# The Brothers Karamazov, Delirium

Братья Карамазовы · Fyodor Dostoevsky · Book VIII — Mitya

Source: https://1732studios.com/books/karamazov/b8-c8. Data: https://1732studios.com/books/karamazov/b8-c8.json.


Началась почти оргия, пир на весь мир.  
It had become almost an orgy, a feast for the whole world.
> Perfective past, feminine agreement: «Началась» is the perfective «начаться» (to begin, intransitive), past tense agreeing in gender with the feminine «оргия». The perfective marks a single completed onset — the orgy snaps into being — and the verb is fronted ahead of its subject, a vivid scene-opening inversion.
> «пир на весь мир» — a feast for all the world: A set folk phrase, literally "a feast for the whole world," meaning a lavish, unbounded celebration to which everyone is welcome. Its rhyme («пир»/«мир») gives it a proverbial, fairy-tale ring that colors the whole drunken scene.

Грушенька закричала первая, чтоб ей дали вина: «Пить хочу, совсем пьяная хочу напиться, чтобы как прежде, помнишь, Митя, помнишь, как мы здесь тогда спознавались!»  
Grushenka was the first to cry out for wine: "I want to drink, I want to get good and drunk, the way it was before, remember, Mitya, remember how the two of us first got to know each other here back then!"
> «чтоб» + past for an indirect command: «Чтоб» (a clipped «чтобы») introduces a willed, indirect command and so takes the past-form irrealis «дали» — literally "that they give her wine." The impersonal plural «дали» ("they") leaves the giver unnamed, a common Russian way of saying "that she be given wine."
> Partitive genitive «вина»: Not the accusative «вино» but the genitive «вина» — the partitive of "some wine," an indefinite quantity rather than the whole substance. The genitive is the natural case for asking for a measure of a mass noun.
> Predicate adjective agreeing with the speaker: «Пьяная» is feminine because Grushenka, the speaker, is feminine — "I [a woman] want to drink myself drunk." The long-form adjective agrees with the implicit «я», a small grammatical fingerprint of who is talking.
> «спознаваться» — got acquainted, folk-flavored: A colloquial, slightly archaic-folk verb for "to get to know one another," warmer and more intimate than neutral «знакомиться». It carries an undertone of becoming close, even of a first love-meeting, fitting her nostalgic appeal to Mitya.

Сам же Митя был как в бреду и предчувствовал «свое счастье».  
As for Mitya himself, he was as if in a delirium, sensing "his happiness" coming.
> «же» as a contrastive hinge: The particle «же» here pivots the narration back to Mitya by contrast with Grushenka: "As for Mitya himself…" Paired with the intensifier «сам» ("himself"), it marks a shift of topic rather than adding emphasis to a single word.
> Imperfective of ongoing inner state: «Предчувствовал» (was sensing, had a foreboding of) is imperfective, framing his anticipation as a continuous inner condition running under the scene rather than a single event. Much of Dostoevsky's psychological narration leans on this imperfective background.

Грушенька его, впрочем, от себя беспрерывно отгоняла: «Ступай, веселись, скажи им, чтобы плясали, чтобы все веселились, „ходи изба, ходи печь“, как тогда, как тогда!» — продолжала она восклицать.  
Grushenka, however, kept driving him off from her: "Go on, enjoy yourself, tell them to dance, tell everyone to make merry, „dance, cottage, dance, stove,“ just like that time, just like that time!" she went on exclaiming.
> Reflexive «себя» as point of reference: «От себя» means "away from herself" — the reflexive pronoun «себя» points back to the clause's subject, Grushenka. It has no nominative and takes whatever case a preposition demands; here genitive after «от».
> Imperfective of repeated action: «Отгоняла» (kept driving off) is imperfective, and with «беспрерывно» (incessantly) it paints a repeated, habitual push-and-pull. The perfective «отогнала» would name one decisive shove; the imperfective makes it a recurring rhythm of the night.

Была она ужасно возбуждена.  
She was terribly worked up.
> Short passive participle as predicate: «Возбуждена» is the short-form past passive participle of «возбудить» (to excite/arouse), feminine, predicating a resulting state: "she was [in a state of being] worked up." Short forms appear only in the predicate and lend the bookish, stative ring typical of this register.
> Verb-first inversion for emphasis: Standard order would be «Она была…»; fronting the verb «была» throws weight onto the whole assertion of her state. Free word order lets Russian foreground the comment — here her agitation — without changing the basic sense.

И Митя бросался распоряжаться.  
And Mitya threw himself into giving orders.
> Reflexive «бросаться» + infinitive: «Бросался» is the -ся verb «бросаться» (to throw oneself, rush) governing the infinitive «распоряжаться» (to give orders). The imperfective shows him repeatedly flinging himself into the bustle; the -ся turns transitive "throw" into intransitive "hurl oneself."

Хор собрался в соседней комнате.  
The chorus had gathered in the adjoining room.
> Perfective + reflexive for "gathered": «Собрался» is the perfective «собраться» — the -ся makes it intransitive ("gathered itself," assembled), a completed result. The masculine singular agrees with the collective noun «хор», treated grammatically as one body.

Та же комната, в которой до сих пор сидели, была к тому же и тесна, разгорожена надвое ситцевою занавеской, за которою опять-таки помещалась огромная кровать с пухлою периной и с такими же ситцевыми подушками горкой.  
The very room they had been sitting in until now was, besides, a cramped one, partitioned in two by a chintz curtain, behind which once again stood an enormous bed with a plump feather mattress and a heap of pillows in the same chintz.
> Relative «который» in the prepositional: «В которой» joins a relative clause; «который» agrees with feminine «комната» but takes the prepositional case after «в» to mean "in which." The subjectless «сидели» ("they had been sitting") leaves the company implied.
> Short passive participle of result: «Разгорожена» — short past passive participle of «разгородить» (to partition off), feminine — states the room's resulting condition: it stood divided in two. The agentless construction describes the setting as a finished fact.
> «ситец» — chintz, the cheap cotton print: «Ситцевый» (chintz, printed cotton) signals humble, common furnishings — the same cheap fabric on the curtain, the pillows, the whole partitioned bed. The instrumental «-ою» ending is the bookish 19th-century variant of modern «-ой».
> «перина» — a feather featherbed: A «перина» is a thick down-stuffed mattress laid atop the bed, a mark of домашний comfort and rustic plenty. Heaped with chintz pillows «горкой» (in a little mound), it evokes the cozy, overstuffed bedchamber of a country inn.

Да и во всех четырех «чистых» комнатах этого дома везде были кровати.  
And indeed all four of the "clean" rooms in that house had beds in them everywhere.
> «да и» — "and indeed, what's more": «Да и» is a folksy additive connector adding a further point: "and besides / and indeed." The «да» here is the colloquial coordinating "and," not the word for "yes."

Грушенька расположилась в самых дверях, Митя ей принес сюда кресло: так же точно сидела она и «тогда», в день их первого здесь кутежа, и смотрела отсюда на хор и на пляску.  
Grushenka settled herself right in the doorway, Mitya carried an armchair over for her there: in just the same way she had sat "that time" too, on the day of their first carouse here, and from this spot she watched the chorus and the dancing.
> Dative of the beneficiary «ей»: «Ей» is dative — "for her" — marking the person the action benefits: Mitya brought a chair for her. The dative routinely carries this "to/for whom" role even without a preposition.
> Imperfective for a remembered habitual scene: «Сидела… и смотрела» are imperfective pasts setting an enduring, recalled tableau — how she used to sit and watch "that time." The aspect holds the picture still rather than advancing the plot.
> «кутёж» — a wild carouse: «Кутёж» (genitive «кутежа») is a noisy, money-spilling drinking spree, the very thing Mitya is reenacting. The word carries reckless abandon — exactly the headlong squandering that defines his "first carouse here."

Девки собрались все тогдашние же; жидки со скрипками и цитрами тоже прибыли, а наконец-то прибыл и столь ожидаемый воз на тройке с винами и припасами.  
The same girls as before had all gathered; the fiddle-and-zither men, the Jews, had come too, and at last the long-awaited cart had arrived on its troika with the wines and the provisions.
> «девки» — the village girls: «Девка» is a plain, rustic word for a peasant girl or wench, lower in register than «девушка» and faintly coarse. It marks the hired chorus-girls' social world and recurs as the keynote of the scene's earthy revelry.

Митя суетился.  
Mitya bustled about.
> Reflexive «суетиться» — to bustle: «Суетился» is the -ся verb «суетиться» (to fuss, bustle about), one of many verbs that exist only in the reflexive form. The imperfective gives a continuous, fidgety busyness — a one-line snapshot of Mitya's restless state.

В комнату входили глядеть и посторонние, мужики и бабы, уже спавшие, но пробудившиеся и почуявшие небывалое угощение, как и месяц назад.  
Outsiders kept coming into the room to gawk—peasant men and women, already asleep but roused now and scenting an unheard-of treat, just as a month before.
> A chain of past active participles: Three past active participles modify «мужики и бабы»: «спавшие» (who had been sleeping), «пробудившиеся» (who had woken), «почуявшие» (who had scented). Each replaces a «который»-clause and compresses a whole backstory into adjectives — the dense participial layering that marks literary narration.
> «мужик» and «баба» — peasant man and woman: The standard rustic pairing for common village folk: «мужик» a peasant man, «баба» a peasant woman (married, often older). Both are earthy, everyday terms placing these onlookers firmly in the peasant world drawn to the gentleman's free liquor.
> «небывалый» — unheard-of: «Небывалый» literally "such as has never been," i.e. unprecedented, extraordinary. Applied to «угощение» (a treat, free food and drink offered to guests), it captures the peasants' astonishment at the lavishness on offer.

