an absurd tale of being birched with mock-pious gravity.

— Э, полно, скверно всё это, не хочу слушать, я думала, что веселое будет, — оборвала вдруг Грушенька, Митя всполохнулся и тотчас же перестал смеяться.  
"Eh, enough, this is all vile, I don't want to listen — I thought it would be merry," Grushenka suddenly broke in. Mitya started up and at once stopped laughing.
> «что» clause; neuter «веселое»: «что» introduces the reported thought after «думала» ('I thought that...'). «веселое» is the neuter adjective used as a noun ('something merry'), with «будет» — 'I thought it would be merry'. The impersonal neuter keeps the expected fun vague.
> «всполохнуться» — to start, take alarm: «всполохнуться» (perfective reflexive) is to be startled, to start up in alarm — Mitya instantly reacts to Grushenka's displeasure. A somewhat dialectal, expressive verb close to «всполошиться».

Высокий пан поднялся с места и с высокомерным видом скучающего не в своей компании человека начал шагать по комнате из угла в угол, заложив за спину руки.  
The tall pan rose from his seat and, with the haughty air of a man bored in company not his own, began pacing the room from corner to corner, his hands clasped behind his back.
> Present active participle «скучающего»: «скучающего» is the present active participle of «скучать» (to be bored), declined in the genitive to agree with «человека»: 'of a man [who is] bored'. The participle condenses a который-clause into one modifier — bookish narrative texture.
> Perfective gerund «заложив»: «заложив» is the perfective past gerund of «заложить» (here 'to clasp/put behind'): 'having clasped his hands behind his back'. The gerund freezes the completed posture that accompanies his pacing.
> «из угла в угол» — from corner to corner: A set phrase for restless pacing back and forth ('from corner to corner'), with «из» + genitive paired against «в» + accusative of motion. The image marks the tall pan's haughty, caged irritation.

— Ишь зашагал! — презрительно поглядела на него Грушенька.  
"Look at him, off pacing about!" Grushenka eyed him scornfully.
> «ишь» and inceptive «зашагал»: «ишь» is a colloquial particle of mocking surprise ('look at that!, just look at him'). «зашагал» (inceptive «за-» on «шагать», to stride) means 'off he started pacing' — Grushenka jeers at the pan's strutting.

Митя забеспокоился, к тому же заметил, что пан на диване с раздражительным видом поглядывает на него.  
Mitya grew uneasy; besides, he noticed that the pan on the sofa was glancing at him with an irritated look.
> Iterative imperfective «поглядывает»: «поглядывает» (imperfective, with the «-ыва-» frequentative) means 'keeps glancing, glances now and then' — repeated, intermittent looks, not a single glance. The present tense here renders the ongoing scene Mitya notices.
> «забеспокоиться» — to grow uneasy: Inceptive perfective reflexive: 'began to feel anxious'. The «за-» catches the moment unease takes hold of Mitya — a quiet narrative beat of his deepening discomfort with the Poles.

— Пан, — крикнул Митя, — выпьем, пане! И с другим паном тоже: выпьем, панове! — Он мигом сдвинул три стакана и разлил в них шампанское.  
"Pan!" Mitya cried, "let us drink, panie! And with the other pan too: let us drink, panowie!" In an instant he drew three glasses together and poured the champagne into them.
> 1st-pl exhortative «выпьем» and Polish vocatives: «выпьем» is the perfective 1st-pl used as an exhortation: 'let's drink!'. Mitya addresses them with Polish vocatives — «пане» (sg.) and «панове» (pl., 'gentlemen') — clumsily flattering the two Poles in their own tongue.
> Perfectives for swift action; «три стакана»: «сдвинул» and «разлил» are perfectives chaining two completed acts — drew the glasses together, poured out the champagne. «три стакана» shows the genitive singular after «три»; «мигом» ('in a flash') stresses Mitya's eager haste.

— За Польшу, панове, пью за вашу Польшу, за польский край! — воскликнул Митя.  
"To Poland, panowie, I drink to your Poland, to the Polish land!" cried Mitya.
> «панове» — Polish, not Russian: Mitya addresses the two Poles with the Polish plural vocative «panowie» ('gentlemen'), rendered in Cyrillic. Throughout this scene Dostoevsky writes the Poles' speech in transliterated Polish — and Russians aping it — to mark them as comic, posturing outsiders.
> «за» + accusative for a toast: «пить за» ('to drink to') governs the accusative: «за вашу Польшу», «за польский край». The preposition «за» takes the accusative when it points at a goal or the thing honoured, as opposed to the instrumental of location ('behind').

— Бардзо ми то мило, пане, выпием (это мне очень приятно, пане, выпьем), — важно и благосклонно проговорил пан на диване и взял свой стакан.  
"Bardzo mi to miło, panie, wypijem (this is very pleasant to me, sir, let us drink)," the Pole on the sofa pronounced gravely and graciously, and took up his glass.
> Polish in Cyrillic, glossed in-line: The Pole speaks Polish — «bardzo mi to miło… wypijem» ('this is very pleasant to me… let us drink') — which Dostoevsky immediately glosses in Russian in parentheses. The doubling lets the Russian reader hear the foreignness yet still follow the sense; the gloss «выпьем» is the ordinary Russian first-person-plural exhortation.
> Manner adverbs and the perfective «про-»: The adverbs «важно» (pompously, with self-importance) and «благосклонно» (graciously) carry the irony. «проговорил» is the perfective of «говорить» with the prefix «про-», presenting the utterance as one completed, deliberate act.

— И другой пан, как его, эй, ясневельможный, бери стакан! — хлопотал Митя.  
"And the other gentleman, what's his name, hey, jaśnie wielmożny, take a glass!" Mitya bustled.
> «ясневельможный» — mock-grand address: From Polish «jaśnie wielmożny», a high honorific ('most illustrious / right honourable'). Mitya, not knowing the second Pole's name, throws out this absurdly grandiose title — part flattery, part drunken mockery.
> «хлопотать» — to fuss and bustle: «хлопотал» (imperfective) means to bustle about, busy oneself fussily over arrangements. It paints Mitya's restless, over-eager hosting in this scene.
> Imperfective imperative «бери»: «бери» is the imperative of imperfective «брать» ('take'). The imperfective command here is an open, hospitable invitation ('go on, take a glass'), where a perfective «возьми» would sound like a sharper, one-off order.

— Пан Врублевский, — подсказал пан на диване.  
"Pan Wróblewski," the Pole on the sofa prompted.
> «подсказать» — to prompt, supply a word: «подсказал» means to prompt or supply the missing word (here, the name) — the prefix «под-» giving the sense of quietly feeding something from below or aside.

Пан Врублевский, раскачиваясь, подошел к столу и стоя принял свой стакан.  
Pan Wróblewski, swaying as he came, approached the table and took his glass standing.
> Gerund «раскачиваясь» — swaying as he went: «раскачиваясь» is an imperfective деепричастие (adverbial participle) in -ясь, a reflexive gerund showing an action simultaneous with the main verb: he approached the table while swaying. It shares Wróblewski as its subject and compresses 'as he swayed' into one word.
> Perfective chain and prefixed motion: «подошёл» (perfective of «подходить/подойти», 'walked up to') and «принял» ('took, received') move the narration forward as two completed events. «подошёл» is a prefixed verb of motion: «под-» on the unidirectional «идти» yields the perfective 'approach'.

— За Польшу, панове, ура! — прокричал Митя, подняв стакан.  
"To Poland, panowie, hurrah!" Mitya shouted, raising his glass.
> Perfective gerund «подняв»: «подняв» is a perfective past деепричастие in -в ('having raised'), naming an action completed just before or as the main verb: he shouted, glass already raised. Such gerunds are a hallmark of Russian literary narration, packing a prior sub-action into the same clause.
> «прокричать» — to cry out: A perfective of «кричать» with «про-», marking a single completed shout. Dostoevsky rings many such prefixed speech verbs through this scene — «воскликнул», «прокричал», «провозгласил», «возгласил» — each a slightly different register of exclaiming.

Все трое выпили.  
All three drank.
> Collective numeral «трое»: «трое» is a collective numeral ('the three of them, as a group'), used for groups of people rather than the plain «три». It governs the genitive plural when modifying a noun and lends a sense of the set taken together.

Митя схватил бутылку и тотчас же налил опять три стакана.  
Mitya seized the bottle and at once poured out three more glasses.
> «же» reinforcing «тотчас»: The particle «же» here intensifies the adverb «тотчас» ('at once') into 'that very instant'. Unlike contrastive uses of «же», this is the emphatic particle simply sharpening immediacy.
> «схватить» — to seize, snatch up: «схватил» (perfective) conveys a quick, grasping motion — Mitya grabs the bottle. The verb's abruptness fits his impetuous, headlong energy throughout the carousal.

— Теперь за Россию, панове, и побратаемся!  
"Now to Russia, panowie, and let us be brothers!"
> «побратаемся» — reflexive perfective future: «побратаемся» is the perfective future of the reflexive «побрататься» ('to become brothers, swear brotherhood'). The reflexive -ся here is reciprocal (do it to each other), and the perfective-present form carries future meaning: 'let us become brothers'.

— Налей и нам, — сказала Грушенька, — за Россию и я хочу пить.  
"Pour for us too," said Grushenka, "I want to drink to Russia as well."
> Perfective imperative + emphatic «и»: «налей» is the perfective imperative of «налить» ('pour out'), a single demanded action. The «и» before «нам» ('us too') is the additive 'also/even', not 'and': 'pour for us as well'.
> Topic-comment word order: Grushenka fronts the toast «за Россию», then «и я» ('I too'), pushing «хочу пить' to the end. The reordering foregrounds Russia and her own wish to join — case endings free the words to be arranged for emphasis rather than grammar.

— И я, — сказал Калганов.  
"And so do I," said Kalganov.

— Да и я бы тоже-с… за Россеюшку, старую бабусеньку, — подхихикнул Максимов.  
"Why, and I would too, sir... to little mother Russia, the dear old granny," Maksimov tittered.
> Sentimental diminutives for Russia: Maksimov pours on affectionate diminutives: «Россеюшка» (dear Mother Russia, from «Россия» + -юшк-) and «бабусенька» (sweet old granny). The piled-up -еньк-/-юшк- suffixes signal mawkish, ingratiating tenderness — exactly his fawning manner.
> Conditional «бы» and the servile «-с»: «я бы… пить» is the conditional with «бы» plus an implied past form — a softened, deferential 'I would too'. The clitic «-с», a contraction of «сударь» ('sir'), is tacked on for obsequious politeness, a fading 19th-century habit Dostoevsky gives to fawning minor characters.
> «подхихикнуть» — to titter along: A vivid compound: «хихикать» (to giggle, titter) with «под-» ('alongside, ingratiatingly'). Maksimov giggles to ingratiate himself with the company — the prefix turns a giggle into a sycophantic one.

— Все, все! — восклицал Митя. — Хозяин, еще бутылок!  
"Everyone, everyone!" Mitya exclaimed. "Landlord, more bottles!"
> Partitive genitive «бутылок»: «еще бутылок» ('more bottles') is genitive plural after the quantity word «еще» — the partitive genitive, naming an indefinite further amount of something. An accusative «бутылки» would mean specific bottles; the genitive says 'some more'.

Принесли все три оставшиеся бутылки из привезенных Митей.  
They brought in all three remaining bottles of those Mitya had carried with him.
> Subjectless 'they brought': «Принесли» is a third-person plural with no stated subject — the indefinite-personal construction, equivalent to English 'they brought / someone brought'. Russian uses this freely when the agent is unimportant or generic (the servants).
> Past participles, active and passive: Two participles do heavy lifting: «оставшиеся» (active past, 'the remaining ones', from reflexive «остаться») and «привезённых» (passive past, 'those brought/carried', from «привезти»). The passive participle's agent stands in the instrumental, «Митей» ('by Mitya').

Митя разлил.  
Mitya poured them out.
> «раз-» as distributive prefix: «разлил» (perfective «разлить») means to pour out distributing among several glasses — the prefix «раз-» carrying the sense of spreading apart, dividing the pour around. A bare «налил» would just mean 'poured'.

— За Россию, ура! — провозгласил он снова.  
"To Russia, hurrah!" he proclaimed once more.
> «провозгласить» — to proclaim: An elevated, almost ceremonial verb of speech ('proclaimed, pronounced solemnly'), heightening the mock-grandeur of yet another toast. It belongs to a slightly bookish register above plain «сказал».

Все, кроме панов, выпили, а Грушенька выпила разом весь свой стакан.  
Everyone except the Poles drank, and Grushenka tossed off her whole glass at a single draught.
> «кроме» + genitive; «панов» declines: «кроме» ('except') governs the genitive, hence «панов». Notice the Polish-flavoured «пан» is now fully naturalized into Russian declension (genitive plural «панов»), even as its meaning stays pointedly foreign.
> «разом» — at one go: «разом» is an adverb meaning 'all at once, in a single gulp'. With «весь свой стакан» ('her whole glass') it gives Grushenka's defiant draining of the toast in one swallow — the reflexive possessive «свой» marking the glass as her own.

Панове же и не дотронулись до своих.  
The Poles, however, did not so much as touch theirs.
> «же» contrasting, «и не» = 'not even': Here «же» is the contrastive particle ('the Poles, on the other hand'), pivoting against the others who drank. «и не дотронулись» means 'did not even touch' — the «и» intensifying the negation.
> «дотронуться до» + genitive: «дотронуться» ('to touch') governs «до» plus the genitive of what is touched: «до своих» ('their own [glasses]'). The reflexive possessive «свой» points the ownership back to the Poles themselves.

— Как же вы, панове? — воскликнул Митя. — Так вы так-то?  
"What's the matter with you, panowie?" cried Mitya. "So that's how it is with you?"
> Particles «же» and «-то» voicing offence: Mitya's indignation is built entirely from particles: «Как же вы?» ('What's with you, then?') and «так-то» ('so that's how it is') with the emphatic clitic «-то» underscoring the topic. English needs intonation and added words to do what these tiny particles do.

Пан Врублевский взял стакан, поднял его и зычным голосом проговорил:  
Pan Wróblewski took up his glass, raised it, and in a booming voice declared:
> «зычный» — booming, stentorian: «зычный» describes a loud, resonant, far-carrying voice. The instrumental phrase «зычным голосом» ('in a booming voice') sets up the provocation that follows.
> Instrumental of manner: «зычным голосом» is the instrumental of manner — 'by means of / in a booming voice'. Russian routinely uses the bare instrumental, with no preposition, to express the manner or means by which something is done.

— За Россию в пределах до семьсот семьдесят второго года!  
"To Russia within her borders before the year seventeen seventy-two!"
> Ordinal year in the genitive: Russian dates put the year in the genitive ('of the … year'), and in a compound ordinal only the last element is ordinal and declines: «семьсот семьдесят второго года» = '[the year] seven-hundred seventy-second'. The thousand is colloquially dropped here.

— Ото бардзо пенкне! (Вот так хорошо!) — крикнул другой пан, и оба разом осушили свои стаканы.  
"Oto bardzo pięknie! (Now that's good!)" cried the other Pole, and the two of them drained their glasses at one go.
> Polish exclamation, glossed: Cyrillic-spelled Polish «Oto bardzo pięknie!» ('Now that's fine / beautiful!'), again glossed in parentheses as «Вот так хорошо!». The Pole crows approval at the anti-Russian toast.
> «осушить» — to drain dry: «осушить» literally 'to dry up / drain', here idiomatic for emptying a glass completely. The image: they drank theirs to the last drop — pointedly, only for the insulting toast.

— Дурачье же вы, панове! — сорвалось вдруг у Мити.  
"What fools you are, panowie!" burst suddenly from Mitya.
> «дурачьё» — collective 'pack of fools': «дурачьё» is a collective noun (neuter, in -ьё) from «дурак», massing the idea into 'a lot of fools, the foolish lot'. The suffix carries contempt — Mitya lumps the Poles together as one despicable mass.
> Reflexive «сорвалось» — it burst out of him: «сорвалось» (reflexive «сорваться») literally 'tore loose, broke off' — used of words that escape one involuntarily. The construction «у Мити» (genitive with «у») frames the outburst as something that happened from/out of Mitya, not something he deliberately said.

— Па-не!! — прокричали оба пана с угрозою, наставившись на Митю, как петухи.  
"Pa-nie!!" the two Poles shouted threateningly, bristling at Mitya like a pair of fighting cocks.
> «Па-не!!» — drawn-out Polish outrage: The Poles bark the Polish vocative «panie!» ('sir!'), hyphenated to show it stretched out in indignation. It is a warning shot of wounded gentility.
> Reflexive gerund + simile: «наставившись» is a perfective reflexive gerund ('having fixed [their gaze/themselves] on') sharing the subject 'the two Poles'. The simile «как петухи» ('like fighting-cocks') makes the menace comic — two preening birds squaring up.

Особенно вскипел пан Врублевский.  
Pan Wróblewski in particular boiled over.
> «вскипеть» — to boil over (with rage): «вскипел» literally 'came to a boil' (water), here figurative for flaring up in sudden anger. The prefix «вс-» marks the upward, instantaneous surge of temper.

— Але не можно не мець слабосьци до своего краю? — возгласил он. (Разве можно не любить своей стороны?)  
"Ale nie można nie mieć słabości do swego kraju?" he proclaimed. (Surely a man may love his own country?)
> Polish defence of patriotism, glossed: Polish «Ale nie można nie mieć słabości do swego kraju?» — 'But can one not have a weakness (fondness) for one's own land?' — glossed in Russian as «Разве можно не любить своей стороны?». Note «слабость до» ('a soft spot for'), a Polish idiom Russian would render «слабость к».
> Genitive of negation: In the Russian gloss, the object of negated «не любить» stands in the genitive: «своей стороны» (not accusative «свою сторону»). Negating a verb regularly pulls its object into the genitive, especially with abstract or general objects.

— Молчать! Не ссориться! Чтобы не было ссор! — крикнула повелительно Грушенька и стукнула ножкой об пол.  
"Be quiet! No quarreling! I won't have any quarrels!" Grushenka cried imperiously, and stamped her little foot on the floor.
> Infinitive as blunt command: Grushenka snaps orders with bare infinitives — «Молчать!» ('Silence!'), «Не ссориться!» ('No quarrelling!'). The infinitive imperative is curt, impersonal, and absolute, like a barked military order, harsher than the ordinary -и/-те imperative.
> «чтобы» + past for a willed command: «Чтобы не было ссор!» ('Let there be no quarrels!') uses «чтобы» with a past-form verb to express a forceful wish or command — the irrealis «чтобы» construction. «ссор» is genitive plural after negated existential «не было».
> «ножкой» — affectionate diminutive: «ножка» is the diminutive of «нога» ('foot'), here tender rather than literal — Grushenka stamps her dainty little foot. The narrator's diminutive softens her imperiousness into something charming and feminine.

Лицо ее загорелось, глаза засверкали.  
Her face was flushed, her eyes flashing.
> Inchoative «за-» — bursting into action: Both verbs carry the inceptive prefix «за-», marking the sudden onset of a state: «загорелось» ('began to blaze/flush') and «засверкали» ('began to flash'). «за-» plus a perfective stem is Russian's standard way of saying 'started to —'.

Только что выпитый стакан сказался.  
The glass she had just drunk was telling on her.
> Passive participle «выпитый»: «выпитый» is a past passive participle ('drunk, drained') from perfective «выпить», modifying «стакан» — 'the just-drunk glass'. «Только что» ('only just now') times the action; together they make a tight participial phrase where English needs a relative clause.
> «сказаться» — to make itself felt: The reflexive «сказаться» idiomatically means 'to tell, take effect, show its result' — the wine she had just drunk was beginning to work on her. Not 'was said'; the -ся shifts the sense to an effect manifesting itself.

Митя страшно испугался.  
Mitya was terribly frightened.
> «страшно» as intensifier; reflexive «испугаться»: «страшно» literally 'terribly/frighteningly' is used as a colloquial intensifier ('terribly frightened'). «испугался» is the reflexive perfective «испугаться» ('to take fright') — the -ся here marking an inwardly experienced change of state.

— Панове простите! Это я виноват, я не буду. Врублевский, пан Врублевский, я не буду!..  
"Panowie, forgive me! It's my fault, I won't do it again. Wróblewski, Pan Wróblewski, I won't do it again!.."
> Compound imperfective future, elliptical: «я не буду» ('I won't [do it again]') is the compound imperfective future — «буду» plus an understood, dropped infinitive. Russian readily leaves the infinitive unspoken when it is clear, leaving just the future of «быть» to carry the promise.
> «виноват» — short adjective 'at fault': «виноват» is the short (predicative) form of «виноватый», the standard way to say 'I'm to blame, it's my fault'. Short adjectives in such confessions of guilt or rightness («я виноват», «вы правы») are idiomatic and bookish.

— Да молчи хоть ты-то, садись, экой глупый! — со злобною досадой огрызнулась на него Грушенька.  
"Oh do hold your tongue, you at least, sit down, you silly man!" Grushenka snapped at him with angry vexation.
> Particle stack: «да», «хоть», «-то»: Three particles colour the command: «да» (exasperated 'oh, do —'), «хоть» ('at least'), and the contrastive clitic «-то» pinning «ты» ('you, of all people'). The pile-up renders Grushenka's irritated, intimate scolding — a texture only particles can carry.
> «экой» — colloquial 'what a…': «экой» (also «экий») is a folksy exclamatory determiner, 'what a / such a': «экой глупый» = 'what a silly man'. It belongs to lively, lower-register spoken Russian, fitting Grushenka's earthy speech.
> «огрызнуться» — to snap back: «огрызнуться» is to snarl or snap back the way a dog does — a sharp, biting retort. The reflexive perfective with «о(б)-» captures a single curt snapping response, vivid and animal.

Все уселись, все примолкли, все смотрели друг на друга.  
They all sat down, all fell silent, all looked at one another.
> Anaphoric «все» and aspect contrast: The triple «все… все… все» ('all… all… all') hammers the collective hush. The first two verbs are perfective («уселись», «примолкли» — they sat, they fell silent: discrete events), the last imperfective («смотрели» — they were looking: an ongoing state), so the sentence settles from action into a held tableau.
> Reciprocal «друг на друга»: «друг друга» is the fixed reciprocal pronoun 'one another'; a preposition slots between its two halves and governs the second, hence «друг на друга» ('at one another'). Only the second element declines for case.

— Господа, всему я причиной! — качал опять Митя, ничего не понявший в возгласе Грушеньки. — Ну чего же мы сидим? Ну чем же нам заняться… чтобы было весело, опять весело?  
"Gentlemen, I'm the cause of it all!" Mitya started up again, understanding nothing of Grushenka's outburst. "Well, why are we just sitting here? Well, what shall we do... to make it gay again, gay once more?"
> Instrumental predicate «причиной»: «я причиной» — 'I [am] the cause' — puts the predicate noun in the instrumental, an idiomatic zero-copula pattern ('я причиной всему' = I'm the cause of it all). «всему» is dative governed by «причина» of what he is the cause.
> Past active participle with genitive of negation: «ничего не понявший» ('having understood nothing') is a past active participle from «понять», used adjectivally of Mitya. The negated object «ничего» (genitive of «ничто») shows both negative concord («ни… не») and the genitive of negation.
> Dative subject + instrumental after «заняться»: «нам заняться» ('what are we to busy ourselves with') is a dative-subject infinitive construction with no nominative. «чем» is the instrumental object of «заняться» ('occupy oneself with'), and «же» adds the fretful 'on earth'.

— Ах, в самом деле ужасно невесело, — лениво промямлил Калганов.  
"Ah, it really is dreadfully dull," Kalganov drawled lazily.
> «промямлить» — to mumble drawlingly: «мямлить» is to mumble, drawl, speak limply and indecisively; with «про-» it is one such limp utterance. Paired with «лениво» ('lazily'), it perfectly draws Kalganov's bored languor.
> «невесело» — joylessly dull: «невесело» negates «весело» ('merry') into 'cheerless, no fun'. «в самом деле» ('really, in fact') and «ужасно» ('awfully') stack to make the dullness emphatic — a recurring keyword «весело/невесело» runs through this whole revel.

— В банчик бы-с сыграть-с, как давеча… — хихикнул вдруг Максимов.  
"We might have a little game of faro, sir, like before..." Maksimov suddenly giggled.
> «бы» wish + double servile «-с»: «сыграть бы» ('how about a little game') is the bare-«бы» wish — a past-less hypothetical expressing a tentative suggestion. Maksimov coats it in the cringing «-с» (from «сударь»), tacked on twice, marking his servile timidity.

— Банк? Великолепно! — подхватил Митя, — если только панове…  
"Faro? Splendid!" Mitya caught him up. "If only the panowie..."
> «подхватить» — to take up eagerly: «подхватил» literally 'caught up', here 'seized on the idea, chimed in eagerly' — Mitya jumps at the suggestion. The same verb recurs through the dialogue for characters picking up and running with another's words.

— Пузьно, пане! — как бы нехотя отозвался пан на диване…  
"Późno, panie!" the Pole on the sofa responded, as if reluctantly...
> «Пузьно» — Polish 'late': Polish «Późno, panie!» ('It's late, sir!'), spelled phonetically in Cyrillic — the soft «ź» rendered «зь». Grushenka will demand a translation two lines on, the comedy lying precisely in the Poles' alien speech.
> «нехотя» — reluctantly: «нехотя» is a frozen adverb ('unwillingly, reluctantly'), historically a gerund of «хотеть». «как бы» ('as if') hedges it: the Pole responds 'as though reluctantly', the affectation that so irritates Grushenka.

— То правда, — поддакнул и пан Врублевский.  
"That's true," Pan Wróblewski chimed in too.
> «поддакнуть» — to chime in agreement: «поддакнуть» is to say 'да, да' in assent, to second someone obsequiously. The verb itself is built from «да» ('yes') with «под-»; Wróblewski merely echoes his companion's agreement.

— Пузьно? Это что такое пузьно? — спросила Грушенька.  
"Późno? What does that mean, późno?" Grushenka asked.
> «что такое…?» — 'what is…?': «Что такое пузьно?» is the set frame for asking the meaning or nature of something ('what is this — pузьno?'). «такое» is the neuter of «такой» frozen into the idiom; Grushenka demands a gloss of the Polish word.

— То значи поздно, пани, поздно, час поздний, — разъяснил пан на диване.  
"It means late, pani, late, the hour is late," the Pole on the sofa explained.
> Polish-tinged gloss, «пани»: The Pole explains in half-Polish: «То значи» (Polish «to znaczy», 'that means') and «пани» (the Polish feminine address to Grushenka). His Russian «поздно… час поздний» finally renders the word she asked about.
> Post-posed adjective «час поздний»: Placing the adjective after its noun, «час поздний» (vs ordinary «поздний час»), gives a predicative, sententious ring — 'the hour [is] late'. Such inversion is a bookish, slightly oracular flavour suited to the Pole's pompous delivery.

— И всё-то им поздно, и всё-то им нельзя! — почти взвизгнула в досаде Грушенька. — Сами скучные сидят, так и другим чтобы скучно было. Пред тобой, Митя, они всё вот этак молчали и надо мной фуфырились…  
"Everything's late with them, everything's not allowed with them!" Grushenka almost shrieked in vexation. "They sit there dull themselves, so everyone else has to be dull too. Before you came, Mitya, they kept silent just like this and put on airs at me..."
> «-то» + dative-subject «нельзя»: The clitic «-то» on «всё» ('everything, the whole lot of it') voices exasperated insistence. «им поздно», «им нельзя» are dative-subject impersonals — 'for them it's [too] late / not allowed' — with no nominative subject, the experiencer in the dative «им».
> «чтобы» purpose with dative-subject state: «чтобы другим скучно было» ('so that others too should be bored') is a «чтобы» purpose clause with past-form «было» and a dative subject «другим». It compactly expresses the Poles' spiteful wish that everyone share their gloom.
> «фуфыриться» — to put on airs: «фуфыриться» is a colloquial, slightly contemptuous verb: to puff oneself up, sulk haughtily, give oneself airs. Grushenka accuses the Poles of preening and looking down on her — the word is as deflating as the act it names.

— Богиня моя! — крикнул пан на диване, — цо мувишь, то сень стане. Видзен неласкен, и естем смутны. (Вижу нерасположение, оттого я и печальный). Естем готув (я готов), пане, — докончил он, обращаясь к Мите.  
"My goddess!" cried the Pole on the sofa, "co mówisz, to się stanie. Widzę niełaskę, i jestem smutny. (I see your displeasure, and so I am sad.) Jestem gotów (I am ready), panie," he finished, turning to Mitya.
> «Богиня моя!» — 'My goddess!': The Pole's grandiloquent endearment to Grushenka, «Богиня моя» ('my goddess'). The inflated gallantry — set beside his clipped, reluctant Polish refusals — is exactly the theatrical posing Dostoevsky mocks in him.
> Sustained Polish, glossed: A long Polish stretch in Cyrillic — «co mówisz, to się stanie» ('what you say shall be'), «Widzę niełaskę, i jestem smutny» ('I see [your] disfavour, and I am sad'), «Jestem gotów» ('I am ready') — each clause glossed in Russian. Dostoevsky sustains the bilingual comedy to its fullest here.