Митя здоровался и обнимался со знакомыми, припоминал лица, откупоривал бутылки и наливал всем кому попало.  
Mitya greeted and embraced acquaintances, remembered faces, uncorked bottles and poured for anyone at all who came to hand.
> Reciprocal -ся verbs: «Здоровался» (greeted) and «обнимался» (embraced) carry -ся in its reciprocal sense — exchanging greetings and embraces "with one another." The accompanying «с знакомыми» (with acquaintances) confirms the mutual reading.
> Imperfective string of habitual actions: A run of five imperfective pasts presents Mitya's behavior as ongoing, repeated activity — greeting, embracing, recalling, uncorking, pouring, all at once and again and again. The unbroken imperfective keeps the scene churning without resolving into discrete events.
> «кому попало» — to whoever came to hand: An idiom from «попало» meaning "to just anyone, at random, indiscriminately." In the dative «кому попало» it stresses Mitya's heedless, undiscriminating generosity — pouring for absolutely anybody.

На шампанское зарились очень только девки, мужикам же нравился больше ром и коньяк и особенно горячий пунш.  
Only the girls hankered after the champagne; the men preferred rum and cognac, and above all hot punch.
> Dative experiencer with «нравиться»: «Нравиться» works backwards from English: the thing liked («ром») is the grammatical subject and the one who likes it stands in the dative — «мужикам» (the men). The «же» contrasts the men's taste with the girls'. So it reads literally "to the men the rum was more pleasing."
> «зариться» — to covet, hanker after: «Зариться (на что-то)» is a colloquial verb for greedily eyeing or lusting after something — the girls "had their eyes on" the champagne. It carries a faint note of envious appetite, fitting the scramble for luxury at the feast.

Митя распорядился, чтобы был сварен шоколад на всех девок и чтобы не переводились всю ночь и кипели три самовара для чаю и пунша на всякого приходящего: кто хочет, пусть и угощается.  
Mitya gave orders that chocolate be brewed for all the girls, and that three samovars be kept boiling all night long without a break, for tea and punch for everyone who came: let whoever wishes help himself.
> «чтобы» + past passive for an order: After «распорядился» (gave orders), «чтобы» introduces the willed content with the irrealis past, and «был сварен» is a short passive participle: "that chocolate be brewed." This is the standard pattern for reporting a command — «чтобы» plus past-form/passive, leaving the doer unspecified.
> Negated «чтобы»-clause: "so they not run out": «Не переводились» (an imperfective -ся verb, "not be exhausted / never run dry") and «кипели» (keep boiling) both sit under «чтобы» in the past form. The negation «не» plus imperfective stresses continuous, unbroken supply all night.
> «пусть» + present for a 3rd-person command: «Пусть» plus a present-tense verb forms a third-person imperative: "let whoever wishes help himself." The -ся on «угощается» is the middle voice — to treat/serve oneself. The «и» here is the emphatic particle "even, just."

Одним словом, началось нечто беспорядочное и нелепое, но Митя был как бы в своем родном элементе, и чем нелепее всё становилось, тем больше он оживлялся духом.  
In a word, something disorderly and absurd had begun, but Mitya was as if in his own native element, and the more absurd it all became, the more his spirit came alive.
> «чем… тем…» — the more… the more: The correlative «чем + comparative … тем + comparative» builds the "the more X, the more Y" construction: «чем нелепее… тем больше» — the more absurd it grew, the more he came alive. Both comparatives («нелепее», «больше») are the invariable predicative form.
> Reflexive possessive «свой»: «Своём» (свой) means "his own" — referring back to the subject Mitya. Using «его» instead would point to someone else's element; «свой» locks the possession onto the clause's own subject. «Как бы» softens it to "as if in."
> «оживляться духом» — to revive in spirit: «Оживляться» (to come alive, grow animated) with the instrumental «духом» ("in spirit") frames Mitya's exhilaration as a kind of inner kindling. The phrase has an elevated, almost spiritual ring against the squalor of the scene.

Попроси у него какой-нибудь мужик в те минуты денег, он тотчас же вытащил бы всю свою пачку и стал бы раздавать направо и налево без счету.  
Had any peasant asked him for money in those minutes, he would instantly have pulled out his whole wad and started handing it out right and left without counting.
> Imperative form as a conditional protasis: The imperative «попроси» is used not as a command but to state a hypothetical condition: "had any peasant asked him." This idiomatic use of the imperative for "if X had happened" pairs with the «бы»-conditional in the main clause («вытащил бы… стал бы»).
> «просить у кого genitive»: To ask someone for something is «просить у кого-то чего-то»: «у него» (genitive after «у», "from him") plus «денег», the genitive of the thing requested. Money («деньги») here in the partitive genitive — asking for "some money."
> «-нибудь» — any peasant at all: «Какой-нибудь» with the non-specific suffix «-нибудь» means "any old, no particular" peasant — a hypothetical, unspecified one, as opposed to «какой-то» (some specific but unnamed man). The choice fits the purely conditional "if any peasant had asked."

Вот почему, вероятно, чтоб уберечь Митю, сновал кругом его почти безотлучно хозяин, Трифон Борисыч, совсем уж, кажется, раздумавший ложиться спать в эту ночь, пивший, однако, мало (всего только выкушал один стаканчик пунша) и зорко наблюдавший по-своему за интересами Мити.  
That, no doubt, is why—to keep watch over Mitya—the innkeeper Trifon Borisych hovered around him almost without leaving his side, having apparently given up the idea of going to bed at all that night, drinking very little, however (he downed only a single small glass of punch), and keeping a sharp eye, in his own fashion, on Mitya's interests.
> «чтоб» + infinitive = purpose: When the subject is the same, «чтоб(ы)» takes a bare infinitive to express purpose: «чтоб уберечь Митю» — "in order to protect Mitya." Compare the past-form «чтобы» used for a willed action with a different subject.
> Past active participles describing the innkeeper: Three past active participles in «-вший» pile up around «хозяин»: «раздумавший» (having given up the idea), «пивший» (drinking), «наблюдавший» (keeping watch). Each agrees with «хозяин» and stacks a clause into a single adjective — a hallmark of the dense literary sentence.
> «выкушать» and the diminutive «стаканчик»: «Выкушать» is a politely old-fashioned, deferential verb for "to drink/partake," and «стаканчик» is the diminutive of «стакан» (glass) — "a little glass." Together they gently underscore how abstemiously the canny innkeeper drank.

В нужные минуты он ласково и подобострастно останавливал его и уговаривал, не давал ему оделять, как «тогда», мужиков «цигарками и ренским вином» и, боже сохрани, деньгами, и очень негодовал на то, что девки пьют ликер и едят конфеты: «Вшивость лишь одна, Митрий Федорович, — говорил он, — я их коленком всякую напинаю, да еще за честь почитать прикажу — вот они какие!»  
At the necessary moments he would fawningly and obsequiously stop him and talk him out of it, not letting him deal out to the peasants, as "that time," "cigars and Rhine wine," and, God forbid, money, and he was greatly indignant that the girls were drinking liqueur and eating sweets: "They're nothing but lice, Mitry Fyodorovich," he said, "I'd give every one of them a knee in the backside, and make them count it an honor besides—that's the sort they are!"
> «не давать» + dative + infinitive — "not let": «Не давать кому-то + infinitive» means "to not let / prevent someone from doing": «не давал ему оделять» — wouldn't let him deal out. «Ему» is dative (the one prevented), «оделять» the imperfective infinitive of the action blocked.
> «подобострастный» — fawning, obsequious: «Подобострастно» means cringingly servile, toadying. Paired with «ласково» (gently), it pins the innkeeper's manner exactly: he restrains Mitya not by force but by oily, ingratiating deference, all in pursuit of Mitya's money.
> «цигарка» and «ренское вино»: «Цигарка» is a hand-rolled cigarette/cheap cigar; «ренское (вино)» is an old term for Rhine wine, from German Rhein. Both are dated, faintly provincial words for the treats Mitya had handed out "that time." They sit in the instrumental as what he "deals out" people with.
> «вшивость» — lousiness, riffraff: Literally "lice-ridden-ness" (from «вошь», louse), used contemptuously for worthless rabble: "They're nothing but lice." The innkeeper's coarse scorn for the village girls bursts out in this earthy abstract noun.
> Bookish «почитать за честь»: «Почитать за честь» is an elevated set phrase, "to count/deem it an honor," with «почитать» in its old sense "to regard as." The innkeeper mixes this lofty idiom with crude threats — "I'd order them to count it an honor [to be kicked]" — a comic clash of registers.

Митя еще раз вспомянул про Андрея и велел послать ему пуншу.  
Mitya remembered Andrei once more and gave orders to send him some punch.
> «велеть» + infinitive; partitive «пуншу»: «Велел послать» — "ordered to send" — pairs «велеть» with a bare infinitive. «Пуншу» is a partitive genitive in the old «-у» ending (some punch), and «ему» dative marks Andrei as recipient. The «-у» partitive is a slightly archaic, folk-flavored form beside modern «-а».
> «вспомянуть» — to recall (elevated): «Вспомянуть» is a bookish, slightly archaic variant of «вспомнить» (to remember), with a faint flavor of "to call to mind, make mention of." It lends Mitya's tender remembering of the coachman Andrei a softly solemn coloring.

«Я его давеча обидел», — повторял он ослабевшим и умиленным голосом.  
"I offended him just now," he kept repeating in a weakened, tender voice.
> Instrumental of manner: «Ослабевшим и умиленным голосом» is the instrumental of manner — "in a weakened, tender voice," describing how he spoke. The instrumental routinely answers "by/with what means or manner." «Ослабевшим» is itself a past active participle (having grown weak).
> «давеча» — a while ago, just now: «Давеча» is a colloquial, old-fashioned adverb for "a little while ago, earlier today." It belongs to the folk-spoken layer of the dialogue and recurs in Grushenka's speech, anchoring events to the recent past of this very night.
> «умилённый» — tenderly moved: «Умилённый» denotes a soft, melting tenderness welling up to the point of tears — a key Dostoevskian emotion of contrite, loving softness. Mitya's guilt over having offended Andrei dissolves into exactly this «умиление».