— Начинай, пане! — подхватил Митя, выхватывая из кармана свои кредитки и выкладывая из них две сторублевых на стол.  
"Begin, panie!" Mitya caught him up, snatching his banknotes out of his pocket and laying two hundred-rouble notes from among them on the table.
> Paired imperfective gerunds: Two imperfective present gerunds in -я, «выхватывая» ('snatching out') and «выкладывая» ('laying out'), run parallel to the main verb, painting Mitya's simultaneous flurry of action as he speaks. Chains of such gerunds are signature literary narration.

— Я тебе много, пан, хочу проиграть. Бери карты, закладывай банк!  
"I want to lose a lot to you, pan. Take the cards, hold the bank!"
> «проиграть» — to lose (at play): «проиграть» (perfective) specifically means to lose at gambling — the prefix «про-» here carrying the sense of losing/squandering through play. Mitya's wish to lose to the Pole is bravado, a grand gesture of contempt-as-generosity.
> Imperfective imperatives of invitation: «бери», «закладывай» are imperfective imperatives ('take the cards, set up the bank') — open, energetic commands urging him to get on with it. «закладывать банк» is the faro idiom for the banker setting up the hand.

— Карты чтоб от хозяина, пане, — настойчиво и серьезно произнес маленький пан.  
"The cards must come from the landlord, panie," the little Pole said insistently and earnestly.
> Elliptical «чтоб» demand: «Карты чтоб от хозяина» ('the cards [must come] from the landlord') is a clipped «чтоб»-clause with the verb omitted — a curt insistence on a condition. The little Pole, alert to cheating, demands a fresh sealed pack from the innkeeper.

— То найлепши спосуб (самый лучший способ), — поддакнул пан Врублевский.  
"To najlepszy sposób (that's the best way)," Pan Wróblewski chimed in.
> Polish «najlepszy sposób»: Polish «To najlepszy sposób» ('that's the best way'), glossed «самый лучший способ». Note Polish «najlepszy» (superlative of 'good') against Russian «лучший» — cognate Slavic roots diverging just enough to mark the foreignness.

— От хозяина? Хорошо, понимаю, пусть от хозяина, это вы хорошо, панове! Карты! — скомандовал Митя хозяину.  
"From the landlord? Fine, I understand, let it be from the landlord, that's a good idea of yours, panowie! Cards!" Mitya commanded the landlord.
> «пусть» — third-person 'let it be': «пусть» forms a third-person imperative / concession: «пусть от хозяина» ('let it be from the landlord'). It expresses Mitya's yielding assent — 'have it your way' — a softer command than the bare imperative.

Хозяин принес нераспечатанную игру карт и объявил Мите, что уж сбираются девки, жидки с цимбалами прибудут тоже, вероятно, скоро, а что тройка с припасами еще не успела прибыть.  
The landlord brought an unopened pack of cards and announced to Mitya that the girls were already gathering, that the Jews with their cimbalom would probably arrive soon too, but that the troika with the provisions had not yet managed to get there.
> Reported speech with «что»: The landlord's report is strung on repeated «что» ('that…') — the subordinating conjunction introducing reported fact — with «а что» ('but that…') marking the contrastive last clause. The cascade of «что»-clauses neatly stacks his three pieces of news.

Митя выскочил из-за стола и побежал в соседнюю комнату сейчас же распорядиться.  
Mitya jumped up from the table and ran into the next room to give his orders at once.
> Prefixed motion perfectives: «выскочил» ('jumped out', «вы-» + «скочить») and «побежал» ('set off running', «по-» + «бежать') are perfective prefixed motion verbs, each a single bounded movement. «по-» on a motion verb specifically marks the setting-off, the start of going.

Но девок всего пришло только три, да и Марьи еще не было.  
But only three girls had come in all, and Marya was not there yet either.
> Numeral subject and genitive «девок»: Word order and case combine for emphasis: «девок» (genitive plural) is fronted, «всего… только три» ('only three in all') trails. With «три» the verb stands in the singular neuter «пришло», as numeral-headed subjects often do, treating the group as a single quantity.
> Genitive of negation in existence: «Марьи… не было» — the absent subject of a negated existential goes in the genitive: «Марьи» (gen.), not nominative «Марья». The neuter «не было» is invariable, agreeing with no subject at all. This is the obligatory genitive-of-absence pattern.

Да и сам он не знал, как ему распорядиться и зачем он выбежал: велел только достать из ящика гостинцев, леденцов и тягушек и оделить девок.  
And indeed he himself did not know what orders to give or why he had run out: he merely told them to fetch some treats from the chest — fruit drops and toffees — and to share them out among the girls.
> Dative-subject infinitive in an embedded question: «как ему распорядиться» ('what orders he was to give') is a dative-subject infinitive ('for him to arrange') folded into an indirect question. The dative «ему» names the would-be doer where there is no nominative subject — a very Dostoevskian framing of a man at a loss.
> «леденцы» and «тягушки» — sweets: Treats for the village girls: «леденцы» are hard fruit-drops / boiled sweets, «тягушки» pulled toffees (from «тянуть», 'to pull', for the way taffy is stretched). Homely, cheap delights — Mitya scattering small kindnesses in his largesse.
> «велеть» + bare infinitive: «велел достать… и оделить» ('ordered [them] to fetch… and share out') uses «велеть» governing bare perfective infinitives — the ordinary way to report a command's content. The implicit dative recipient (the servants) is left unspoken.

«Да Андрею водки, водки Андрею! — приказал он наскоро, — я обидел Андрея!»  
"And vodka for Andrei, vodka for Andrei!" he ordered hurriedly. "I've offended Andrei!"
> Chiasmus + partitive genitive «водки»: Mitya repeats his order in mirror-image — «Андрею водки, водки Андрею» — a chiasmus driven by emotion. «водки» is the partitive genitive ('some vodka'), and «Андрею» the dative recipient; the verb 'give' is dropped, as it freely can be in such excited commands.

Тут его вдруг тронул за плечо прибежавший вслед за ним Максимов.  
Just then Maksimov, who had run out after him, suddenly touched him on the shoulder.
> Past active participle modifying the subject: «прибежавший вслед за ним» ('who had come running after him') is a past active participle from perfective «прибежать», placed before «Максимов» to compress a whole relative clause ('Maksimov, who had run after him') into a tight pre-modifier — typical literary economy.

— Дайте мне пять рублей, — прошептал он Мите, — я бы тоже в банчик рискнул, хи-хи!  
"Give me five roubles," he whispered to Mitya, "I'd like to take a turn at faro too, hee-hee!"
> Conditional «бы рискнул»: «я бы… рискнул» is the conditional — past-form «рискнул» plus «бы» — used to soften the request into a wistful 'I'd like to chance it too'. The hesitant mood matches Maksimov's wheedling, half-apologetic begging for money.

— Прекрасно, великолепно! Берите десять, вот! — Он вытащил опять все кредитки из кармана и отыскал десять рублей. — А проиграешь, еще приходи, еще приходи…  
"Wonderful, splendid! Take ten, here!" He pulled all his banknotes out of his pocket again and found ten roubles. "And if you lose, come again, come again..."
> Perfective future as an open conditional: «проиграешь» is a perfective-present form with future meaning ('if you lose') — the bare conjugated verb standing in for a whole «если»-clause, a common colloquial conditional. «приходи» is the imperfective imperative inviting repeated visits: 'keep coming back'.

— Хорошо-с, — радостно прошептал Максимов и побежал в залу.  
"Very good, sir," Maksimov whispered joyfully, and ran back into the hall.
> «Хорошо-с» — the servile «-с» once more: Maksimov's assent «Хорошо-с» ('Very good, sir') again wears the deferential clitic «-с» (< «сударь»). Dostoevsky uses this fading honorific suffix as a consistent verbal tic to mark his cringing, dependent hanger-on.

Воротился тотчас и Митя и извинился, что заставил ждать себя.  
Mitya returned at once too, and apologized for having kept them waiting.
> «заставить» + infinitive; reflexive «себя»: «заставить ждать» means 'to make [someone] wait' — «заставить» plus a bare infinitive expressing compulsion. «себя» is the reflexive object pronoun ('to wait for himself'), referring back to Mitya, the clause's subject.

Паны уже уселись и распечатали игру.  
The Poles had already sat down and broken open the pack.
> Perfective pair: completed preparations: «уселись» ('had settled themselves', reflexive) and «распечатали» ('had broken open / unsealed') are two perfectives reporting completed setup just before Mitya's return. «распечатать» (to unseal) confirms the fresh-pack precaution the Poles insisted on.

Смотрели же гораздо приветливее, почти ласково.  
They were looking far more cordial now, almost affable.
> Comparative adverbs + intensifier «гораздо»: «приветливее» ('more cordially') is the comparative adverb in -ее, intensified by «гораздо» ('far, much'). «почти ласково» ('almost affectionately') sharpens the shift in the Poles' manner now that money is on the table.
> Subjectless verb + topic-shifting «же»: The subject (the Poles) is dropped, carried over from the previous sentence, leaving «Смотрели» to open the clause. The particle «же» marks the gentle topic-shift back to them and their changed expression — a quiet narrative hinge.

Пан на диване закурил новую трубку и приготовился метать; в лице его изобразилась даже некая торжественность.  
The Pole on the sofa lit a fresh pipe and prepared to deal; a certain solemnity even showed itself on his face.
> «метать» — to deal (faro): Here «метать» is the technical verb of the card game faro («штосс»): the banker 'throws' the cards to set up the round. The whole episode is steeped in gambling vocabulary — «банк», «талья», «ва-банк», «на пе» — that an ordinary dictionary will not gloss.
> Reflexive «-ся» as middle voice: «изобразилась» (lit. 'depicted itself') uses the clitic «-ся» to turn a transitive verb into an intransitive middle: a solemnity 'showed itself' on his face, with no external agent. Russian constantly forms such middle/inchoative verbs this way.

— На мейсца, панове! — провозгласил пан Врублевский.  
"To your places, panowie!" Pan Wróblewski proclaimed.
> Polish in Cyrillic: 'To your places!': Dostoevsky spells the Pole's Polish phonetically in Cyrillic: «на мейсца» = Polish 'na miejsca' (to [your] places), «панове» = 'panowie', the plural address 'gentlemen'. The macaronic effect — Polish heard through Russian ears — is deliberate and faintly comic.

— Нет, я не стану больше играть, — отозвался Калганов, — я давеча уж им проиграл пятьдесят рублей.  
"No, I shan't play anymore," Kalganov responded, "I already lost fifty roubles to them earlier."
> «давеча» — 'a little while ago': «давеча» is a colloquial, slightly old-fashioned adverb meaning 'earlier today, just now', common in 19th-century speech. It places Kalganov's loss in the recent past of the same evening.
> «стану» as future + negation: «стану играть» is a compound future ('I shall [start to] play'), here negated: «не стану больше играть» — 'I won't play anymore'. «стать» + imperfective infinitive is a common way to frame a future intention, and под negation it reads as a refusal.

— Пан был нещенсливый, пан может быть опять щенсливым, — заметил в его сторону пан на диване.  
"Pan was unlucky, pan may be lucky again," the Pole on the sofa remarked in his direction.
> Polish 'unlucky / lucky': «нещенсливый» / «щенсливый» render Polish 'nieszczęśliwy / szczęśliwy' (unlucky / lucky) in Cyrillic. The Pole's whole sentence is Polish thinly Russified, the running joke of his speech.
> Instrumental of the predicate: After «быть», the predicate adjective stands in the instrumental: «быть ... щенсливым» ('to be lucky'). Russian frames a state reached or assumed through «быть/стать» with the instrumental rather than the nominative.

— Сколько в банке? Ответный? — горячился Митя.  
"How much is in the bank? Will it cover? " Mitya was getting heated.
> «ответный (банк)» — a covering bank: In faro an «ответный банк» is one that 'answers' (covers) any stake a player makes — the bank pays whatever you bet. Mitya is asking whether the Pole's bank will cover all comers.
> «горячиться» — to grow heated: «горячиться» (reflexive, from «горячий», hot) means to get worked up, excited, hot under the collar. The imperfective past «горячился» paints Mitya's mounting agitation as an ongoing state, not a single act.

— Слухам, пане, может сто, може двесьце, сколько ставить будешь.  
"Słucham, panie, perhaps a hundred, perhaps two hundred, however much you care to stake."
> Polish 'I'm listening': «Слухам» = Polish 'słucham' (I'm listening / at your service), «може ... двесьце» = 'może ... dwieście' (perhaps ... two hundred). The Pole answers Mitya's question in his characteristic Polish-in-Cyrillic.
> Compound future with «будешь»: «ставить будешь» is the imperfective compound future: «будешь» (future of «быть») + imperfective infinitive «ставить» — 'however much you will [be] staking'. The «ты»-form «будешь» is also the Pole's faintly condescending familiar address.

— Миллион! — захохотал Митя.  
"A million!" Mitya burst out laughing.
> «захохотать» — to burst out laughing: The prefix «за-» here is inceptive: «захохотать» means to break into loud laughter, 'start guffawing'. Dostoevsky favours these «за-» onset verbs to mark a sudden eruption of feeling.

— Пан капитан, может, слышал про пана Подвысоцкего?  
"Pan captain has perhaps heard of Pan Podwysocki?"
> «про» + accusative; animate accusative: «про» governs the accusative and means 'about, concerning'. «пана Подвысоцкего» shows animate accusative borrowing the genitive ending (animate masculine acc. = gen.), which is how Russian keeps the object distinct once endings move freely.

— Какого Подвысоцкого?  
"What Podwysocki?"
> «какой» agreeing in the accusative: The interrogative «какой» ('which / what kind of') declines like an adjective and here agrees with «Подвысоцкого» in animate masculine accusative: «Какого Подвысоцкого?» — 'What Podwysocki [do you mean]?'

— В Варшаве банк ответный ставит кто идет. Приходит Подвысоцкий, видит тысёнц злотых, ставит: ва-банк. Ба́нкер муви: «Пане Подвысоцки, ставишь злото чи на го́нор?» — «На го́нор, пане», — муви Подвысоцкий. «Тем лепей, пане». Ба́нкер мечет талью, Подвысоцкий берет тысёнц злотых. «Почекай, пане, — муви ба́нкер, вынул ящик и дает миллион, — бери, пане, ото есть твой рахунек» (вот твой счет)! Банк был миллионным. «Я не знал того», — муви Подвысоцкий. «Пане Подвысоцки, — муви ба́нкер, — ты ставилэсь на го́нор, и мы на го́нор». Подвысоцкий взял миллион.  
"In Warsaw the bank covers whoever comes against it. Podwysocki comes up, sees a thousand złotys, and stakes: va banque. The banker says: 'Panie Podwysocki, do you put down the gold, or na honor?' — 'Na honor, panie,' says Podwysocki. 'So much the better, panie.' The banker deals the round, Podwysocki takes the thousand złotys. 'Wait, panie,' says the banker, drew out a strongbox and hands over a million — 'take it, panie, oto jest twój rachunek (this is your account)!' The bank held a million. 'I didn't know that,' says Podwysocki. 'Panie Podwysocki,' says the banker, 'you staked na honor, and so did we.' Podwysocki took the million."
> «на гонор» — on (one's) honor: Polish 'na honor' = on credit, on one's word of honor, staking without laying down the cash. «гонор» entered Russian to mean touchy, aristocratic pride — exactly the szlachta self-image the story flatters.
> Polish 'says': «муви»: «муви» = Polish 'mówi' (says); «почекай» = 'poczekaj' (wait); «рахунек» = 'rachunek' (account, bill), which the narrator glosses parenthetically as «(вот твой счет)». The whole anecdote is delivered in dense Polish-in-Cyrillic with Russian glosses.
> Historic present in narration: The story is told in a string of imperfective presents — «приходит, видит, ставит, мечет, берет» — the vivid 'historic present' that makes a past anecdote feel as if it unfolds before us. This staccato present is a storyteller's device.
> Genitive of negation: «не знал того»: Under negation the object shifts from accusative to genitive: «не знал того» ('didn't know that') uses genitive «того» rather than accusative. This is the classic genitive of negation with an abstract object.

— Это неправда, — сказал Калганов.  
"That isn't true," said Kalganov.
> Zero copula in the present: «Это неправда» — 'That('s) untrue' — has no verb 'to be': Russian omits the present-tense copula, juxtaposing subject and predicate nominative directly. Kalganov's flat little sentence punctures the Pole's tall tale.

— Пане Калганов, в шляхетной компании так мувиць не пржистои (в порядочном обществе так не говорят).  
"Panie Kalganov, w szlachetnej kompanii tak mówić nie przystoi (in decent society one does not talk like that)."
> Polish: 'one doesn't speak so in noble company': Pure Polish in Cyrillic: 'w szlachetnej kompanii tak mówić nie przystoi' — glossed by the narrator as «(в порядочном обществе так не говорят)». «шляхетный» is from szlachta, the Polish nobility; the Pole stands on gentlemanly decorum.

— Так и отдаст тебе польский игрок миллион! — воскликнул Митя, но тотчас спохватился. — Прости, пане, виновен, вновь виновен, отдаст, отдаст миллион, на го́нор, на польску честь! Видишь, как я говорю по-польски, ха-ха! Вот ставлю десять рублей, идет — валет.  
"As if a Polish gambler would just hand you a million!" Mitya cried, but checked himself at once. "Forgive me, panie, I'm in the wrong, in the wrong again, he'd hand it over, he'd hand over a million, na honor, on Polish honor! See how I talk Polish, ha-ha! There, I stake ten roubles — the jack goes."
> Ironic «так и» + word order: «Так и отдаст!» is sarcastic: 'as if he'd just hand it over!' — «так и» plus the perfective future «отдаст» mockingly asserts the opposite. Fronting «так и» and pushing the subject «польский игрок» rightward throws the scornful emphasis to the front (topic–comment ordering).
> «спохватиться» — to catch oneself: «спохватиться» (reflexive, perfective) means to suddenly catch oneself, realize one has gone too far. Mitya checks his mockery mid-sentence and apologizes — the swing is pure Karamazov volatility.
> Short adjective «виновен»: «виновен» is the short (predicative) form of «виновный», 'guilty, at fault' — 'I'm in the wrong'. The short adjective, here a bookish flourish, predicates a state and cannot stand before a noun.
> Archaic short form «польску»: «на польску честь» uses the old short/truncated feminine accusative «польску» for «польскую» — an archaic, folksy contraction Mitya adopts to mimic Polish gallantry. «валет» is the jack at cards.

— А я рублик на дамочку, на червонную, на хорошенькую, на паненочку, хи-хи! — прохихикал Максимов, выдвинув свою даму и как бы желая скрыть ото всех, придвинулся вплоть к столу и наскоро перекрестился под столом.  
"And I'll put a little rouble on the lady, on the red one, on the pretty one, on the little miss, hee-hee!" Maksimov tittered, pushing forward his queen, and, as if wishing to hide it from everyone, drew right up to the table and hastily crossed himself under it.
> A cascade of diminutives: Maksimov coos in diminutives: «рублик» (a dear little rouble), «дамочка» (the little queen-card), «хорошенькую» (the pretty little one), «паненочка» (a little 'panna', young lady). The pile-up of -ик/-очк- suffixes makes his timid, fawning glee audible.
> Gerund chains («деепричастие»): Dostoevsky strings adverbial participles around the main verb: «выдвинув» (perfective, 'having pushed forward'), «желая» (imperfective, 'wishing'). Each shares Maksimov's subject and folds attendant action into one sentence — a hallmark of literary narration.

Митя выиграл. Выиграл и рублик.  
Mitya won. The little rouble won too.
> Inversion and the particle «и»: Two clipped perfectives report the result. In «Выиграл и рублик» the verb fronts and «и» means 'too / even' (the little rouble won as well), with the subject «рублик» held to the stressed end — the new information last.

— Угол! — крикнул Митя.  
"A corner!" cried Mitya.
> «угол» — a 'corner' bet: A faro/gambling term: to play «угол» ('corner') is to fold the corner of the card, signalling a particular raised stake. Mitya's shouted card-terms — «угол», «бита», «на пе» — drive the rhythm of the losing streak.

— А я опять рублик, я семпелечком, я маленьким, маленьким семпелечком, — блаженно бормотал Максимов в страшной радости, что выиграл рублик.  
"And I'll put another little rouble, just a simple stake, a little one, a tiny little simple stake," Maksimov muttered blissfully, in tremendous joy at having won a rouble.
> «семпель» and its diminutive: «семпель» (from French 'simple') is the plainest faro bet, a single flat stake; «семпелечком» is its caressing diminutive — 'with a teeny simple stake'. Maksimov shrinks even the gambling jargon into baby-talk.
> Instrumental of manner/means: «семпелечком ... маленьким» stand in the instrumental, the case of means: he stakes 'by way of / with' a tiny simple bet. The bare instrumental neatly expresses the manner of the wager.
> «блаженно» — blissfully: «блаженно бормотал» ('muttered blissfully'): «блаженный» carries a religious overtone (the 'blessed', the holy fool), so Maksimov's rapture over a one-rouble win is faintly ridiculous in its beatific intensity.

— Бита! — крикнул Митя. — Семерку на пе!  
"Beaten!" cried Mitya. "The seven doubled!"
> «бита» — 'beaten!': «бита» (short passive participle of «бить», beat) is the card-table cry that a card has been beaten/lost. «Семерку на пе» = 'the seven, doubled' — staking the seven for double or nothing.
> «на пе» — paroli (double): «на пе» (from French 'paroli') means letting a winning stake ride for double. Mitya's repeated «на пе» is his doomed attempt to double his way out of the hole; each one is 'killed'.

Убили и на пе.  
The doubled stake was killed too.
> Impersonal plural «убили»: «Убили» ('[they] killed') is an indefinite-personal third-plural with no stated subject — 'the doubled stake got killed too'. «убить» is also card jargon for beating a stake; the agentless plural keeps the focus on the loss, not who inflicted it.

— Перестаньте, — сказал вдруг Калганов.  
"Stop," Kalganov said suddenly.
> Polite imperative «перестаньте»: «перестаньте» is the «-те» imperative of «перестать» (to stop, cease): a clipped, formal 'Stop it'. Kalganov uses the plural/polite form, keeping a cool distance even as he intervenes.

— На пе, на пе, — удваивал ставки Митя, и что ни ставил на пе, — всё убивалось.  
"Doubled, doubled," Mitya kept doubling his stakes, and whatever he doubled was all killed.
> «что ни ...» concessive + «-ся» passive: «что ни ставил ... всё убивалось» — 'whatever he staked ... was all killed'. «что ни» builds a concessive 'no matter what', and «убивалось» is an imperfective «-ся» passive: the stakes 'got killed' repeatedly, the imperfect marking the grinding repetition.
> Imperfective of repeated action: «удваивал» (imperfective past, 'kept doubling') frames a habitual, repeated motion against the backdrop of the run of losses — the imperfective's job of painting process rather than a single event.

А рублики выигрывали.  
But the little roubles kept winning.
> Contrastive «а» + imperfective: «А» opens a gentle contrast: Mitya's big stakes die, 'but the little roubles kept winning'. «выигрывали» is imperfective — ongoing, repeated winning — the bitter irony underlined by aspect, and «рублики» a fond diminutive of Maksimov's pennies.

— На пе! — рявкнул в ярости Митя.  
"Doubled!" Mitya barked in a fury.
> «рявкнуть» — to bark out: «рявкнуть» is to bark, bellow, snarl out a single word; «в ярости» = 'in a fury'. The harsh, animal verb (later echoed of the Pole, «рявкнул на Калганова») tracks the rising violence in the room.

— Двесьце проиграл, пане. Еще ставишь двесьце? — осведомился пан на диване.  
"You've lost two hundred, panie. Will you stake another two hundred?" the Pole on the sofa inquired.
> Polish 'two hundred': «Двесьце» = Polish 'dwieście' (two hundred); «осведомился» ('inquired') is the Russian narration. The Pole keeps tallying Mitya's losses in his own tongue.
> Present tense as immediate future: «Еще ставишь?» uses the imperfective present «ставишь» for an action proposed for the very next moment — 'Will you stake [another] two hundred?'. Russian readily lets the present cover the imminent future.

— Как, двести уж проиграл? Так еще двести! Все двести на пе! — И, выхватив из кармана деньги, Митя бросил было двести рублей на даму, как вдруг Калганов накрыл ее рукой.  
"What, I've lost two hundred already? Then another two hundred! All two hundred doubled!" And, snatching the money out of his pocket, Mitya was about to throw two hundred roubles on the queen, when Kalganov suddenly covered it with his hand.
> Perfective gerund «выхватив»: «выхватив» (perfective past gerund, 'having snatched') marks an action completed just before the main verb «бросил было». «из кармана» — «из» + genitive 'out of the pocket' — shows the genitive of source after «из».
> The particle «было»: «бросил было» uses the special particle «было», which marks an action begun or intended but interrupted/undone: Mitya 'was just about to throw' the money when Kalganov stopped him. It is a uniquely Russian way to signal a thwarted action.
> Instrumental of instrument: «накрыл ... рукой» — 'covered it with his hand'. «рукой» stands in the instrumental, the case of the means or instrument of the action, with no preposition needed.

— Довольно! — крикнул он своим звонким голосом.  
"Enough!" he cried in his ringing voice.
> «свой» + instrumental of manner: «своим звонким голосом» ('in his own ringing voice') is an instrumental of manner; «своим» is the reflexive possessive «свой», pointing the voice back to the clause's own subject (Kalganov), where «его» would risk meaning someone else's.

— Что вы это? — уставился на него Митя.  
"What are you doing?" Mitya stared at him.
> Elliptical «Что вы это?»: «Что вы это?» is an idiomatic, verbless exclamation — 'What are you [doing] this?', i.e. 'What's got into you?'. The bare «что ... это» with no verb is colloquial astonishment.
> «уставиться» — to stare fixedly: «уставиться» (reflexive, perfective) is to fix one's stare on someone, gawp. Used here of Mitya rounding on Kalganov, the «-ся» verb conveys a sudden, riveted look.

— Довольно, не хочу! Не будете больше играть.  
"Enough, I won't have it! You shan't play anymore."
> Future as flat prohibition: «Не будете больше играть» — literally 'you will not play anymore' — uses the compound future as a categorical decree, not a prediction: 'You shan't play.' The negated «будете ... играть» turns statement into command.

— Почему?  
"Why?"

— А потому. Плюньте и уйдите, вот почему. Не дам больше играть!  
"Just because. Spit on it and walk away, that's why. I won't let you play anymore!"
> «А потому» — 'just because': «А потому» (lit. 'and therefore') used alone is a curt, almost childish non-answer to «почему?» — 'Because.' It refuses to give a reason while pretending to.
> «плюнуть» — 'spit on it': «Плюньте» is the «-те» imperative of «плюнуть» (to spit). The idiom «плюнуть на (что-то)» means to give up on something, dismiss it with contempt — 'spit on it and walk away'.
> «дать» as 'let / allow': «Не дам играть» — 'I won't let [you] play'. «дать» + infinitive means to permit/allow; «дам» is the perfective simple future used as a firm refusal: 'I won't allow it.'

Митя глядел на него в изумлении.  
Mitya gazed at him in astonishment.
> Imperfective «глядел» + «в» + prepositional: «глядел» (imperfective past) holds the stare as a lingering state of astonishment. «в изумлении» — «в» + prepositional 'in amazement' — is the locative use of «в» for an emotional state.

— Брось, Митя, он, может, правду говорит; и без того много проиграл, — со странною ноткой в голосе произнесла и Грушенька.  
"Drop it, Mitya, perhaps he's telling the truth; you've lost a lot as it is," Grushenka said too, with a strange note in her voice.
> Familiar imperative «брось»: «Брось» is the singular «ты»-imperative of «бросить» (to throw/drop): 'drop it, give it up'. Grushenka's bare, intimate command — name plus «ты»-form — marks her closeness to Mitya.
> «и без того» — 'as it is': «и без того» is a set phrase meaning 'even without that, as it is already': 'you've lost a lot as it is'. It concedes a state already reached before any further action.
> «нотка» and archaic «-ою»: «нотка» is a diminutive of «нота» — a faint 'note' in the voice. «странною» carries the bookish/archaic instrumental ending «-ою» for «-ой», common in 19th-century prose. Grushenka's 'strange note' quietly foreshadows the scene's turn.

Оба пана вдруг поднялись с места со страшно обиженным видом.  
Both Poles suddenly rose from their places with a terribly offended air.
> «-ся» middle + «с» + genitive: «поднялись» (from «подняться», to rise) is a «-ся» intransitive. «с места» — «с» + genitive 'from [their] place(s)' — is the genitive of separation governed by «с».
> «с» + instrumental of manner: «со ... обиженным видом» ('with a terribly offended air') is «с» + instrumental describing manner. «обиженным» is a past passive participle pressed into service as an adjective — 'offended'.