Калганов не хотел было пить, и хор девок ему сначала не понравился очень, но, выпив еще бокала два шампанского, страшно развеселился, шагал по комнатам, смеялся и всё и всех хвалил, и песни и музыку.  
Kalganov had been reluctant to drink, and at first the chorus of girls had not much pleased him, but after downing two more glasses of champagne he grew terribly merry, strode about the rooms, laughed, and praised everything and everyone, the songs and the music alike.
> The particle «было» of the interrupted intention: «Было» after a past verb marks an action begun or intended but then reversed — "was about to / at first didn't." «Не хотел было пить» = "had been disinclined to drink [but then did]." This «было» is a distinctive narrative particle for a checked or undone action.
> Perfective gerund «выпив»: «Выпив» is a perfective past gerund (деепричастие) from «выпить» — "having drunk." It names a prior, completed action by the same subject before the main verb «развеселился» (grew merry): having downed two glasses, he then cheered up.
> Inverted numeral = approximation: Reversing noun and numeral, «бокала два» instead of «два бокала», signals approximation: "a couple of glasses, two or so." The numeral «два» still pulls «бокала» into the genitive singular.

Максимов, блаженный и пьяненький, не покидал его.  
Maximov, blissful and a little drunk, would not leave his side.
> Imperfective negation of a continuing state: «Не покидал» (imperfective "was not leaving / would not leave") with the accusative object «его» describes a sustained refusal to budge from Kalganov's side. The imperfective stretches the non-action across the whole scene.
> «пьяненький» — sweetly, harmlessly tipsy: The diminutive «-еньк-» softens «пьяный» (drunk) into «пьяненький» — "a little drunk" in an endearing, pitiable way. Paired with «блаженный» (blissful), it paints the old buffoon Maximov as gently, contentedly soused rather than menacing.

Грушенька, тоже начинавшая хмелеть, указывала на Калганова Мите: «Какой он миленький, какой чудесный мальчик!»  
Grushenka, beginning to grow tipsy herself, pointed out Kalganov to Mitya: "What a darling he is, what a marvelous boy!"
> Present active participle + infinitive: «Начинавшая» is a past active participle of «начинать» agreeing with feminine Grushenka, governing the infinitive «хмелеть» (to grow tipsy): "who was beginning to get tipsy." The participle folds a whole circumstantial clause into the subject.
> Exclamatory «какой»: «Какой» in an exclamation means "what a…!": «Какой он миленький!» = "What a darling he is!" As an adjective it agrees with what it modifies; the predicate «миленький» carries the affectionate diminutive «-еньк-».

И Митя с восторгом бежал целоваться с Калгановым и Максимовым.  
And Mitya ran off in rapture to kiss Kalganov and Maximov.
> Motion verb + reciprocal infinitive: «Бежал» is the unidirectional motion verb «бежать» (running in one direction), here imperfective for the repeated rushing; «целоваться» is the reciprocal -ся verb "to kiss [each other]." "Ran to kiss" — purpose expressed by a bare infinitive of motion's goal.
> Instrumental of manner with «с»: «С восторгом» — "with rapture" — uses «с» + instrumental to express the emotional manner of the action. Such «с + instrumental» phrases (с радостью, с восторгом, с гневом) are the standard way to color how something is done.

О, он многое предчувствовал; ничего еще она ему не сказала такого и даже видимо нарочно задерживала сказать, изредка только поглядывая на него ласковым, но горячим глазком.  
Oh, he had a foreboding of much; she had told him nothing of the kind as yet, and even seemed to be deliberately holding back from saying it, only now and then glancing at him with a tender but ardent little eye.
> Genitive of negation + negative concord: «Ничего… не сказала» shows both negative concord (the ни-word «ничего» still requires «не» on the verb) and the genitive of negation — the negated object stands in the genitive «ничего такого» ("nothing of the kind"). «Ему» is the dative recipient.
> Imperfective gerund «поглядывая»: «Поглядывая» is an imperfective present gerund (деепричастие) — "[while] glancing now and then." It expresses an action simultaneous with the main clause, sharing its subject (she), and the «по-» prefix adds the sense of intermittent, occasional looking.
> «глазок» — a little eye, tender diminutive: «Глазком» is the instrumental of «глазок», the diminutive of «глаз» (eye). "Glancing with a tender little eye" — the diminutive bathes her sidelong looks in coy, caressing intimacy, the emotional charge English can barely carry.

Наконец она вдруг схватила его крепко за руку и с силой притянула к себе.  
At last she suddenly seized him firmly by the hand and pulled him forcibly toward her.
> Two perfectives for sudden, decisive acts: «Схватила» (seized) and «притянула» (pulled toward) are both perfective pasts — single, completed, abrupt actions that snap the narrative forward, reinforced by «вдруг» (suddenly) and «с силой» (forcibly). The perfective is the aspect of decisive event against the scene's imperfective drift.
> Reflexive «себя» after «к»: «К себе» — "toward herself" — again the reflexive «себя», here dative after the preposition «к», pointing back to the subject Grushenka. She pulled him toward her own self.

Сама она сидела тогда в креслах у дверей.  
She was sitting at the time in the armchair by the door.
> Intensifier «сама»: «Сама» (feminine of «сам») intensifies the subject — "she herself." Set first for emphasis, it underscores that it was Grushenka, in person, who was sitting there, against the free Russian word order that lets the comment fall where the writer wishes.

— Как это ты давеча вошел-то, а? Как ты вошел-то!.. я так испугалась. Как же ты меня ему уступить-то хотел, а? Неужто хотел?  
—How was it you came in just now, eh? How you came in!.. I was so frightened. How could you have meant to give me up to him, eh? Did you really mean to?
> The emphatic clitic «-то»: The hyphenated «-то» on «вошёл-то» is the emphatic topic particle (not the indefinite suffix): it presses on the known topic, roughly "the way you came in." It threads through her excited speech here («вошел-то», «уступить-то») lending an insistent, colloquial pressure.
> «же» + «уступить» + dative: «Же» here heightens the astonished question. «Уступить кого-то кому-то» (to yield/give someone up to someone) takes accusative «меня» and dative «ему» — "give me up to him." The whole reproachful question hangs on these case roles.
> «неужто» — "surely not?": «Неужто» is a folk variant of «неужели», an incredulous particle: "can it really be?, surely you didn't?" It marks emotional disbelief and belongs to Grushenka's earthy, agitated register.

— Счастья твоего губить не хотел! — в блаженстве лепетал ей Митя. — Но ей и не надо было его ответа.  
—I didn't want to ruin your happiness!—Mitya babbled to her in bliss.—But she had no need of his answer.
> Genitive object under negation: Fronted «счастья твоего» is genitive, the genitive of negation governed by «не хотел губить» — "I didn't want to ruin your happiness." Placing the object first throws emotional weight onto it, the topic-comment freedom Russian's cases allow.
> Impersonal «надо» + dative + genitive: «Ей не надо было его ответа» is a subjectless construction: the experiencer «ей» stands in the dative, «надо» is the invariable predicate, and the negated thing needed, «его ответа», takes the genitive of negation. "She had no need of his answer."
> «лепетать» — to babble: «Лепетать» is to babble or prattle, the speech of a child, a lover, or the drink-loosened tongue. Recurring through this scene («лепетал ей Митя»), it reduces Mitya's blissful words to a tender, half-coherent murmur.

— Ну, ступай… веселись, — отгоняла она его опять, — да не плачь, опять позову.  
—Well, go on… enjoy yourself,—she drove him off again,—and don't cry, I'll call you back again.
> Imperatives, one folk-archaic: «Ступай» (go on) is a slightly old-fashioned, folksy imperative of «ступать», and «не плачь» a negated imperative "don't cry." The imperfective negated imperative «не плачь» is the normal form for telling someone to stop / not do something.
> Perfective future «позову»: «Позову» is the perfective «позвать» conjugated with present endings to mean the future — "I'll call [you back]." A perfective verb in present-form endings always reads as a single completed future action, with no auxiliary needed.

И он убегал, а она принималась опять слушать песни и глядеть на пляску, следя за ним взглядом, где бы он ни был, но через четверть часа опять подзывала его, и он опять прибегал.  
And he would run off, and she would set herself again to listening to the songs and watching the dancing, following him with her gaze wherever he might be, but a quarter of an hour later she would summon him again, and again he would come running.
> Iterative imperfectives of a recurring routine: A chain of imperfective pasts — «убегал», «принималась слушать», «подзывала», «прибегал» — renders a repeated cycle: he'd run off, she'd listen, then summon him, and he'd come running again. The imperfective is precisely the aspect for this loop of habitual action.
> Imperfective gerund «следя»: «Следя» is the present gerund of «следить» (to follow/track), expressing a simultaneous attendant action: "following him with her gaze." «За ним» is instrumental-governing «за», and «взглядом» the instrumental of means.
> «где бы… ни» — wherever: The frame «где бы … ни был» builds a concessive "wherever he might be." The «бы» supplies the hypothetical sweep and «ни» the universal concession — a fixed construction (кто бы ни, что бы ни, где бы ни) for "no matter where/who/what."

— Ну, садись теперь подле, рассказывай, как ты вчера обо мне услышал, что я сюда поехала; от кого от первого узнал?  
—Well, sit down beside me now, tell me how you heard about me yesterday, that I'd set off here; from whom did you first learn it?
> Imperfective imperatives of invitation: «Садись» and «рассказывай» are imperfective imperatives. The imperfective imperative typically invites or urges an action's onset and continuation — "do sit down, do tell" — warmer and more inviting than the brisk perfective «сядь, расскажи».
> «от кого» — interrogative in the genitive: «Узнать от кого» — to learn from whom — puts the interrogative «кто» in the genitive after «от». The doubled «от… от первого» means "from whom, from the first person," i.e. who first told you. Such case-marked question words are how Russian frames "from/to/about whom."

И Митя начинал всё рассказывать, бессвязно, беспорядочно, горячо, но странно, однако же, рассказывал, часто вдруг хмурил брови и обрывался.  
And Mitya would begin telling it all, incoherently, in no order, fervently, but he told it strangely, all the same, often suddenly knitting his brows and breaking off.
> Imperfective string of an iterative scene: The imperfective pasts «начинал», «рассказывал», «хмурил», «обрывался» present a recurring habit — each time he would begin, tell, knit his brows, break off. «Обрывался» is the -ся middle of «обрывать» (to break off, intransitive).
> Adverbs of manner heaped in apposition: Three manner adverbs pile up to characterize the telling — "incoherently, disorderly, fervently." «Горячо» is the adverb from «горячий» (hot), here "ardently." The rhythmic triple, then the hinge «но странно, однако же», is pure Dostoevskian breathless syntax.

— Чего ты хмуришься-то? — спрашивала она.  
—What are you frowning about?—she would ask.
> «хмуриться» reflexive + emphatic «-то»: «Хмуриться» is the -ся verb "to frown," intransitive. «Чего» is a colloquial genitive of «что» used for "what/why," and the clitic «-то» presses the topic — "what are you frowning about, then?" The whole question lives in the spoken, folk register.

— Ничего… одного больного там оставил. Кабы выздоровел, кабы знал, что выздоровеет, десять бы лет сейчас моих отдал!  
—Nothing… I left a sick man back there. If only he'd recover, if only I knew he would recover, I'd give ten years of my life right now!
> The folk conditional «кабы» + «бы»: «Кабы» is a colloquial, folk-flavored «если бы» ("if only"), introducing an unreal wished-for condition with past-form verbs. The main clause answers in the «бы»-conditional — «десять бы лет… отдал» ("I'd give ten years") — with the mobile «бы» leaning on the stressed «десять».
> Genitive plural after a numeral: After «десять» (and all numbers from five up), the counted noun goes into the genitive plural: «десять лет» — ten years. «Лет» is the suppletive genitive plural that «год» borrows from «лето». «Моих» agrees in that genitive plural.

— Ну, бог с ним, коли больной. Так неужто ты хотел завтра застрелить себя, экой глупый, да из-за чего? Я вот этаких, как ты, безрассудных, люблю, — лепетала она ему немного отяжелевшим языком. — Так ты для меня на всё пойдешь? А? И неужто ж ты, дурачок, вправду хотел завтра застрелиться! Нет, погоди пока, завтра я тебе, может, одно словечко скажу… не сегодня скажу, а завтра. А ты бы хотел сегодня? Нет, я сегодня не хочу… Ну ступай, ступай теперь, веселись.  
—Well, God be with him, if he's sick. So you really did mean to shoot yourself tomorrow, you silly thing—and over what? It's just men like you, the reckless ones, that I love,—she babbled to him with a tongue grown a little heavy.—So you'd do anything for me? Eh? And did you really, you little fool, truly mean to shoot yourself tomorrow! No, wait a while; tomorrow I'll perhaps say one little word to you… I'll say it not today, but tomorrow. And you'd like it today? No, today I don't want to… Well, go on, go on now, enjoy yourself.
> Folk conditional «коли»: «Коли» is a folksy, archaic equivalent of «если» (if): "God be with him, if he's sick." «Больной» here is a short-style predicate adjective "sick." Both belong to the peasant-spoken layer Grushenka slips into.
> «себя» as object of «застрелить»: «Застрелить себя» — to shoot oneself — uses the full reflexive pronoun «себя» as the direct object (contrast the -ся verb «застрелиться» she uses moments later, same meaning). Russian offers both routes to reflexivity, and Grushenka swings between them.
> Softening «бы» — "would you like": «Ты бы хотел» uses «бы» with a past-form verb not for a condition but to soften the question into the polite/tentative "would you like?" The same particle that builds conditionals also files down the edge of a direct request.
> «дурачок» — silly little fool, affectionate: «Дурачок» is the diminutive of «дурак» (fool), but the «-чок» softens the insult into fondness — "you little fool," said tenderly. Like «безрассудных» and «глупый» around it, it scolds Mitya with unmistakable affection.

Раз, однако, она подозвала его как бы в недоумении и озабоченно.  
Once, however, she beckoned him over as if in bewilderment and concern.
> «как бы» — "as if, as it were": «Как бы» (with the irrealis «бы») softens an assertion to "as if, sort of": "as if in bewilderment." It hedges the narrator's reading of Grushenka's manner, a favorite Dostoevskian qualifier for half-grasped inner states.
> Perfective «подозвать» — beckoned over: «Подозвала» is perfective — one completed summoning. The prefix «подо-» adds the directional sense of calling someone over to oneself, and the perfective marks it as a single punctual act breaking the scene's flow («Раз, однако…»).

— Чего тебе грустно? Я вижу, тебе грустно… Нет, уж я вижу, — прибавила она, зорко вглядываясь в его глаза. — Хоть ты там и целуешься с мужиками и кричишь, а я что-то вижу. Нет, ты веселись, я весела и ты веселись… Я кого-то здесь люблю, угадай кого?.. Ай, посмотри: мальчик-то мой заснул, охмелел, сердечный.  
—Why are you so sad? I can see you're sad… No, I see it now,—she added, peering keenly into his eyes.—Even though you go kissing the peasants over there and shouting, still I can see something. No, you enjoy yourself, I'm merry and you be merry too… There's someone here I love, guess who?.. Ah, look: my boy's fallen asleep, the dear thing got tipsy.
> Dative experiencer with an emotion: «Тебе грустно» is a classic subjectless dative construction: the experiencer «тебе» in the dative, «грустно» an invariable predicative — "you feel sad" (lit. "to you it is sad"). This dative-of-feeling pattern is the very grammar of inner life in Dostoevsky.
> Imperfective gerund «вглядываясь»: «Вглядываясь» is a present gerund of the -ся verb «вглядываться» (to peer intently into), expressing an action simultaneous with «прибавила». The «в-» prefix and «в его глаза» (accusative of direction) give the sense of looking searchingly into his eyes.
> Perfective imperative + objective «кого»: «Угадай» is the perfective imperative "guess!", and «кого» is the accusative/genitive of «кто» — "guess whom." The case-marked question word shows the one to be guessed is the object of loving, not the lover.
> «сердечный» — the dear, poor soul: From «сердце» (heart), «сердечный» as a term of endearment means "the dear, poor thing" — affectionate pity for the tipsy, sleeping Kalganov. It is the warm folk-tender register Grushenka keeps slipping into.

Она говорила про Калганова: тот действительно охмелел и заснул на мгновение, сидя на диване.  
She was speaking of Kalganov: he really had grown tipsy and had dropped off for a moment, sitting on the sofa.
> Two perfectives: completed onsets of state: «Охмелел» (grew tipsy) and «заснул» (fell asleep) are perfective pasts marking the completed entry into a new state. The prefixes «о-» and «за-» are "ingressive," turning the process into a finished crossing-over into drunkenness and sleep.
> Imperfective gerund «сидя»: «Сидя» is the present gerund of «сидеть» (to sit), expressing the attendant circumstance — "while sitting on the sofa" — concurrent with falling asleep. It shares the subject (Kalganov) of the main clause, as a деепричастие must.

И не от одного хмеля заснул, ему стало вдруг отчего-то грустно, или, как он говорил, «скучно».  
And it was not from drink alone that he had fallen asleep; he had suddenly felt sad about something, or, as he put it, "bored."
> Dative + «стало» — a feeling came over him: «Ему стало грустно» is the impersonal dative pattern in its inchoative form: «стало» (perfective "became") plus the predicative «грустно», with the experiencer «ему» in the dative — "he suddenly felt sad." «Стало» marks the onset of the mood.
> «скучно» — bored / dreary, more than "bored": Kalganov's word «скучно», flagged in quotes, spans "bored," "dreary," and a vague spiritual ennui — the untranslatable Russian «скука». The narrator notes that his sadness was "not from drink alone," hinting at this deeper, characteristically Russian listlessness.

Сильно обескуражили его под конец и песни девок, начинавшие переходить, постепенно с попойкой, в нечто слишком уже скоромное и разнузданное.  
And toward the end the girls' songs greatly disheartened him as well, beginning gradually, as the drinking went on, to turn into something altogether too coarse and unbridled.
> Verb-first inversion, delayed subject: The sentence opens with the verb «обескуражили» (disheartened) and its object «его», holding back the subject «песни девок» to the end for weight. Russian's free order lets the new, heavy information — the girls' songs — land last, as the comment.
> Participle + «переходить в» + accusative: «Начинавшие» (past active participle, agreeing with «песни») governs «переходить в нечто» — "beginning to turn into something." «Переходить в» takes the accusative of the resulting state; «нечто» is the indeclinable "something."
> «скоромный» — from fast-day food to "risqué": «Скоромный» originally means non-Lenten food (meat, dairy) forbidden during fasts; by extension it came to mean "ribald, off-color, indecent." Here the songs turn «слишком скоромное» — too coarse — a vivid example of religious vocabulary darkening into the carnal.

Да и пляски их тоже: две девки переоделись в медведей, а Степанида, бойкая девка с палкой в руке, представляя вожака, стала их «показывать».  
And their dances too: two of the girls dressed themselves up as bears, and Stepanida, a brisk girl with a stick in her hand, playing the keeper, set about "putting them through their paces."
> «переодеться в» + accusative animate: «Переоделись в медведей» — "dressed up as bears" — uses the -ся verb «переодеться» (to change one's clothes / disguise oneself) with «в» + accusative. «Медведей» is animate-accusative (= genitive plural), so the bears "into which" they dress show the animacy rule at work.
> Imperfective gerund «представляя»: «Представляя вожака» is a present gerund — "playing/representing the keeper" — a simultaneous action attending «стала их показывать». The subject of the gerund is Stepanida, who also governs the main verb.

«Веселей, Марья, — кричала она, — не то палкой!»  
"Livelier, Marya," she shouted, "or it's the stick!"
> Elliptical threat «не то» + instrumental: «Не то» means "or else," and «палкой» is the instrumental of «палка» (stick) — the means of the implied beating: "or else [I'll use] the stick!" The verb is dropped, leaving only the instrument, a curt, menacing ellipsis.
> Comparative as a command: «Веселей» is the predicative comparative of «весёлый» (merry) — "livelier!" — used here as an urging: do it more merrily. The comparative's invariable -ей form doubles neatly as an exhortation.