— Жартуешь (шутишь), пане? — проговорил маленький пан, строго осматривая Калганова.  
"Żartujesz (are you joking), panie?" the little Pole said, eyeing Kalganov sternly.
> Polish 'are you joking?': «Жартуешь» = Polish 'żartujesz' (you're joking), which Dostoevsky immediately glosses as «(шутишь)». The parenthetical Russian translations throughout let the reader follow the Poles while still hearing their foreignness.
> Present gerund «осматривая»: «осматривая» (imperfective present gerund, 'eyeing / looking over') expresses an action simultaneous with the main verb «проговорил»: he spoke while sternly sizing Kalganov up. It shares the subject of the main clause.

— Як сен поважашь то робиць, пане! (Как вы смеете это делать!) — рявкнул на Калганова и пан Врублевский.  
"Jak się poważasz to robić, panie! (How dare you do that!)" Pan Wróblewski barked at Kalganov too.
> Polish: 'How dare you do that!': «Як сен поважашь то робиць» renders Polish 'Jak się poważasz to robić' (How do you dare to do that), glossed by the narrator. «робиць» = 'robić' (to do); «сен» = the Polish reflexive 'się'.

— Не сметь, не сметь кричать! — крикнула Грушенька. — Ах петухи индейские!  
"Don't you dare, don't you dare shout!" Grushenka cried. "Ah, you turkey-cocks!"
> Infinitive as sharp prohibition: «Не сметь кричать!» uses a bare infinitive «сметь» under negation as a blunt command — 'Don't you dare shout!'. The negated infinitive is a forceful, impersonal way of issuing an order in Russian.
> «петухи индейские» — turkey-cocks: «индейский петух» is the old name for a turkey (lit. 'Indian rooster'). Grushenka's «Ах петухи индейские!» mocks the two strutting, puffed-up Poles as preening turkey-cocks — vivid, contemptuous folk insult.

Митя смотрел на них на всех поочередно; но что-то вдруг поразило его в лице Грушеньки, и в тот же миг что-то совсем новое промелькнуло и в уме его — странная новая мысль!  
Mitya looked at them all in turn; but something in Grushenka's face suddenly struck him, and at that same instant something quite new flashed through his mind too — a strange new thought!
> Distributed preposition «на ... на ...»: «на них на всех» repeats the preposition «на» across the pronoun and its quantifier — a colloquial doubling for emphasis, 'at them, at all of them'. «поочередно» = 'one after another, in turn'.
> Indefinite «что-то» and perfective flash: «что-то» ('something', a specific but unidentified thing) with the clitic «-то» twice names a vague stimulus; the perfectives «поразило» and «промелькнуло» fix two sudden, momentary events — something struck him, a thought flashed by.

— Пани Агриппина! — начал было маленький пан, весь красный от задора, как вдруг Митя, подойдя к нему, хлопнул его по плечу.  
"Pani Agrippina!" the little Pole was beginning, crimson all over with anger, when suddenly Mitya, stepping up to him, clapped him on the shoulder.
> Gerund «подойдя» + «по» + dative: «подойдя» (perfective gerund, 'having stepped up') sets the action just before «хлопнул». «по плечу» — «по» + dative 'on the shoulder' — is the idiom for slapping someone on a body part, where «по» governs the dative.

— Ясневельможный, на два слова.  
"Jaśnie wielmożny, a couple of words."
> «ясневельможный» — 'Your Lordship': Polish 'jaśnie wielmożny', a grandiloquent honorific for a nobleman ('most illustrious sir'). Mitya lays it on thick, flattering the Pole's szlachta vanity before drawing him aside. «на два слова» = 'a couple of words'.

— Чего хцешь, пане? (Что угодно?)  
"Czego chcesz, panie? (What do you want?)"
> Polish 'What do you want?': «Чего хцешь?» = Polish 'Czego chcesz?' (What do you want?), glossed «(Что угодно?)». «хцешь» = 'chcesz'; the genitive «чего» after «хотеть» is shared by both languages.

— В ту комнату, в тот покой, два словечка скажу тебе хороших, самых лучших, останешься доволен.  
"Into that room, into that chamber, I'll say a couple of words to you — good ones, the very best, you'll be satisfied."
> «покой» — chamber (archaic): Beside its common sense 'peace, rest', «покой» here means an inner room or chamber — an older, slightly elevated usage. «два словечка» is a coaxing double diminutive of «слово», 'a couple of little words'.
> Suppletive superlative «лучший»: «лучших» is from «лучший», the suppletive comparative/superlative of «хороший» (good → better/best). Reinforced by «самых» ('the very'), it reads as a true superlative: 'the very best [words]'.

Маленький пан удивился и опасливо поглядел на Митю.  
The little Pole was surprised and looked warily at Mitya.
> Two perfectives, two beats: «удивился» and «поглядел» are perfectives chaining single completed acts: he was surprised, then glanced. «опасливо» ('warily') colours the look. The «-ся» of «удивился» marks the change-of-state middle ('became surprised').

Тотчас же, однако, согласился, но с непременным условием, чтобы шел с ним и пан Врублевский.  
He agreed at once, however, but on the strict condition that Pan Wróblewski come with him.
> «чтобы» + past-form for a stipulation: «чтобы шел» uses «чтобы» + a past-tense verb to express a willed condition: the demand 'that [Wróblewski] come with him'. After «чтобы» Russian requires this irrealis past form, not an infinitive or present.

— Телохранитель-то? Пусть и он, и его надо! Его даже непременно! — воскликнул Митя. — Марш, панове!  
"Your bodyguard? Let him come too, we need him! We even need him absolutely!" cried Mitya. "March, panowie!"
> Emphatic clitic «-то»: «Телохранитель-то?» ('The bodyguard, eh?') uses the topic-marking clitic «-то», which singles out a known referent for emphasis — distinct from the indefinite «-то» of «кто-то». Mitya picks up and underscores 'the bodyguard'.
> Third-person imperative «пусть»: «Пусть и он [идёт]» — 'let him too [come]'. «пусть» + a present/future verb forms the third-person imperative, a wish or permission directed at someone not addressed: 'let him come along'.

— Куда это вы? — тревожно спросила Грушенька.  
"Where are you off to?" Grushenka asked anxiously.
> Verbless «Куда это вы?»: «Куда это вы?» drops the verb of motion entirely — 'Where (are) you (off to)?'. «куда» asks direction (motion-toward), and the little «это» adds anxious immediacy to Grushenka's question.

— В один миг вернемся, — ответил Митя.  
"We'll be back in a moment," Mitya answered.
> Perfective future «вернемся»: «вернемся» is the perfective simple future of «вернуться» ('we'll come back'), a single completed return promised for 'in a flash' («в один миг»). The «-ся» is part of the lexical verb 'to return'.

Какая-то смелость, какая-то неожиданная бодрость засверкала в лице его; совсем не с тем лицом вошел он час назад в эту комнату.  
A kind of boldness, a kind of unexpected vigor, was flashing in his face; it was not at all with that face that he had entered this room an hour before.
> «засверкать»; «бодрость»: «засверкать» (inceptive «за-», 'to begin flashing/sparkling') makes the boldness suddenly blaze up in his face. «бодрость» is 'vigour, briskness, good cheer' — the surge of resolve that transforms Mitya.
> Emphatic inversion: «не с тем лицом»: The instrumental phrase «не с тем лицом» ('not with that face') is fronted before subject and verb for rhetorical weight, and «вошел он» inverts to verb–subject. The marked order throws stress onto the contrast between the man who entered an hour ago and the one now.

Он провел панов в комнатку направо, не в ту, в большую, в которой собирался хор девок и накрывался стол, а в спальную, в которой помещались сундуки, укладки и две большие кровати с ситцевыми подушками горой на каждой.  
He led the Poles into a little room to the right — not into the big one where the chorus of girls was gathering and the table was being laid, but into a bedroom in which stood trunks, packing cases, and two large beds, each piled high with a mound of cotton-print pillows.
> Contrastive «не ... а ...»: The correction is built on «не X, а Y» — 'not into that one ... but into a bedroom'. «а» (not «но») is the contrastive conjunction that replaces a rejected alternative; the whole frame clarifies which room by ruling out another.
> «укладки», «ситцевый»: «укладка» is a chest or packing-box (from «укладывать», to pack away); «ситцевый» means made of «ситец», cheap printed cotton (chintz). The mounded chintz pillows and trunks evoke a provincial inn's homely bedroom.
> Relative «который» + «-ся» passive: «в которой» ('in which') is the relative «который» in the prepositional, agreeing with «комнату» in gender/number but taking the case its own clause needs. «накрывался стол» is an imperfective «-ся» passive — 'the table was being laid'.

Тут на маленьком тесовом столике в самом углу горела свечка.  
Here, on a little deal table in the very corner, a candle was burning.
> «тесовый»; «свечка»: «тесовый» means made of «тёс», rough sawn deal-boards — a plain wooden table. «свечка» is the diminutive of «свеча» (candle), a humble little candle. The bare, modest detail sets the intimate, dim stage for Mitya's secret offer.

Пан и Митя расположились у этого столика друг против друга, а огромный пан Врублевский сбоку их, заложив руки за спину.  
The Pole and Mitya settled themselves at this little table facing each other, while the enormous Pan Wróblewski stood to one side of them, his hands clasped behind his back.
> «друг против друга» — facing each other: «друг против друга» ('opposite one another') is the reciprocal construction: the frozen «друг ... друга» frames mutual relation, here with «против» + genitive — they sit face to face.
> Perfective gerund of posture: «заложив руки за спину» ('having clasped his hands behind his back') is a perfective gerund describing the completed posture Wróblewski holds. «за спину» — «за» + accusative — marks motion to behind the back.

Паны смотрели строго, но с видимым любопытством.  
The Poles looked stern, but with evident curiosity.
> «с» + instrumental of attitude: «с видимым любопытством» ('with evident curiosity') is «с» + instrumental of accompanying manner/feeling. «видимым» (from «видимый», 'visible') is a present passive participle in -мый used as an adjective — a markedly bookish form.

— Чем моген служиць пану? — пролепетал маленький пан.  
"Czym mogę służyć panu? (How can I be of service to you?)" the little Pole lisped.
> Polish 'How may I serve you?': «Чем моген служиць пану?» = Polish 'Czym mogę służyć panu?' (How can I serve you?). The instrumental «чем» (by what means) and the dative «пану» (to whom) are shared by Polish and Russian; «пролепетал» ('lisped, babbled') mocks the Pole's manner.

— А вот чем, пане, я много говорить не буду: вот тебе деньги, — он вытащил свои кредитки, — хочешь три тысячи, бери и уезжай куда знаешь.  
"Here's how, panie, I won't say much: here's money for you," he pulled out his banknotes, "if you want three thousand, take it and clear off wherever you please."
> «кредитки» — banknotes: «кредитка» is a colloquial term for a «кредитный билет», a state credit-note, i.e. paper money. Mitya pulls out the very banknotes whose origin will haunt the rest of the novel.
> Imperative «уезжай» + free relative: «уезжай» is the «ты»-imperative of the imperfective «уезжать» (to leave, drive off). «куда знаешь» ('wherever you know/like') is a free relative of place — 'clear off anywhere you please'.

Пан смотрел пытливо, во все глаза, так и впился взглядом в лицо Мити.  
The Pole looked searchingly, with all his eyes, fairly fastening his gaze on Mitya's face.
> «впиться взглядом» — to fasten one's gaze: «впиться» (perfective, '-ся') is to dig/bore in, sink into; «впиться взглядом в лицо» means to fasten one's stare onto a face, drink it in. «взглядом» is an instrumental of means. «во все глаза» = 'with all one's eyes', staring intently.
> «пытливо» — searchingly: «пытливо» (from «пытливый», inquisitive, probing) means with a keen, searching curiosity. The Pole scans Mitya's face for the catch behind the offer.

— Тржи тысенцы, пане? — Он переглянулся с Врублевским.  
"Trzy tysiące, panie?" He exchanged a glance with Wróblewski.
> Polish 'three thousand?': «Тржи тысенцы» = Polish 'trzy tysiące' (three thousand). The Pole repeats Mitya's sum in disbelieving Polish before glancing at his confederate — the bargaining has begun.
> Reciprocal «-ся» + «с» + instrumental: «переглянулся» ('exchanged a glance', «пере-» + «-ся») is reciprocal — two parties glancing at each other; «с Врублевским» («с» + instrumental) names the partner. The «-ся» here carries 'with each other', not 'oneself'.

— Тржи, панове, тржи! Слушай, пане, вижу, что ты человек разумный. Бери три тысячи и убирайся ко всем чертям, да и Врублевского с собой захвати — слышишь это? Но сейчас же, сию же минуту, и это навеки, понимаешь, пане, навеки вот в эту самую дверь и выйдешь. У тебя что там: пальто, шуба? Я тебе вынесу. Сию же секунду тройку тебе заложат и — до видзенья, пане! А?  
"Three, panowie, three! Listen, panie, I see you're a sensible man. Take three thousand and go to the devil, and take Wróblewski with you — do you hear me? But right now, this very minute, and it's forever, do you understand, panie, forever, you'll go out through this very door. What have you got there: an overcoat, a fur coat? I'll bring it out to you. They'll harness the troika for you this very second and — do widzenia, panie! Well?"
> «убираться ко всем чертям»: «убираться» (imperfective, '-ся') is the rude 'clear off, get out'; «ко всем чертям» = 'to all the devils', i.e. 'to hell'. Mitya's bargaining is contemptuous even as he offers a fortune. «захвати» ('grab, take along') is a clipped perfective imperative.
> Polish 'goodbye': «до видзенья» = Polish 'do widzenia' (goodbye, lit. 'until [our] seeing again'). Mitya peppers his ultimatum with Polish, half mocking, half cajoling.
> Indefinite-personal plural «заложат»: «заложат» ('they'll harness') is a third-plural with no named subject — the indefinite-personal construction, 'someone / they will harness for you'. «тебе» is the dative of benefit, 'for you'.

Митя уверенно ждал ответа.  
Mitya waited confidently for the answer.
> «ждать» + genitive object: «ждать» governs the genitive of the awaited thing: «ждал ответа» ('waited for an answer'). Verbs of waiting, seeking, and desiring take a genitive object, especially when it is abstract or non-specific.

Он не сомневался.  
He had no doubts.
> Imperfective «-ся» of a mental state: «сомневаться» (imperfective, '-ся', 'to doubt') exists only in the «-ся» form. The negated imperfective «не сомневался» states an ongoing state of mind — 'he had no doubts', he was not doubting.