Медведи наконец повалились на пол как-то совсем уж неприлично, при громком хохоте набравшейся не в прорез всякой публики баб и мужиков.  
The bears at last tumbled to the floor in a way that was altogether too indecent, amid the loud guffaws of the crowd of men and women that had packed in past all measure.
> Past active participle of a -ся verb in the genitive: «Набравшейся» is a past active participle of «набраться» (to crowd in, accumulate), genitive feminine to agree with «публики» after «хохоте… публики». It compresses "of the crowd that had packed in" into one dense modifier — and «баб и мужиков» stands in apposition, genitive plural.
> «не в прорез» — past all measure: A rare colloquial idiom meaning "beyond bounds, more than fits" — the crowd had packed in «не в прорез», past all room. The phrase, like much of this scene's diction, draws on earthy folk speech now opaque even to many Russians.

«Ну и пусть их, ну и пусть их, — говорила сентенциозно Грушенька с блаженным видом в лице, — кой-то денек выйдет им повеселиться, так и не радоваться людям?»  
"Let them be, then, let them be," Grushenka said sententiously, with a blissful look on her face, "if a day comes their way to make merry, why shouldn't people be glad of it?"
> «пусть их» — "let them be": «Пусть» forms a third-person permission/dismissal, and the bare «их» ("them," object of an implied verb) gives the colloquial "let them be, never mind them." The doubled «ну и пусть их» heightens Grushenka's indulgent, expansive mood.
> Dative subject of «не радоваться»: «Не радоваться людям» — "are people not to rejoice, then?" — is a dative-subject rhetorical question: the experiencers «людям» in the dative, the verb in the negated infinitive expressing "should they not?" The -ся verb «радоваться» (to rejoice) takes its cause in the dative.
> «сентенциозно» — sententiously: A bookish adverb meaning "in the manner of pronouncing a maxim," gently ironic here: tipsy Grushenka delivers her folk wisdom about letting people enjoy themselves with mock-solemn gravity. The Latinate word winks at her homespun philosophizing.

Калганов же смотрел так, как будто чем запачкался.  
Kalganov, for his part, looked as though he had got himself smeared with something.
> «как будто» + the indefinite «чем»: «Как будто» means "as though." «Чем» here is the instrumental of «что» used indefinitely — "with something": «запачкался чем» = got himself smeared with something. The -ся verb «запачкаться» (to get oneself dirty) is the perfective middle of «запачкать».
> Contrastive «же» marking a topic switch: «Же» after «Калганов» pivots from the merry crowd to the fastidious Kalganov by contrast — "Kalganov, for his part…" It does not stress a single word but signals the narrative's turn to a new figure.

«Свинство это всё, эта вся народность, — заметил он, отходя, — это у них весенние игры, когда они солнце берегут во всю летнюю ночь».  
"It's all swinishness, this whole „folk spirit,“" he remarked, walking off, "this is their springtime games, when they keep watch over the sun the whole summer night through."
> Imperfective gerund «отходя»: «Отходя» is the present gerund of «отходить» (to step away), naming the simultaneous action — "walking off" — as Kalganov makes his remark. The prefixed motion verb «отходить» is the imperfective member of the pair «отходить/отойти».
> «свинство» vs «народность»: Kalganov sneers "свинство" (swinishness, from «свинья», pig) at what others would solemnly call «народность» — "folk spirit, national character," a loaded term of 19th-century debate over the Russian people's soul. His clash of the two words is an ideological jab at romanticized peasant culture.

Но особенно не понравилась ему одна «новая» песенка с бойким плясовым напевом, пропетая о том, как ехал барин и девушек пытал:  
But he was particularly displeased by one "new" little song with a brisk dance tune, sung about how a squire rode along and put the question to the girls:
> Dative experiencer with «понравиться»: Again the "liking" verb inverts: the song «песенка» is the subject, the displeased Kalganov «ему» the dative experiencer, negated — "one song did not please him." «Песенка» is the diminutive of «песня» (a little song / ditty).
> Past passive participle «пропетая»: «Пропетая» is a past passive participle of «пропеть» (to sing through), feminine, agreeing with «песенка»: "a song sung about how…" «Ехал» is the unidirectional motion verb «ехать» (riding/driving one way), imperfective for the ongoing journey of the folk tale.
> «пытать» — to put to the test, sound out: In this song «пытать» means to test or question the girls — "sounded them out" on whether they'd love him. The verb also carries the heavier modern sense "to torture," and the older "to try," lending the playful refrain a faint shadow.

Барин девушек пытал, Девки любят али нет?  
The squire put the girls to the test, / Do the lasses love him, yes or no?
> Folk «али» = «или»: «Али» is a folk-poetic variant of «или» (or): "do the girls love [him] or not?" It is a marker of song and peasant speech, helping the refrain ring with traditional чаstушка flavor.

Но девкам показалось, что нельзя любить барина:  
But it seemed to the lasses that one mustn't love a squire:
> Dative + «показалось» + «нельзя»: Two impersonal constructions nest here: «девкам показалось» (it seemed to the girls — dative experiencer) and «нельзя любить» (one mustn't love — invariable «нельзя» plus infinitive). Both run without a nominative subject, the hallmark dative-experiencer grammar.

Барин будет больно бить, А я его не любить.  
The squire will beat me sore, / And so I'll love him no more.
> Infinitive for a resolved future in song: «Я его не любить» uses a bare infinitive where standard grammar wants a finite verb — a folk-song idiom for firm resolve: "and so I'll [choose] not to love him." The negation «не» plus infinitive carries the girl's flat refusal. «Любить» governs the accusative «его».
> «больно» — sorely, painfully (adverb): «Больно» as an adverb means "painfully, sorely" — "will beat me sore." Colloquially «больно» can also mean "very, awfully," but here, paired with «бить» (to beat), it is the literal pain the squire would inflict.

Ехал потом цыган (произносилось цы́ган), и этот тоже:  
Then a Gypsy rode by (pronounced Gýpsy), and he too:
> Imperfective motion verb «ехал»: «Ехал» (the unidirectional «ехать», imperfective) continues the song's procession — "then a Gypsy rode by." Each verse repeats this «ехал… пытал» frame, the imperfective holding each suitor in mid-journey.

Цы́ган девушек пытал, Девки любят али нет?  
The Gýpsy put the girls to the test, / Do the lasses love him, yes or no?
> Free order: object before verb: «Девушек пытал» places the object «девушек» (animate accusative = genitive plural) before the verb, the song's fixed refrain pattern. The animacy rule makes «девушек» look genitive, and word order serves the meter rather than grammar.

Но и цыгана нельзя любить:  
But one mustn't love a Gypsy either:
> «нельзя» + infinitive + animate object: «Нельзя любить» — "one mustn't love" — is the impersonal «нельзя» plus infinitive, here with the animate-accusative object «цыгана» (= genitive singular for an animate masculine noun). No subject; the prohibition floats over everyone.

Цы́ган будет воровать, А я буду горевать.  
The Gýpsy will go thieving, / And I'll be left grieving.
> Compound imperfective future with «буду»: Both lines use the compound (imperfective) future: «будет воровать» (will go thieving) and «буду горевать» (will grieve) — the conjugated future of «быть» plus an imperfective infinitive. The aspect frames these as ongoing, habitual outcomes, perfect for the song's general truths.

И много проехало так людей, которые пытали девушек, даже солдат:  
And many men rode by in this way, putting the question to the girls, even a soldier:
> «много» + genitive plural; neuter agreement: After the quantity word «много» the counted noun goes genitive plural — «людей» (of people). The verb takes the impersonal neuter singular «проехало», the regular agreement with «много + genitive». «Проехало» is the perfective «проехать» — many had ridden past in all.
> Relative «которые» in the nominative plural: «Которые» joins the relative clause, agreeing with «людей» in number (plural) but taking the nominative as subject of «пытали» within its own clause. "Many people rode by who put the question to the girls."

Солдат девушек пытал, Девки любят али нет?  
The soldier put the girls to the test, / Do the lasses love him, yes or no?
> The fixed refrain returns: The identical refrain «Девки любят али нет?» recurs verse by verse, each time with a new rider — the song's structure is incremental repetition, the spine of the чаstушка/folk genre. Only the suitor's name changes against the unvarying question.

Но солдата с презрением отвергли:  
But the soldier they spurned with scorn:
> Impersonal plural + instrumental of manner: The subjectless plural «отвергли» ("they spurned") leaves the rejecters generic — the girls of the song. «Солдата» is the animate accusative (= genitive singular), and «с презрением» is «с» + instrumental of manner: "spurned with scorn."

Солдат будет ранец несть, А я за ним...  
The soldier will carry his pack, / And I behind his back…
> «несть» — folk infinitive of «нести»: «несть» is a colloquial, song-register variant of the infinitive «нести» (to carry), shortened to fit the folk-verse metre. The whole couplet imitates a soldiers' street ditty.
> Compound future «будет несть»: «будет несть» is the imperfective compound future — «будет» (future of «быть») plus an imperfective infinitive — naming an ongoing future action: "will be carrying." The pack «ранец» sits in the accusative as direct object.
> «ранец» — a soldier's knapsack: «ранец», a loanword (German Ranzen), is the military pack carried on the back. The image fixes the song in the world of conscript soldiers.

Тут следовал самый нецензурный стишок, пропетый совершенно откровенно и произведший фурор в слушавшей публике.  
Here followed the most unprintable little verse, sung quite frankly and producing a furor among the listening crowd.
> Chain of participles modifying «стишок»: Two participles pile onto «стишок»: the past passive «пропетый» (sung) and the past active «произведший» (which produced). Stacking participles to compress two relative clauses into one noun phrase is a hallmark of Dostoevsky's bookish narration.
> «нецензурный» and the diminutive «стишок»: «нецензурный» means literally "un-censorable," i.e. unprintable, obscene. The diminutive «стишок» (from «стих», a verse) is dismissive-affectionate — a "little ditty" — softening the crudeness with a knowing wink.
> Past active participle «слушавшей»: «слушавшей» (listening / who was listening) is the past active participle of imperfective «слушать», agreeing with «публике» in the prepositional. It replaces a «которая слушала» clause, condensed to a single modifier.
> «произвести фурор» — to cause a sensation: A fixed idiom borrowed from French (faire fureur): «фурор» is a public stir, a sensation. The phrasing is mildly ironic given that what produced the "furor" was an obscene verse.