Нечто чрезвычайно решительное мелькнуло в лице пана.  
Something extraordinarily resolute flickered across the Pole's face.
> «нечто» — 'something' (bookish): «нечто» is the literary, indeclinable 'something' (as opposed to colloquial «что-то»), taking neuter agreement: «нечто ... решительное». «чрезвычайно» = 'extraordinarily'. The elevated «нечто» suits the narrator's grave register at this pivot.
> Perfective «мелькнуть» — a single flicker: «мелькнуло» (perfective, semelfactive «-ну-») names one instantaneous flash — 'flickered across'. The «-ну-» suffix marks a single, momentary act, against any imperfective sense of repeated flickering.

— А ру́бли, пане?  
"And the roubles, panie?"
> Topic-shifting «а» in an elliptical question: «А ру́бли, пане?» — 'And the roubles, panie?' — uses «а» to shift the topic and a verbless ellipsis to pose the sly question: the Pole, far from refusing, is already haggling over the currency. The whole moral turn of the scene hangs on this little 'and'.

— Рубли-то вот как, пане: пятьсот рублей сию минуту тебе на извозчика и в задаток, а две тысячи пятьсот завтра в городе — честью клянусь, будут, достану из-под земли! — крикнул Митя.  
"Here is how the rubles stand, sir: five hundred rubles this very minute, into your hand, for the cab and as a deposit, and the other two thousand five hundred tomorrow, in town — on my honor I swear it, they'll be there, I'll dig them up from under the ground!" Mitya cried.
> The topic-marking «-то»: The clitic «-то» here is not the indefinite suffix but the emphatic topic-marker, singling out «рубли» as the very thing in question: 'as for the rubles…'. It lends Mitya's opening a colloquial, button-holing urgency.
> «пане» — addressing a Polish gentleman: «пан» is the Polish title 'sir, gentleman, lord'; «пане» is its vocative ('sir!'). Dostoevsky keeps the Polish form to mark the two Poles as comic outsiders, and Mitya mimics it back at them.
> «сию минуту» — 'this very minute': A fixed phrase 'at once, immediately', built on the archaic demonstrative «сей» ('this') in the accusative «сию». «сей» is bookish-elevated, but survives in frozen idioms like this and «сего числа».
> «достать из-под земли» — to get hold of by any means: Literally 'I'll get it from under the ground', an idiom of desperate resolve to find money or a thing no matter what. The perfective «достану» is a simple future ('I will get'), conjugated like a present.

Поляки переглянулись опять.  
The Poles exchanged glances once more.
> Reciprocal «-ся»: exchanged glances: «переглянуться» is a reciprocal verb in «-ся»: the Poles glance at each other. The «-ся» here means 'one another', not a true reflexive, and the prefix «пере-» gives the quick mutual exchange.

Лицо пана стало изменяться к худшему.  
The gentleman's face began to change for the worse.
> «стало» + infinitive — began to change: «стать» plus an imperfective infinitive («изменяться») means 'to begin to', framing the face's change as a process now under way. «к худшему» is the dative of the comparative «худший» in the set phrase 'for the worse'.

— Семьсот, семьсот, а не пятьсот, сейчас, сию минуту в руки! — надбавил Митя, почувствовав нечто нехорошее. — Чего ты, пан? Не веришь? Не все же три тысячи дать тебе сразу. Я дам, а ты и воротишься к ней завтра же… Да теперь и нет у меня всех трех тысяч, у меня в городе дома лежат, — лепетал Митя, труся и падая духом с каждым своим словом, — ей-богу, лежат, спрятаны…  
"Seven hundred, seven hundred, not five hundred, right now, this very minute, into your hands!" Mitya raised the offer, sensing something amiss. "What's wrong, sir? Don't you believe me? I can't very well hand you all three thousand at once. I'll give it, and you'll be back at her side by tomorrow… The thing is, I haven't got all three thousand on me just now — it's lying back in town, at my place," Mitya babbled, growing more cowed and losing heart with every word he spoke, "by God, it's lying there, hidden away…"
> Past gerund «почувствовав» — having sensed: «почувствовав» is a perfective past adverbial participle (деепричастие) in «-в»: 'having sensed something amiss', a completed action just prior to «надбавил». It shares Mitya's subject and compresses a whole clause into one word — a hallmark of Dostoevsky's narration.
> The particle «же» and genitive-flavored negation: «же» here insists and reasons with the listener ('I can't very well…'). The whole turn is an impersonal infinitive of inability ('[one can]not give all three thousand at once'), the kind of subjectless construction Russian reaches for constantly.
> Genitive of negation with «нет»: «нет» ('there is not') forces its subject into the genitive: «всех трёх тысяч» (gen.) rather than nominative. This is the obligatory genitive of an absent thing — Mitya doesn't have the three thousand on him.
> «лепетать» — to babble: «лепетать» is to prattle or babble like a child or a flustered man, imperfective and durative — Mitya is helplessly running on. The imperfective past paints the babbling as ongoing background to the dialogue.
> Twinned present gerunds «труся и падая»: Two imperfective present gerunds in «-я» express simultaneous attendant states: 'growing cowed and losing heart' as he speaks. «падая духом» is the idiom 'losing one's spirit/heart'.
> «ей-богу» — 'by God': A worn-down oath, originally 'to God', used to swear sincerity in colloquial speech. It keeps the old dative «богу» and is exactly the kind of folksy asseveration that floods Mitya's pleading.

В один миг чувство необыкновенного собственного достоинства засияло в лице маленького пана:  
In an instant a feeling of extraordinary self-importance lit up the little gentleman's face:
> Word order: fronted adverbial: The sentence opens with the time-phrase «В один миг» ('in an instant') as topic, holding the new information — the self-importance lighting up his face — for the end. This topic-first, comment-last weighting is the engine of the line's rhythm.
> Perfective «засияло» — lit up: The prefix «за-» on «сиять» marks the inceptive perfective: not 'shone' but 'began to shine / lit up', a single completed flaring. It moves the narrative forward against the imperfective background.
> «собственное достоинство» — self-worth, dignity: 'Self-esteem, one's own dignity'. Dostoevsky pairs the Pole's «необыкновенное собственное достоинство» with his shabby reality for sharp comic irony — the small man swelling with self-regard.

— Чи не потшебуешь еще чего? — спросил он иронически. — Пфе! А пфе! (стыд, срам!) — И он плюнул.  
"Will you be wanting anything more?" he asked ironically. "Pfui! Pfui to you! (shame, disgrace!)" — And he spat.
> Polish in Cyrillic dress: The Pole's line is Polish ('Czy nie potrzebujesz jeszcze czego?' — 'Don't you need anything more?') spelled phonetically in Cyrillic, and is left unglossed. The parenthetical «(стыд, срам!)» that follows is Dostoevsky's in-text gloss of the disgust interjection «Пфе! А пфе!» ('shame, disgrace!'), not of the Polish question. The macaronic effect mocks the gentleman's pretension.
> «стыд» and «срам» — shame and disgrace: A near-synonymous doublet: «стыд» is shame, «срам» a more visceral disgrace or scandal. The pairing intensifies, a common expressive device.

Плюнул и пан Врублевский.  
Pan Wróblewski spat as well.
> Verb-first inversion for symmetry: The verb «плюнул» ('spat') leads, the subject «пан Врублевский» follows, echoing the first Pole's spit in the previous line. Russian's free word order lets the repeated action sit up front, binding the two spits together.

— Это ты оттого плюешься, пане, — проговорил Митя как отчаянный, поняв, что всё кончилось, — оттого, что от Грушеньки думаешь больше тяпнуть. Каплуны вы оба, вот что!  
"The reason you're spitting, sir," said Mitya like a man in despair, having grasped that it was all over, "is that you think you can wring more out of Grushenka. Capons, the pair of you, that's what!"
> Past gerund «поняв» — having grasped: «поняв» is a perfective past gerund ('having understood'), a prior completed act framing Mitya's despair. «кончилось» is the reflexive «-ся» of intransitive completion: 'it [all] came to an end' by itself.
> «тяпнуть» — to grab/snatch (slangy): A coarse colloquial perfective, 'to snatch, grab a chunk of'. Mitya accuses the Poles of holding out to «тяпнуть» more money from Grushenka — the low register marks his contempt.
> «каплун» — a capon: A «каплун» is a castrated, fattened rooster; as an insult it brands the two Poles as plump, emasculated, gelded creatures. The fronted predicate «Каплуны вы оба» ('Capons, the pair of you') throws the slur to the front for full scorn.

— Естем до живего доткнентным! (Я оскорблен до последней степени) — раскраснелся вдруг маленький пан как рак и живо, в страшном негодовании, как бы не желая больше ничего слушать, вышел из комнаты.  
"I am cut to the quick! (I am insulted to the last degree)" — the little gentleman suddenly flushed red as a crab and briskly, in dreadful indignation, as though refusing to hear another word, walked out of the room.
> Polish outburst, glossed: Phonetic Polish ('Jestem do żywego dotknięty' — 'I am cut to the quick'), again glossed by Dostoevsky in parentheses «(Я оскорблен до последней степени)». The Pole reaches for his grandest indignation in his native tongue.
> «покраснеть как рак» — red as a crab: A stock simile: 'to go red as a boiled crayfish/crab' (the creature turns scarlet when cooked). It paints the little Pole's furious flush vividly and comically.
> «как бы» + present gerund, with negative concord: «как бы» ('as though') softens the gerund «не желая» into a seeming motive. Note the negative concord: «не… ничего» — both the negated participle and «ничего» carry negation, one meaning ('not wishing to hear anything').
> Prefixed motion verb «выйти»: «вышел» (from «выйти») is the perfective of «выходить», 'to go out, exit'. The prefix «вы-» ('out') both gives the direction and makes it a clean aspect pair, a single completed departure.

За ним, раскачиваясь, последовал и Врублевский, а за ними уж и Митя, сконфуженный и опешенный.  
Wróblewski followed after him, swaying, and after the two of them came Mitya, abashed and bewildered.
> Present gerund «раскачиваясь» — swaying: An imperfective present gerund in «-ясь» (reflexive «-ся» after a vowel): Wróblewski follows 'while swaying'. The «-ся» here is the middle/intransitive 'rocking oneself'.
> Chained inversion and the procession: Each clause fronts its 'after X' phrase («За ним», «за ними»), staging a little procession out of the room. The contrastive «а» shifts to the next mover (Mitya), and «и» before each name means 'also'.
> «сконфуженный», «опешенный» — abashed, dumbfounded: Two past passive participles used as adjectives: «сконфуженный» 'embarrassed, abashed' and «опешенный» 'taken aback, stunned'. The pairing captures Mitya's deflation as he trails the Poles out.

Он боялся Грушеньки, он предчувствовал, что пан сейчас раскричится.  
He was afraid of Grushenka; he had a foreboding that the gentleman would start shouting any moment.
> «бояться» + genitive of the feared thing: «бояться» ('to fear') exists only in the «-ся» form and governs the genitive: «Грушеньки» (gen.). One fears 'of' someone in Russian — the object of dread stands in the genitive.
> Inceptive perfective «раскричится»: «раскричаться» ('to burst out shouting') takes «рас-» + «-ся» for an explosive inceptive perfective; conjugated, it is a simple future ('will start shouting'). «сейчас» here means 'any moment now'.

Так и случилось.  
And so it happened.
> Emphatic «так и» — 'and so it did': «так и» before a verb confirms that something happened exactly as expected: 'and so it happened'. «случилось» is the reflexive «-ся» of «случиться», 'to occur' — an event that befalls of itself.

Пан вошел в залу и театрально встал пред Грушенькой.  
The gentleman walked into the parlor and struck a theatrical pose before Grushenka.
> Archaic «пред» + instrumental: «пред» is the bookish, shortened form of «перед» ('before, in front of'), governing the instrumental «Грушенькой». The clipped «пред» lends a touch of elevated, theatrical solemnity — fitting his pose.

— Пани Агриппина, естем до живего доткнентным! — воскликнул было он, но Грушенька как бы вдруг потеряла всякое терпение, точно тронули ее по самому больному месту.  
"Pani Agrippina, I am cut to the quick!" he started to exclaim, but Grushenka all at once seemed to lose every shred of patience, as though he had touched her on her sorest spot.
> The particle «было» — an interrupted action: «было» after a perfective past marks an action begun but cut short or undone: 'he started to exclaim [but…]'. Here Grushenka's outburst breaks across his cry — the perfect signal of a thwarted move.
> «как бы» softening the verb: «как бы» ('as if, seemingly') hedges the narrator's claim about Grushenka's inner state. «потеряла» is perfective ('lost'), and «всякое терпение» means 'every bit of patience'.

— По-русски, говори по-русски, чтобы ни одного слова польского не было! — закричала она на него. — Говорил же прежде по-русски, неужели забыл в пять лет! — Она вся покраснела от гнева.  
"In Russian, speak in Russian, and not one Polish word!" she shouted at him. "You used to speak Russian before — don't tell me you've forgotten it in five years!" — She had gone scarlet all over with anger.
> «чтобы» + past, with «ни… не» concord: «чтобы» introduces a willed result and takes the past-form irrealis «не было». «ни одного слова… не было» is negative concord ('not a single Polish word'), the genitive «слова» demanded by the negated existential.
> Particle «же» and the imperfective of habit: «же» insists, appealing to fact ('you DID speak Russian before'). The imperfective «говорил» states a former habitual fact — he used to speak Russian — against which his present Polish posturing is absurd.
> «неужели» — incredulous 'surely not?': An emphatic interrogative particle of disbelief: 'don't tell me…, surely you haven't…'. Grushenka throws it at the Pole's claimed amnesia — 'surely you haven't forgotten in five years!'.

— Пани Агриппина…  
"Pani Agrippina…"

— Я Аграфена, я Грушенька, говори по-русски, или слушать не хочу! — Пан запыхтел от гонора и, ломая русскую речь, быстро и напыщенно произнес:  
"I'm Agrafena, I'm Grushenka, speak Russian or I won't listen!" — The gentleman puffed up with wounded pride and, mangling his Russian, pronounced rapidly and pompously:
> «гонор» — touchy pride: «гонор» (a Polish borrowing, honor) is swaggering, prickly self-importance — exactly the Polish szlachta vanity Dostoevsky satirizes. «запыхтел» ('began puffing/wheezing') makes the wounded pride physical and ridiculous.
> Present gerund «ломая» — mangling: «ломая русскую речь» ('breaking/mangling the Russian tongue') is an imperfective present gerund of attendant manner: he pronounces 'while mangling' his Russian. The image sets up the broken speech that follows.