Кончилось наконец дело на купце:  
The matter ended at last on a merchant:
> Reflexive «кончилось» and inverted order: «кончилось» is the reflexive (-ся) intransitive "came to an end" — the verb takes no object, the matter ends of itself. The subject «дело» follows its verb, and the adverb «наконец» is wedged inside, a loose spoken rhythm.
> Prepositional «на купце»: «на купце» is the prepositional case after «на», here marking the point the sequence of verses settled on — "ended on a merchant." Animate «купец» declines to «купце».

Купчик девушек пытал, Девки любят али нет?  
The merchant put the girls to the test, / Do the lasses love him, yes or no?
> Folk-song diminutives: «купчик», «девки»: «купчик» is a familiar diminutive of «купец» (a little merchant-fellow); «девки» is the plain folk word for young women, earthier than «девушки». Both pin the verse to peasant song register.
> «али» — folk «или»: «али» is a rustic, dialectal variant of «или» (or), used in song and peasant speech: "do they love him or not?" It signals the folk-poetic voice as clearly as a banjo.
> Animate accusative «девушек»: «девушек» is the genitive-shaped accusative of animacy: animate plural objects borrow the genitive ending, so "tested the girls" looks like the genitive «девушек». «пытал» here is the older sense "put to the test, questioned."

И оказалось, что очень любят, потому, дескать, что  
And it turned out that they loved him very much indeed, for, so they say,
> Impersonal «оказалось, что…»: «оказалось» is an impersonal neuter past — "it turned out" — with no nominative subject, introducing a «что»-clause of reported fact. The pattern frames the whole revelation as something that simply emerged.
> «дескать» — reported-speech marker: «дескать» is a particle flagging that the words are someone else's claim, not the narrator's — "so they say," "supposedly," often with a hint of irony. It distances the speaker from the assertion that follows.

Купчик будет торговать, А я буду царевать.  
The merchant will be trading, / And I'll be queening it.
> Parallel compound futures: Both lines use the imperfective compound future «будет/буду» plus infinitive, naming ongoing future states: "will be trading" / "will be reigning." The parallel structure carries the song's sing-song logic.
> «царевать» — to live like a queen: From «царь» (tsar), «царевать» means to reign, but in this song it is the girl's daydream of lording it in ease — "queening it," living grandly while the merchant works.

Калганов даже озлился:  
Kalganov even grew cross:
> Reflexive of emotion «озлился»: «озлился» is a perfective reflexive (-ся) verb of entering a state — "grew angry, got cross" — from «зло» (malice). The -ся here marks a change of inner state in the subject himself.

— Это совсем вчерашняя песня, — заметил он вслух, — и кто это им сочиняет! Недостает, чтобы железнодорожник аль жид проехали и девушек пытали: эти всех бы победили. — И, почти обидевшись, он тут же и объявил, что ему скучно, сел на диван и вдруг задремал.  
—That's a completely outdated song,—he remarked aloud,—and who is it that composes such things for them! All it lacks is for a railwayman or a Jew to ride by and put the question to the girls: those two would carry the day over all the rest.—And, almost taking offense, he there and then announced that he was bored, sat down on the sofa, and suddenly dozed off.
> «аль» and the slur «жид»: «аль» is, like «али», folk for «или» (or). «жид» is a now-offensive ethnic slur for a Jew, neutral-to-pejorative in 19th-c. usage; Kalganov tosses it off casually, a period detail of class and prejudice the translation keeps as "a Jew."
> Conditional «бы победили»: «всех бы победили» is the conditional: past-form verb plus the particle «бы», "would beat everyone." The «бы» leans on «всех» rather than the verb, its usual mobile habit; «всех» is the animate-genitive accusative "everyone."
> Perfective gerund «обидевшись»: «обидевшись» (having taken offense) is a perfective past gerund «деепричастие» of the reflexive «обидеться», naming a completed circumstance accompanying the main verbs. It must share their subject — Kalganov.
> Dative-subject «ему скучно»: «ему скучно» is the classic impersonal experiencer construction: the dative «ему» names who feels, and the neuter predicate «скучно» the state — "he was bored," literally "to-him [it-is] boring."
> «недостаёт, чтобы…» — "all that's missing is…": «недостаёт» (impersonal: "there is lacking") plus a «чтобы»-clause means "the only thing missing is that…" — Kalganov's sarcastic way of saying the song could hardly get more vulgar.

Хорошенькое личико его несколько побледнело и откинулось на подушку дивана.  
His pretty little face had paled somewhat and had sunk back onto the sofa cushion.
> Double diminutive: «хорошенькое личико»: Both words are diminutive-affectionate: «хорошенький» (pretty, dear) softens «хороший», and «личико» is the tender diminutive of «лицо» (face). Together they tint Kalganov's boyish prettiness with warmth.
> Perfective verbs; reflexive «откинулось»: Both verbs are perfective past, marking single completed events against the scene's flow. «откинулось» is reflexive-intransitive — the face "sank back" of itself — agreeing as neuter with «личико».

— Посмотри, какой он хорошенький, — говорила Грушенька, подводя к нему Митю, — я ему давеча головку расчесывала; волоски точно лен и густые…  
—Look how pretty he is,—Grushenka was saying, leading Mitya over to him,—I combed his little head just now; his hair is just like flax, and thick…
> Imperfective gerund «подводя»: «подводя» (leading over) is a present imperfective gerund «деепричастие» expressing an action simultaneous with «говорила» — she speaks while leading Mitya up. Its subject is Grushenka, the main-clause subject.
> «давеча» — "a little while ago": «давеча» is a homely, slightly archaic adverb meaning "earlier today, just now." It recurs in this chapter (see «давеча» in s105) and gives Grushenka's speech its colloquial colour.
> Tender diminutives «головку», «волоски»: «головку» (little head, from «голова») and «волоски» (little hairs, from «волосы») are caressing diminutives. Grushenka is mothering the sleeping Kalganov, and the suffixes carry all the tenderness of the gesture.
> «точно» as "just like"; «лен» (flax): Here «точно» is not "exactly" but the comparative particle "just like, as if": his hair is fair and fine «точно лен» — like flax. Flax for blond hair is a stock Russian folk simile.

И, нагнувшись над ним в умилении, она поцеловала его лоб.  
And, bending over him in tenderness, she kissed his forehead.
> Perfective gerund «нагнувшись»: «нагнувшись» (having bent over) is a perfective past gerund: the bending is completed just before — and frames — the main act «поцеловала» (she kissed). Both share Grushenka as subject.
> «умиление» — tender emotion: «умиление» names a soft, melting tenderness moved almost to tears — a key Dostoevskian feeling, the heart suddenly overflowing with affection. "In tenderness" only partly catches its near-religious warmth.

Калганов в один миг открыл глаза, взглянул на нее, привстал и с самым озабоченным видом спросил: где Максимов?  
In an instant Kalganov opened his eyes, glanced at her, half rose, and with the most anxious air asked: where was Maximov?
> String of perfective verbs: A rapid chain of perfective past verbs — opened, glanced, half-rose, asked — each a single completed event, driving the narrative forward beat by beat. «привстал» carries the prefix «при-», "a little, partway up."
> Zero copula in the embedded question: «где Максимов?» has no verb "to be": the present-tense copula is simply absent, as always in Russian — "where [is] Maximov?" It is an embedded question after «спросил».

— Вот ему кого надо, — засмеялась Грушенька, — да посиди со мной минутку. Митя, сбегай за его Максимовым.  
—So it's him he wants,—Grushenka laughed,—but do sit with me a little minute. Mitya, run and fetch his Maximov for him.
> Dative + «надо»; «кого» as object: «ему… надо» is a dative-experiencer construction — "to him [it] is needed" = "what he wants." «кого» is the animate-genitive accusative of «кто», the person he needs, fronted for emphasis: "so it's HIM he wants."
> Imperatives «посиди», «сбегай»: Two perfective imperatives: «посиди» (sit a while — prefix «по-» limits the duration) and «сбегай» (run and fetch — "there-and-back"). Both are warm, brisk commands typical of Grushenka's bossing.
> «минутку» — "a little minute": «минутку», diminutive of «минута», is the coaxing "just a tiny minute" — affectionate, wheedling, the suffix doing emotional rather than literal work.

Оказалось, что Максимов уж и не отходил от девок, изредка только отбегал налить себе ликерчику, шоколаду же выпил две чашки.  
It turned out that Maximov had not in fact left the girls' side at all, only now and then darting off to pour himself a drop of liqueur, and as for chocolate he had drunk two cupfuls.
> Imperfective for repeated background action: «не отходил» (kept not leaving) and «отбегал» (would dart off) are imperfective pasts naming habitual, repeated behaviour over the evening — the standing background against which events happen.
> Partitive genitive «шоколаду»; topic-fronting «же»: «шоколаду» is an old partitive genitive in -у ("some chocolate"), surviving in mass nouns. «же» here is not emphatic but a soft topic-shift particle — "and as for chocolate" — fronting the new topic «шоколаду».
> Diminutive partitive «ликерчику»: «ликерчику» combines the affectionate diminutive «ликерчик» (a nice little liqueur) with the partitive genitive -у — "a drop of liqueur." The suffix conveys cosy self-indulgence.

Личико его раскраснелось, а нос побагровел, глаза стали влажные, сладостные.  
His little face had flushed red, and his nose had turned purple, his eyes had grown moist and rapturous.
> Contrastive «а» linking parallel clauses: «а» here is the mild contrastive-and that hinges two parallel observations — face flushed pink, but nose turned purple — without real opposition. It is the untranslatable connective of Russian description.
> «стать» + nominative predicate adjectives: «стали влажные, сладостные» — "grew moist, sweet." With «стать» plus an adjective the predicate stays nominative (agreeing with «глаза»), unlike a predicate noun, which would take the instrumental.
> «сладостный» — bookish "sweet, blissful": «сладостный», an elevated literary doublet of «сладкий» (sweet), means rapturous, voluptuously sweet. Applied to a tipsy old man's moist eyes it is gently mock-poetic.

Он подбежал и объявил, что сейчас «под один мотивчик» хочет протанцевать танец саботьеру.  
He came trotting up and announced that he wished, right now, "to a certain little tune," to dance the sabotière.
> «под мотивчик» — "to a tune"; diminutive: «под» + accusative here means "to (the accompaniment of)" a tune, as in «танцевать под музыку». «мотивчик» is a coy diminutive of «мотив» (melody) — "a certain little tune," set in quotes as Maximov's own affected phrase.

— Меня ведь маленького всем этим благовоспитанным светским танцам обучали-с…  
—You see, as a little boy I was taught all these well-bred, fashionable dances, sir…
> The servile particle «-с»: The clitic «-с» (from «сударь», "sir") tacked onto words is the deferential, self-abasing speech-tic of the period's petty gentry and servants. Maximov sprinkles it everywhere — «обучали-с», «папиросочку-с» — marking his cringing, ingratiating manner.
> Indefinite-personal «обучали»: «обучали» is a third-person-plural verb with no stated subject — the indefinite-personal construction, "they taught me" = "I was taught." «Меня» is the accusative object fronted for emphasis.
> «благовоспитанный», «светский» — genteel society: «благовоспитанный» is a stately compound, "well-brought-up, of good breeding"; «светский» means "of high society, fashionable" (from «свет», the social world). Both in the dative plural after «обучали» ("taught… to dances"), they paint the gentility Maximov pretends to.

— Ну ступай, ступай с ним, Митя, а я отсюда посмотрю, как он там танцевать будет.  
—Well, go on, go along with him, Mitya, and I'll watch from here how he dances over there.
> «ступай» — archaic-folk "go": «ступай(те)» is an old, homely imperative "go, go along," warmer and more rustic than «иди». Its doubling — «ступай, ступай» — is the affectionate, shooing repetition of everyday speech.
> Compound future in an embedded question: «танцевать будет» is again the imperfective compound future — "how he will [be] dancing" — here with the auxiliary «будет» after the infinitive, the order shuffled freely as Russian allows.

— Нет, и я, и я пойду смотреть, — воскликнул Калганов, самым наивным образом отвергая предложение Грушеньки посидеть с ним.  
—No, I'll go too, I'll go and watch as well,—cried Kalganov, in the most naive way declining Grushenka's offer to sit with her.
> Emphatic repetition «и я, и я»: «и… и» here is not "both… and" but emphatic insistence — "me too, me too I'll go." The doubling captures Kalganov's childish eagerness; «пойду» is the perfective future, a single decided act.
> Imperfective gerund «отвергая»: «отвергая» (declining, rejecting) is a present imperfective gerund describing the manner accompanying «воскликнул» — he cries out, in so doing rejecting Grushenka's offer. «предложение… посидеть» governs an infinitive complement.

И все направились смотреть.  
And everyone set off to watch.
> Reflexive «направились» + infinitive of purpose: «направились» is the perfective reflexive "set off, headed," the -ся marking the subjects' own motion. The bare infinitive «смотреть» states the purpose — "set off to watch."

Максимов действительно свой танец протанцевал, но, кроме Мити, почти ни в ком не произвел особенного восхищения.  
Maximov did in fact dance his dance, but apart from Mitya he aroused no particular admiration in almost anyone.
> «действительно» — "indeed, in fact": «действительно» (from «действие», action) is the confirming adverb "really, in fact, sure enough" — the narrator wryly granting that Maximov did go through with his dance.
> Negative concord «ни в ком… не»: «ни в ком… не произвел» stacks the negatives required by Russian concord: the ни-word «ни в ком» (in nobody) demands «не» on the verb too — two negatives, one meaning, "aroused in no one." «кроме Мити» (genitive after «кроме») carves out the exception.
> Reflexive-possessive «свой»: «свой» refers the dance back to the clause's own subject, Maximov — "his own dance." Using «его» instead would mean someone else's. The perfective «протанцевал» (with «про-») means danced it right through, start to finish.

Весь танец состоял в каких-то подпрыгиваниях с вывертыванием в стороны ног, подошвами кверху, и с каждым прыжком Максимов ударял ладонью по подошве.  
The whole dance consisted of a sort of little hops with the legs twisted out to the sides, soles upward, and with each hop Maximov struck the sole with the flat of his hand.
> «состоять в» + prepositional: «состоять в чём-то» ("to consist of/in") governs the prepositional: «в… подпрыгиваниях» — "consisted in some hops." The verbal noun «подпрыгивания» (little jumps up), with the indefinite «каких-то», keeps the dance vague and ridiculous.
> Instrumental «ладонью» of means; «по» + dative: «ладонью» is the instrumental of the means — he struck with the flat of his hand. «по подошве» uses «по» with the dative for the surface struck, the repeated-blow sense suiting imperfective «ударял».
> Vivid dance vocabulary: «вывёртывание» is the twisting-out of the legs; «подошвами кверху» (instrumental) means "soles upward"; «кверху» is the adverb "toward the top." The packed nouns make the absurd clog-dance almost diagrammatic.

Калганову совсем не понравилось, а Митя даже облобызал танцора.  
Kalganov did not like it at all, but Mitya even gave the dancer a kiss.
> Dative experiencer with «нравиться»: «нравиться» works backwards from English: the thing pleases, the person stands in the dative — «Калганову… не понравилось», "to-Kalganov it did not please" = "Kalganov did not like it."
> «облобызать» — to kiss (mock-solemn): «облобызать», from the Church-Slavonic-flavoured «лобзать» (to kiss), is a high, archaic word for kissing. The narrator uses it ironically for Mitya's drunken, effusive smacker on the dancer — solemn diction over a comic act.

— Ну, спасибо, устал, может, что глядишь сюда: конфетку хочешь, а? Цигарочку, может, хочешь?  
—Well, thank you, you're tired; maybe you're looking over here because you'd like a sweet, eh? A cigar, maybe, would you like one?
> Cosy diminutives «конфетку», «цигарочку»: Mitya plies the old man with diminutives: «конфетка» (a sweet) and «цигарочка» (a little cigar, folk «цигарка»). The suffixes are coaxing and hospitable — the warm, expansive register of a drunk being kind.
> Tag particle «а?»: The trailing «а?» is a soft tag inviting agreement, like English "…eh?" / "…right?". It belongs to the texture of coaxing spoken Russian, hovering between a question and an offer.

— Папиросочку-с.  
—A little cigarette, sir.
> «папиросочка» — double-diminutive cigarette, with «-с»: «папироска» is already a familiar form of «папироса» (a Russian cigarette with a cardboard tube); «папиросочку» adds a second affectionate layer, and the servile «-с» completes Maximov's mincing politeness. The bare accusative answers "which would you like?"

— Выпить не хочешь ли?  
—Wouldn't you like a drink?
> Interrogative «ли» with negation: «не хочешь ли?» uses the enclitic «ли» to form a polite yes/no question, the negative making it a soft, hospitable offer — "wouldn't you like…?". The fronted infinitive «выпить» (have a drink) is the focus.

— Я тут ликерцу-с… А шоколатных конфеточек у вас нет-с?  
—A little liqueur for me, sir… And wouldn't you have any chocolate sweets, sir?
> Partitive diminutive «ликерцу»: «ликерцу» is the diminutive «ликерец» in the partitive genitive -у — "a drop of liqueur, sir." Maximov uses the cosy form even of his tipple, every word shrunken and ingratiating.
> Genitive of negation «нет конфеточек»: After «нет» the absent thing must stand in the genitive: «конфеточек у вас нет» — "you have no sweets." «конфеточек» is the genitive plural of the diminutive «конфеточка»; «шоколатных» is a dialectal-childish spelling of «шоколадных».

— Да вот на столе целый воз, выбирай любую, голубиная ты душа!  
—Why, there's a whole cartload on the table, take any you like, you dove-soul!
> «целый воз» — "a whole cartload": «воз» is a cart's load; «целый воз» is the hyperbolic "a whole wagonful," Mitya's expansive, drunken generosity — sweets by the cartload on the table.
> «голубиная душа» — "you dove-soul": An endearment built on «голубь» (dove), bird of meekness and purity — "you gentle, dove-like soul." The interposed «ты» («голубиная ты душа») is the affectionate Russian way of slotting "you" inside a vocative phrase.

— Нет-с, я такую-с, чтобы с ванилью… для старичков-с… Хи-хи!  
—No, sir, I'd like one, sir, the kind with vanilla… for old men, sir… He-he!
> «чтобы» of desired specification: Maximov elides the verb ("I'd [like] one") and uses «чтобы… с ванилью» to specify the wished-for kind — "such a one that [it be] with vanilla." «ванилью» is the instrumental after «с» (with). The «-с» clings to «такую» mid-phrase.
> «старичок» — affectionate "little old man": «старичок», the warm diminutive of «старик», is "a dear little old man." Maximov gently classes himself among the «старички» (genitive plural after «для») who like vanilla sweets — self-deprecating and arch.

— Нет, брат, таких особенных нет.  
—No, brother, there's none of that special kind.
> Genitive of negation in the plural: «таких особенных нет» — "there are none of that special kind" — with «нет» forcing the genitive plural «таких особенных». The noun «конфет» is left understood from the previous lines.
> «брат» as familiar address: «брат» (brother) here is not literal kinship but the warm, levelling form of address among men — "old chap, friend." Mitya, expansive in his cups, calls everyone «брат».