— Пани Аграфена, я пшиехал забыть старое и простить его, забыть, что было допрежь сегодня…  
"Pani Agrafena, I have come to forget the old grievances and to forgive them, to forget what happened before today…"
> Polonized «приехал»: His 'broken Russian' is really Russian bent toward Polish phonetics: «пшиехал» for «приехал» ('I have arrived/come'), Polish 'przyjechał'. Dostoevsky spells the accent into the page.
> «допрежь» — archaic/dialectal 'before': «допрежь» (also «допреж») is an old folk-archaic 'before, prior to', far more rustic than «прежде». In the Pole's mangled speech it adds an incongruous note of antique provincial Russian.

— Как простить? Это меня-то ты приехал простить? — перебила Грушенька и вскочила с места.  
"Forgive? You've come to forgive me, of all things?" Grushenka cut in and sprang up from her place.
> Emphatic «-то» on the pronoun: «меня-то» throws the stress onto the object pronoun: 'me, of all people, you've come to forgive?'. This «-то» clitic singles out and challenges the topic — Grushenka's outraged incredulity made grammatical.
> Perfective «вскочить» — sprang up: «вскочила» (perfective, prefix «вс-» 'up') is a single sharp completed leap: she springs up from her seat. The perfective makes it one abrupt narrative jolt.

— Так есть, пани (точно так, пани), я не малодушны, я великодушны. Но я былем здзивёны (был удивлен), когда видел твоих любовников. Пан Митя в том покое давал мне тржи тысёнцы, чтоб я отбыл. Я плюнул пану в физию.  
"Just so, pani (precisely so, pani), I am not faint-hearted, I am magnanimous. But I was astonished (I was astounded) when I saw your lovers. Pan Mitya in that other room offered me three thousand to clear off. I spat in the gentleman's face."
> Polish 'tak jest' in disguise: Glossed by Dostoevsky as «(точно так, пани)» — 'just so'. «Так есть» calques Polish 'Tak jest', odd in Russian (which would drop the copula), and marks his speech as foreign.
> Short adjectives «малодушны / великодушны»: He reaches for the bookish short-form predicate adjectives «малодушен / великодушен» ('faint-hearted / magnanimous') but botches the gender, using plural-looking «-ы» forms. The short form is the elevated predicative he is aiming at; the error marks his mangled Russian.
> Polish numerals: 'trzy tysiące': «тржи тысёнцы» is Polish 'trzy tysiące' (three thousand) in Cyrillic — he can't even keep the sum in Russian. The macaronic spelling continues the comedy of his self-betraying tongue.
> «физия» — 'mug' (slangy face): «физия» (from «физиономия») is a low, contemptuous word for 'face, mug'. 'I spat in the gentleman's mug' — the coarse term deflates his own grand posturing.

— Как? Он тебе деньги за меня давал? — истерически вскричала Грушенька. — Правда, Митя? Да как ты смел! Разве я продажная?  
"What? He offered you money for me?" Grushenka shrieked hysterically. "Is it true, Mitya? How dared you! Am I something to be sold?"
> «да» as an emotive opener and «как смел!»: Sentence-initial «да» here is not 'yes' but an emphatic intensifier of indignation ('Why, how dared you!'). «смел» is the past of «сметь» 'to dare' — 'how did you dare!'.
> «продажная» and the particle «разве»: «разве» casts an indignant rhetorical question ('Am I really…?'). «продажная» ('for sale, venal') as a feminine adjective-noun implies 'a woman to be bought' — Grushenka recoils at being priced like a thing.

— Пане, пане, — возопил Митя, — она чиста и сияет, и никогда я не был ее любовником! Это ты соврал…  
"Sir, sir," Mitya wailed, "she is pure and radiant, and I have never been her lover! That's a lie you've told…"
> «возопить» — to cry out (elevated): «возопить» is a bookish, almost Church-Slavonic-tinged perfective 'to cry aloud, wail out'. Against the brawling scene it lends Mitya's defense of Grushenka a momentary note of pathos.
> Short adjective «чиста» vs. finite «сияет»: «чиста» is the short-form predicate adjective ('she is pure'), more absolute and bookish than the long form. It is yoked to the present-tense «сияет» ('she shines'), pairing a state with an action.
> Negation + predicate instrumental «любовником»: After «быть» in the past, the predicate noun stands in the instrumental: «любовником» ('I was never her lover'). Note also the concord «никогда… не» — both negative words, one negation.

— Как смеешь ты меня пред ним защищать, — вопила Грушенька, — не из добродетели я чиста была и не потому, что Кузьмы боялась, а чтобы пред ним гордой быть и чтобы право иметь ему подлеца сказать, когда встречу. Да неужто ж он с тебя денег не взял?  
"How dare you defend me in front of him," Grushenka cried out, "it wasn't out of virtue that I stayed pure, and not because I was afraid of Kuzma, but so that I could stand proud before him and have the right to call him a scoundrel when I met him. And do you mean to say he really didn't take money from you?"
> «пред» + instrumental again: Archaic «пред» governs the instrumental «ним» ('before him'). The bookish preposition gives Grushenka's reproach a heightened, almost stagey weight as she turns on Mitya.
> «не… а» + purpose «чтобы»: The contrastive «не X… а Y» ('not out of X but in order to Y') frames Grushenka's real motive. «чтобы… гордой быть» takes the purpose-«чтобы» with predicate instrumental «гордой» — 'so as to be proud before him'.
> «подлец» — scoundrel, the right to name it: «подлец» is a strong word for a base, contemptible man. Grushenka guarded her pride 'to have the right to call him a scoundrel' — the insult is the whole point of her long self-torment.
> Stacked particles «неужто ж» + genitive of negation: «неужто» (folksier «неужели») plus «ж» (=«же») piles up incredulous emphasis. The negated «не взял» pulls its object into the genitive «денег» ('didn't take [any] money'), the genitive of negation.

— Да брал же, брал! — воскликнул Митя, — да только все три тысячи разом захотел, а я всего семьсот задатку давал.  
"He took it, all right, he took it!" Mitya exclaimed, "only he wanted the whole three thousand at once, and all I was offering was seven hundred as a deposit."
> «да… же» and the repeated imperfective: «да» affirms emphatically, «же» insists, and the doubled imperfective «брал… брал» ('he took, all right, he took') stresses the fact of the taking. The imperfective states it as a fact, not a single event.
> Partitive genitive «задатку»: «задатку» is the old partitive genitive in «-у» ('seven hundred by way of deposit'), a flavor of 'some deposit'. The imperfective «давал» frames it as an attempt — what he 'was offering', not what was completed.

— Ну и понятно: прослышал, что у меня деньги есть, а потому и приехал венчаться!  
"Well, that explains it: he caught wind that I have money, and that's why he came to marry me!"
> «прослышать» — to catch wind of: «прослышать» (perfective) is 'to get wind of, hear tell of' — knowledge gathered indirectly, by rumor. Grushenka's bitter inference: he 'caught wind' she had money and came courting for it.
> Possession with «у меня… есть»: Russian expresses 'to have' as «у + genitive… есть»: «у меня деньги есть» ('I have money', lit. 'by me there is money'). The thing possessed is the grammatical subject in the nominative.

— Пани Агриппина, — закричал пан, — я рыцарь, я шляхтич, а не лайдак! Я пшибыл взять тебя в супругу, а вижу нову пани, не ту, что прежде, а упарту и без встыду (своенравную и бесстыдную).  
"Pani Agrippina," the gentleman shouted, "I am a knight, I am a nobleman, not some scoundrel! I came to take you for my wife, but I find a new pani, not the one of before, but a willful and shameless one (headstrong and brazen)."
> «лайдак» — Polish for 'scoundrel': «лайдак» (Polish 'łajdak', rascal/blackguard) is another Polonism in his speech: 'I am a noble, not a łajdak'. The borrowed insult keeps coloring his Russian Polish.
> Polonized scolding, glossed: «упарту» (Polish 'uparta', stubborn) and «без встыду» (Polish 'wstyd', shame) are glossed in the text as «(своенравную и бесстыдную)» — 'headstrong and brazen'. He damns the new Grushenka in half-Polish.
> Correlative «ту, что» and contrastive «а»: «не ту, что прежде» uses the demonstrative «ту» (acc. of «та») as a correlative with the relative «что»: 'not the one [that she was] before'. The contrastive «а» then sets the 'new' against the 'old' pani.

— А и убирайся откуда приехал! Велю тебя сейчас прогнать, и прогонят! — крикнула в исступлении Грушенька. — Дура, дура была я, что пять лет себя мучила! Да и не за него себя мучила вовсе, я со злобы себя мучила! Да и не он это вовсе! Разве он был такой? Это отец его какой-то! Это где ты парик-то себе заказал? Тот был сокол, а это селезень. Тот смеялся и мне песни пел… А я-то, я-то пять лет слезами заливалась, проклятая я дура, низкая я, бесстыжая!  
"Be off, then, back to wherever you came from! I'll have you driven out this instant, and out you'll go!" Grushenka cried in a frenzy. "A fool, a fool I was, to torment myself five years over this! And it wasn't even over him that I tormented myself — I tormented myself out of spite! And this isn't even him at all! Was he ever like this? This is some father of his! Where did you order yourself that wig? The one before was a falcon, and this is a drake. The one before laughed, and sang me songs… And I — I went and drowned myself in tears for five years, cursed fool that I am, low and shameless!"
> Reflexive imperative «убирайся»: «убирайся» is the imperative of the «-ся» verb «убираться» ('clear off, be gone'), curt and dismissive. «откуда приехал» ('whence you came') tacks on the relative-adverb of place.
> Impersonal third-plural 'they'll drive you out': «прогонят» is a subjectless third-person plural ('they will drive [you] out'), Russian's standard way of saying 'you'll be driven out' without naming an agent. «Велю… прогнать» = 'I'll order you driven out'.
> Fronted predicate for self-reproach: «Дура… была я» throws the predicate noun «дура» ('fool', fem.) to the front, ahead of «была я» — the emphatic, lamenting word order of self-accusation. The repetition doubles the bitterness.
> Reflexive pronoun «себя» — tormented myself: «себя» is the full reflexive object pronoun ('myself'), distinct from the verbal «-ся»: she 'tormented herself' for five years. «пять лет» is the accusative of duration.
> «сокол» vs «селезень» — falcon vs drake: She contrasts memory and reality: the man she loved was a «сокол» (falcon — a folk endearment for a dashing young man), this one a mere «селезень» (a waddling drake). The bird imagery is pure Russian folk-song idiom.
> Emphatic «-то» and «заливаться слезами»: The doubled «я-то» drips with self-pity ('and I, fool that I was…'). «слезами заливалась» ('drowned myself in tears') puts the means in the instrumental «слезами» — a stock expressive idiom for weeping floods.
> Piled-up self-curses: «проклятая дура» ('cursed fool'), «низкая» ('base, low'), «бесстыжая» ('shameless' — the folk form of «бесстыдная») stack into a torrent of self-loathing. The colloquial «бесстыжая» is harsher and earthier than the bookish form.

Она упала на свое кресло и закрыла лицо ладонями.  
She sank into her armchair and buried her face in her hands.
> Instrumental of means «ладонями»: «ладонями» ('with her palms', instr. pl.) is the instrumental of the instrument: she covered her face by means of her hands. «упала на свое кресло» uses reflexive «свое» — her own armchair.

В эту минуту вдруг раздался в соседней комнате слева хор собравшихся наконец мокринских девок — залихватская плясовая песня.  
At that very moment, in the next room to the left, the chorus of Mokroye girls — gathered together at last — suddenly struck up a rollicking dance song.
> Past active participle «собравшихся»: «собравшихся» is a past active participle (gen. pl.) of «собраться» ('having gathered'), modifying «девок» — 'the girls who had at last gathered'. It packs a whole который-clause into one declined word, very literary.
> «залихватский» — dashing, rollicking: «залихватский» is an expressive colloquial adjective: 'devil-may-care, rollicking, full of swagger'. It catches the wild abandon of the girls' striking-up dance tune.

— То есть со́дом! — взревел вдруг пан Врублевский. — Хозяин, прогони бесстыжих!  
"This is sheer bedlam!" Pan Wróblewski bellowed all at once. "Landlord, drive these shameless creatures out!"
> «содом» — bedlam, uproar: From the biblical Sodom, «содом» means a scene of riotous disorder, chaos, an unholy din. The marked stress «со́дом» in the text helps the reader hear his outraged, foreign-tinged shout.
> Imperative «прогони» + animate accusative: «прогони» is the perfective imperative of «прогнать» ('drive out!'). «бесстыжих» ('the shameless ones', acc.=gen. pl.) shows animate accusative — the object borrows the genitive form because these are people.

Хозяин, который давно уже с любопытством заглядывал в дверь, слыша крик и чуя, что гости перессорились, тотчас явился в комнату.  
The landlord, who had long been peering curiously through the door, hearing the shouting and sensing that his guests had fallen out, at once stepped into the room.
> Relative «который» + imperfective of duration: «который» opens a relative clause agreeing with «хозяин» (masc.) but in its own nominative as the clause's subject. The imperfective «заглядывал» with «давно уже» ('had long been peering') frames a drawn-out ongoing background action.
> Paired present gerunds «слыша… чуя»: Two imperfective present gerunds ('hearing… and sensing') give the landlord's simultaneous awareness as he steps in. «перессорились» («пере-…-ся») is the reciprocal-perfective 'had fallen out with one another'.

— Ты чего кричишь, глотку рвешь? — обратился он к Врублевскому с какою-то непонятною даже невежливостью.  
"What are you bawling about, splitting your throat like that?" he addressed Wróblewski with a rudeness that was somehow even baffling.
> «рвать глотку» — to bawl one's lungs out: A coarse idiom, lit. 'to tear one's throat', i.e. to shout oneself hoarse. The landlord's crude «Ты чего кричишь, глотку рвешь?» drops all deference toward the Pole.
> Archaic instrumental ending «-ою»: «какою-то… непонятною… невежливостью» shows the old, bookish feminine instrumental in «-ою/-ею» (modern «-ой/-ей»). The longer ending is a 19th-century literary flavor common throughout Dostoevsky.

— Скотина! — заорал было пан Врублевский.  
"You brute!" Pan Wróblewski started to roar.
> «скотина» — beast, brute: «скотина» literally means 'livestock, cattle'; hurled at a person it means 'brute, swine'. It is a grade coarser than a mere insult — the Pole flings it at the landlord.
> «было» — a roar cut short: Again «было» after the perfective «заорал» ('started to roar') signals an action begun but immediately interrupted — the landlord cuts straight back across him in the next line.

— Скотина? А ты в какие карты сейчас играл? Я подал тебе колоду, а ты мои спрятал! Ты в поддельные карты играл! Я тебя за поддельные карты в Сибирь могу упрятать, знаешь ты это, потому оно всё одно что бумажки поддельные… — И, подойдя к дивану, он засунул пальцы между спинкой и подушкой дивана и вытащил оттуда нераспечатанную колоду карт.  
"A brute, am I? And what kind of cards were you playing just now? I handed you a deck, and you hid it away! You were playing with marked cards! I can have you packed off to Siberia for marked cards — do you know that? — because it's all one and the same as forged banknotes…" — And, stepping over to the sofa, he thrust his fingers in between the back and the cushion of the sofa and pulled out from there an unopened deck of cards.
> Dative recipient + contrastive «а»: «тебе» is the dative of the recipient ('I handed you a deck'). The contrastive «а» ('whereas') pivots to the accusation — 'and you hid mine' — the classic «а» of opposed, paired actions.
> Past gerund «подойдя» of prefixed motion: «подойдя» is the perfective past gerund of «подойти» ('having come up to'), a prefixed motion verb with «под-» ('approach'). It takes the dative «к дивану» and stages the prior step before he thrusts in his fingers.
> Negated past passive participle «нераспечатанную»: «нераспечатанную» ('unopened, unsealed') is a past passive participle of «распечатать» with the negative «не-» fused on, declined as an adjective agreeing with «колоду» (acc. fem.) — 'a deck not [yet] broken open'.

— Вот она моя колода, не распечатана! — Он поднял ее и показал всем кругом. — Я ведь видел оттелева, как он мою колоду сунул в щель, а своей подменил — шильник ты этакой, а не пан!  
"Here it is, my deck, still sealed!" — He held it up and showed it round to everyone. "You see, I watched from over there how he stuffed my deck into the crack and swapped in his own — you're a cheat, you are, and no gentleman!"
> Particle «ведь» + dialectal «оттелева»: «ведь» appeals to shared evidence ('you see, after all'). «оттелева» is a folk-dialectal 'from over there' (standard «оттуда»), marking the landlord's earthy peasant speech.
> Reflexive possessive «своей» vs «мою»: «мою колоду» ('my deck') versus «своей [колодой] подменил» ('swapped in his own') — «свой» refers back to the Pole as subject of the clause. «подменить» governs the instrumental of the replacement.
> «шильник» — a cheat, sharper: «шильник» is an old colloquial word for a swindler, sharper, petty crook. With the dismissive «ты этакой» ('you, the likes of you') it caps the insult: 'a cheat, you are, and no gentleman'.

— А я видел, как тот пан два раза передернул, — крикнул Калганов.  
"And I saw how that gentleman palmed his cards twice," Kalganov cried out.
> «передёрнуть» — to palm a card, cheat at cards: «передёрнуть» (perfective) is the specific card-table verb for sleight-of-hand — to slip or switch a card dishonestly. Kalganov's «два раза передернул» ('palmed twice') confirms the cheating in plain sight.

— Ах как стыдно, ах как стыдно! — воскликнула Грушенька, всплеснув руками, и воистину покраснела от стыда. — Господи, экой, экой стал человек!  
"Oh, the shame of it, oh, the shame!" Grushenka exclaimed, throwing up her hands, and she truly did blush with shame. "Lord, what — what a man he's become!"
> Past gerund «всплеснув руками»: «всплеснув руками» ('having thrown up her hands') is a perfective past gerund; «руками» is the instrumental of means. It is the stock gesture of dismay, compressed into a single participial phrase.
> «воистину» — verily, truly: «воистину» is a solemn, Church-Slavonic-flavored 'truly, verily' (familiar from the Easter «Воистину воскресе!»). Dropped into the narration, it lends Grushenka's blush a note of genuine, sincere shame.
> «Господи» and folk «экой»: «Господи» is the Church-Slavonic vocative 'O Lord' used as an exclamation of dismay. «экой» (folk variant of «экий», 'what a…!') doubled drives home her astonishment: 'what a man he's become!'.

— И я это думал, — крикнул Митя.  
"That's just what I was thinking," Mitya cried.

Но не успел он это выговорить, как пан Врублевский, сконфуженный и взбешенный, обратясь ко Грушеньке и грозя ей кулаком, закричал:  
But he had no sooner got the words out than Pan Wróblewski, abashed and infuriated, turned to Grushenka and, shaking his fist at her, shouted:
> «не успел… как» — no sooner… than: The frame «не успел [инф.]… как» means 'he had no sooner done X than…', a fixed correlative construction for an action overtaken by the next. «выговорить» is the perfective 'to get the words out'.
> Past gerund «обратясь» + present gerund «грозя»: «обратясь» (perfective past gerund, 'having turned') and «грозя» (imperfective present gerund, 'shaking [his fist]') chain two attendant actions onto «закричал». «грозить» takes the dative «ей» ('threaten at her') and instrumental «кулаком' ('with his fist').

— Публична шельма! — Но не успел он и воскликнуть, как Митя бросился на него, обхватил его обеими руками, поднял на воздух и в один миг вынес его из залы в комнату направо, в которую сейчас только водил их обоих.  
"Public hussy!" — But he had no sooner managed to exclaim it than Mitya flung himself at him, seized him in both arms, lifted him into the air, and in an instant carried him out of the parlor into the room on the right, the very one into which he had just led the two of them.
> «шельма» — rogue, hussy: «шельма» (a German loan, 'scoundrel, knave') is here flung at Grushenka as 'public hussy'. The clipped «публична» (for «публичная») keeps the Pole's mangled Russian — and the slur triggers Mitya's assault.
> Perfective chain — rapid action: Four perfectives in a row («бросился», «обхватил», «поднял», «вынес») fire off as a single burst of decisive action, each moving the story one event forward. This is the perfective's narrative engine at full throttle.
> Relative «которую» + multidirectional «водил»: «в которую» is the relative pronoun in the accusative-of-motion ('into which'). «водил» is the multidirectional motion verb «водить» — used here for the there-and-back 'had just led them both', as he had taken them in and out earlier.

— Я его там на пол положил! — возвестил он, тотчас же возвратившись и задыхаясь от волнения, — дерется, каналья, небось не придет оттуда!.. — Он запер одну половинку двери и, держа настежь другую, воскликнул к маленькому пану:  
"I laid him out flat on the floor in there!" he announced, returning at once and gasping with agitation, "he's putting up a fight, the scoundrel, but he won't be coming out of there, never fear!.." — He shut one half of the door and, holding the other wide open, called out to the little gentleman:
> «возвестить» — to proclaim, announce: «возвестить» is an elevated, almost biblical 'to herald, proclaim'. Used of Mitya announcing he's 'laid him out flat', the lofty verb against the brawl is wryly comic.
> Paired gerunds: perfective + imperfective: «возвратившись» (perfective past, 'having returned') and «задыхаясь» (imperfective present, 'gasping') sit side by side — a completed action plus an ongoing state. Russian freely mixes the two gerund aspects in one breath.
> «каналья» and the particle «небось»: «каналья» (from Italian via French, 'rascal, scoundrel') is a stock period term of abuse. «небось» is a colloquial particle of confident supposition ('I daresay, never fear') — 'he won't be coming out, I'll wager'.
> «настежь» — wide open: «настежь» is the fixed adverb 'wide open' (of a door). «держа» is the present gerund 'holding'; he holds one door-leaf flung wide while addressing the Pole.

— Ясневельможный, не угодно ли туда же? Пшепрашам!  
"Your Excellency, would you care to join him in there? If you please!"
> Polish «przepraszam» — 'if you please / excuse me': «Пшепрашам» is Polish 'przepraszam' (I beg your pardon / excuse me) in Cyrillic. Mitya tosses the Pole's own language back at him as a sarcastic flourish of false politeness.

— Батюшка, Митрий Федорович, — возгласил Трифон Борисыч, — да отбери ты у них деньги-то, то, что им проиграл! Ведь всё равно что воровством с тебя взяли.  
"My dear fellow, Dmitri Fyodorovich," Trifon Borisych pronounced, "take back the money you lost to them, the money! After all, it's no different from their having robbed you of it."
> Urging imperative «да отбери» + «-то»: «да» + the imperative «отбери» ('do take back!') is an urgent exhortation; «ты» reinforces it. The «деньги-то» clitic flags 'the money' as the known, pressing topic.
> «ведь» + instrumental «воровством»: «ведь» appeals to common sense ('after all'). «воровством» is the instrumental of manner ('by way of theft') — the money was as good as 'taken from you by robbery'. «с тебя» uses «с» + genitive 'off you'.

— Я свои пятьдесят рублей не хочу отбирать, — отозвался вдруг Калганов.  
"I don't want my fifty rubles back," Kalganov suddenly spoke up.
> Reflexive possessive «свои» + numeral case: «свои» ('my own') refers to the subject Kalganov. «пятьдесят рублей» shows numeral government: fifty (5+) takes the genitive plural «рублей». «не хочу отбирать» pairs negation with the imperfective infinitive.

— И я свои двести, и я не хочу! — воскликнул Митя, — ни за что не отберу, пусть ему в утешенье останутся.  
"And I don't want my two hundred either!" Mitya exclaimed, "nothing on earth would make me take it back — let it stay with him for his consolation."
> «ни за что не» — not for anything: «ни за что» ('not for anything, on no account') reinforces the negation «не отберу» — negative concord again: the «ни»-phrase plus «не» make one emphatic refusal. «отберу» is the perfective simple future.
> «пусть» — let it remain (3rd-person imperative): «пусть» + a third-person verb forms an imperative of concession ('let it stay'). «ему» is the dative ('for him'), «в утешенье» an adverbial 'for consolation' — Mitya magnanimously leaves the Pole his money.

— Славно, Митя! Молодец, Митя! — крикнула Грушенька, и страшно злобная нотка прозвенела в ее восклицании.  
"Bravo, Mitya! Good for you, Mitya!" Grushenka cried, and a terribly spiteful note rang out in her exclamation.
> Perfective «прозвенела» — rang out: «прозвенеть» (perfective, «про-») captures a single sounding 'rang out / sounded through'. «страшно злобная» ('terribly spiteful') uses «страшно» as an intensifying adverb — the ugly note in Grushenka's praise of Mitya.

Маленький пан, багровый от ярости, но нисколько не потерявший своей сановитости, направился было к двери, но остановился и вдруг проговорил, обращаясь ко Грушеньке:  
The little gentleman, crimson with fury but not in the least having lost his dignified bearing, started toward the door, then stopped and suddenly pronounced, turning to Grushenka:
> Past active participle «не потерявший»: «потерявший» is a past active participle of «потерять» ('having lost'), negated and modifying the Pole: 'not in the least having lost his dignity'. «нисколько… не» is negative concord, and «своей сановитости' is the genitive of the negated object.
> «сановитость» — stately self-importance: «сановитость» (from «сан», a high rank or dignity) is a grand, dignified bearing — the air of a man of consequence. Of the shabby little Pole it is laden with irony.
> «было» — a start toward the door, reversed: «направился было» ('he started toward [the door]') with «было» marks a move begun then abandoned — «но остановился» ('but stopped'). The pattern keeps undercutting the Pole's grand exits.

— Пани, ежели хцешь исьць за мною, идзьмы, если не — бывай здрова! (Пани, если хочешь идти за мной — пойдем, а если нет — то прощай!)  
"Pani, if you wish to come away with me, then let us go; if not — farewell to you! (Pani, if you want to come with me, then come; and if not — then goodbye!)"
> Polish ultimatum, glossed: His parting line is mostly Polish in Cyrillic ('jeżeli chcesz iść za mną, idźmy… bywaj zdrowa') — 'if you wish to follow me, let us go… fare you well', which Dostoevsky glosses in the parenthesis. «ежели» is a folk-archaic Russian 'if' he blends in.
> Conditional «если… а если нет» (the gloss): Dostoevsky's Russian gloss shows a real conditional: «если хочешь… пойдём» ('if you want… let's go') versus «а если нет» ('and if not'). The contrastive «а» pivots between the two outcomes; «пойдём» is a 1st-pl. exhortative future.

И важно, пыхтя от негодования и амбиции, прошел в дверь.  
And with an air of importance, puffing with indignation and pretension, he passed through the door.
> Present gerund «пыхтя» — puffing: «пыхтя» is an imperfective present gerund ('puffing, snorting') of attendant manner. «от негодования и амбиции» gives the cause in «от» + genitive — 'out of indignation and pretension'.
> «амбиция» — vanity, touchy pride: In 19th-century Russian «амбиция» carries the negative sense of inflated self-regard or wounded vanity, not the neutral English 'ambition'. A telling false friend — and exactly the Pole's besetting trait.

Человек был с характером: он еще после всего происшедшего не терял надежды, что пани пойдет за ним, — до того ценил себя.  
The man had character: even after all that had happened, he had not given up hope that the pani would follow him — so high did he rate himself.
> Genitive of negation «надежды»: The negated «не терял» pulls its object into the genitive «надежды» ('did not lose hope'). «пойдёт за ним» ('would follow him') is a perfective simple future inside the «что»-clause.
> «до того» + reflexive «себя»: «до того» ('to such a degree') intensifies: 'so high did he rate himself'. «себя» is the reflexive object pronoun ('himself'), and the fronted «до того» throws the emphasis onto the measure of his self-regard.

Митя прихлопнул за ним дверь.  
Mitya slammed the door shut behind him.
> Perfective «прихлопнул» — slammed shut: «прихлопнуть» (perfective) is to clap/slam (a door) shut in one decisive motion; the «-ну-» stem and «при-» give a single sharp completed act. «за ним» ('behind him') marks the exit.

— Заприте их на ключ, — сказал Калганов.  
"Lock them in," said Kalganov.
> Polite/plural imperative «заприте»: «заприте» is the imperative of «запереть» ('lock'), with the «-те» that makes it plural or polite. «на ключ» ('with a key') is the fixed phrase for locking fast. Kalganov tells them to lock the Poles in.

Но замок щелкнул с их стороны, они заперлись сами.  
But the lock clicked from their side — they had locked themselves in.
> Reflexive «заперлись» — locked themselves in: «заперлись» is the «-ся» reflexive of «запереть»: 'they locked themselves in'. «сами» ('themselves, of their own accord') intensifies — the Poles bolted the door from their own side, sparing the others the trouble.

— Славно! — злобно и беспощадно крикнула опять Грушенька. — Славно! Туда и дорога!  
"Splendid!" Grushenka cried again, spitefully and mercilessly. "Splendid! Good riddance to them!"
> «туда и дорога» — good riddance: A fixed idiom, lit. 'and the road [leads] right there', meaning 'good riddance, serves them right'. Grushenka spits it after the locked-in Poles with spiteful finality.
> Adverb-first inversion for tone: The manner adverbs «злобно и беспощадно» ('spitefully and mercilessly') lead, coloring «крикнула» before the verb even arrives. Russian's free order lets the emotional charge land first.
---

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.