— Послушайте! — нагнулся вдруг старичок к самому уху Мити, — эта вот девочка-с, Марьюшка-с, хи-хи, как бы мне, если бы можно, с нею познакомиться, по доброте вашей…  
—Listen!—the old fellow suddenly bent right down to Mitya's very ear,—that girl there, sir, Maryushka, sir, he-he, how might I, if it were possible, get acquainted with her, out of your kindness, sir…
> Dative + «бы» + infinitive of wishful possibility: «как бы мне… познакомиться» is a dative-experiencer wish softened by «бы» — "how might I (somehow) get acquainted." The dative «мне» names the would-be agent of the infinitive; «бы» tints it hypothetical and timid.
> Conditional «если бы можно»: «если бы можно» is the irrealis conditional — "if it were possible" — the impersonal «можно» (one may) softened by «если бы». It hedges his cheeky request in layers of subjunctive timidity.
> «Марьюшка» — caressing diminutive of Marya: «Марьюшка» is a tender, folk-affectionate diminutive of the name «Марья» (Marya), via the suffix -юшка. Maximov dignifies even the serving-girl with a sweet name, again capped by the servile «-с».

— Ишь ты чего захотел! Нет, брат, врешь.  
—Look what you're after! No, brother, you're lying.
> «ишь ты» — mock-indignant exclamation: «ишь (ты)» is a folksy interjection of mocking surprise — "look at you!, well, well!". «чего захотел» (genitive object «чего») = "the nerve, what he's after!" The whole phrase is good-humoured ribbing.
> «врёшь» — "you're lying / no chance": Literally "you lie," «врёшь!» is a stock colloquial brush-off meaning "nonsense, not a chance, you won't." Mitya isn't accusing Maximov of a lie so much as flatly denying his request.

— Я никому ведь зла не делаю-с, — уныло прошептал Максимов.  
—I do no one any harm, you see, sir,—Maximov whispered mournfully.
> Double negative concord «никому… не»: «никому… не делаю» again shows obligatory negative concord — the ни-word «никому» (dative, "to nobody") still needs «не» on the verb. «зла» is genitive of negation: "I do no harm to anyone."
> Appealing particle «ведь»: «ведь» appeals to shared knowledge and pleads for sympathy — "after all, you see, surely." Maximov's «я никому ведь зла не делаю» is a small plaintive defence: "I don't do anyone any harm, you know."
> «уныло» — "mournfully, despondently": «уныло», from «уныние» (dejection, a spiritual gloom close to the sin of despair), tints his whisper with hangdog sadness. Dostoevsky's narration loves such single-word emotional cues.

— Ну хорошо, хорошо. Здесь, брат, только поют и пляшут, а впрочем, черт! подожди… Кушай пока, ешь, пей, веселись. Денег не надо ли?  
—Well, all right, all right. Here, brother, they only sing and dance, but—ah, the devil! wait a bit… Eat for now, eat, drink, enjoy yourself. Do you need any money?
> Cluster of imperatives: A burst of imperfective imperatives urging continued action: «кушай» (the polite-folksy "eat"), then plain «ешь, пей, веселись» (eat, drink, make merry). «веселись» is reflexive — "enjoy yourself." The imperfective fits open-ended indulgence.
> Genitive of negation + «ли» offer: «денег не надо ли?» pairs the genitive of negation «денег» (after «не надо») with the polite question particle «ли» — "don't you need any money?". «надо» governs the genitive of what is wanted/needed under negation.

— Потом бы разве-с, — улыбнулся Максимов.  
—Later, perhaps, sir,—Maximov smiled.
> «бы» wish + «разве»: «потом бы разве» is an elliptical, hedged wish — "perhaps later, maybe." The bare «бы» (without a verb) carries the conditional softening, and «разве» adds tentative "perhaps"; «-с» rounds off the servility.

— Хорошо, хорошо…  
—All right, all right…

Голова горела у Мити.  
Mitya's head was burning.
> «у Мити» possessor; topic-comment order: Russian states bodily sensations with «у» + genitive for the possessor: «у Мити» — "at Mitya's [was] a burning head." Putting «голова» first and «у Мити» last makes the head the topic and Mitya the new, weighted information.

Он вышел в сени на деревянную верхнюю галерейку, обходившую изнутри, со двора, часть всего строения.  
He went out into the passage onto the wooden upper gallery that ran along the inside, on the courtyard side, around part of the whole building.
> «сени» and «галерейка» — the house's layout: «сени» is the cold entrance passage of a traditional Russian house, between door and living rooms. «галерейка» is the diminutive of «галерея» — a little open wooden gallery/balcony running round the courtyard side, typical of provincial inns.
> Past active participle «обходившую»: «обходившую» (running around, encircling) is a past imperfective active participle agreeing with «галерейку» in the accusative feminine. It packs a whole «которая обходила» relative clause into one modifier — pure literary syntax.

Свежий воздух оживил его.  
The fresh air revived him.
> Perfective «оживил» of a single result: «оживил» is perfective (prefix «о-» on «живить») — a single completed event with a result: the fresh air "revived him" all at once. «его» is the accusative object. A spare, decisive sentence amid the delirium.

Он стоял один, в темноте, в углу и вдруг схватил себя обеими руками за голову.  
He stood alone, in the dark, in a corner, and suddenly clutched his head with both hands.
> Reflexive pronoun «себя» + «за» + accusative: «схватил себя за голову» uses the reflexive object pronoun «себя» (himself) with the idiom «схватить за» + accusative (to seize by) — "clutched himself by the head." Note «себя» as a full object, distinct from the verbal clitic -ся.
> Instrumental of means «обеими руками»: «обеими руками» (with both hands) is the instrumental of the means. «обеими» is the feminine form of the dual-derived numeral «оба/обе» (both), which still distinguishes gender.

Разбросанные мысли его вдруг соединились, ощущения слились воедино, и всё дало свет.  
His scattered thoughts suddenly joined together, his sensations fused into one, and everything threw off a light.
> Perfective verbs of sudden convergence: Three perfectives mark the abrupt mental event: «соединились» (joined), «слились» (fused — both reflexive-intransitive), «дало свет» (gave/threw off light). The aspect makes each a single, decisive flash, mirroring the sudden clarity.
> «воедино» — "into one": «воедино», a bookish fused adverb (в + единое), means "together into a single whole." Paired with reflexive «слились» (merged) it intensifies the image of scattered feelings fusing — elevated, almost mystical diction for the moment of revelation.

Страшный, ужасный свет!  
A fearful, a terrible light!
> Verbless exclamation; doubled epithet: A nominal, copula-less exclamation — just "[A] fearful, terrible light!" The paired near-synonyms «страшный, ужасный» intensify by accumulation, a Dostoevskian rhythm of mounting dread.

«Вот если застрелиться, так когда же как не теперь? — пронеслось в уме его. — Сходить за пистолетом, принести его сюда и вот в этом самом, грязном и темном углу и покончить».  
"If I'm to shoot myself, then when, if not now?" flashed through his mind. "Go for the pistol, bring it here, and right here, in this very corner, dirty and dark, make an end of it."
> Emphatic «же» + «как не»: «когда же… как не теперь?» = "when then, if not now?". «же» drives home the rhetorical urgency; «как не» ("if not, how if not") sets up the only possible answer. The particle is the texture of Mitya's frantic inner voice.
> Reflexive «застрелиться»; bare infinitives of resolve: «застрелиться» is the reflexive — to shoot oneself, the -ся turning the act inward. The clipped infinitives «сходить… принести… покончить» (go for, bring, make an end) read as a bare to-do list of suicide, terrible in its flatness.
> Reflexive «пронеслось»; possessive after the noun: «пронеслось» (flashed, rushed through — reflexive-intransitive) is impersonal-neuter, its subject the quoted thought. «в уме его» places the possessive «его» after «уме», a bookish word order weighting "in his mind."

Почти с минуту он стоял в нерешимости.  
For nearly a minute he stood in indecision.
> «нерешимость» — irresolution: «нерешимость» (from «решить», to decide) is the state of being unable to decide — indecision, wavering. The prepositional «в нерешимости» fixes Mitya frozen between life and the pistol.

Давеча, как летел сюда, сзади него стоял позор, совершенное, содеянное уже им воровство и эта кровь, кровь!..  
Earlier, as he was flying here, behind him stood disgrace, the theft already perfected, already committed by him, and that blood, blood!..
> «как» = "as / when"; imperfective «летел»: Here «как» means "as, when" (temporal), not "how." «летел» is the unidirectional motion verb «лететь» in the imperfective past — "as he was flying [here]" — its single-trajectory sense fitting his headlong rush.
> Stacked passive participles; instrumental agent «им»: «совершённое, содеянное… воровство» — two past passive participles modifying «воровство» (theft): "perpetrated, already committed." The agent is in the instrumental «им» (by him), the standard way a passive names its doer. «содеянное» is markedly bookish-archaic.
> «позор» (disgrace) and the hammering repetition: «позор» is public shame, dishonour — the key word of Mitya's torment. The repeated «эта кровь, кровь!..» (that blood, blood!) with trailing dots enacts his obsessive horror — Dostoevsky's syntax breaking down under feeling.

Но тогда было легче, о, легче!  
But then it had been easier, oh, easier!
> Impersonal «было легче» — comparative predicate: «легче» is the invariable comparative of «лёгкий/легко» (easier), used impersonally with «было»: "it had been easier." No subject — the state alone is predicated, the dative experiencer left implicit.

Ведь уж всё тогда было покончено: ее он потерял, уступил, она погибла для него, исчезла — о, приговор тогда был легче ему, по крайней мере казался неминуемым, необходимым, ибо для чего же было оставаться на свете?  
For everything had then already been over and done with: he had lost her, given her up, she was lost to him, gone—oh, the sentence had then been easier for him, at least it had seemed inescapable, inevitable, for what was the point of staying on in the world?
> Periphrastic passive «было покончено»: «было покончено» is the short-form past passive participle «покончено» plus «было» — "it had all been finished/done with." The short neuter form joins «быть» to state a completed result, the core periphrastic passive.
> Instrumental predicate after «казаться»: «казаться» (to seem) takes its predicate in the instrumental: «казался неминуемым, необходимым» — "seemed inescapable, inevitable." The instrumental frames a perceived, attributed quality rather than an inherent one.
> «ибо» — archaic-bookish "for, because": «ибо» is the elevated, scriptural conjunction "for, because," loftier than «потому что». Its use — «ибо для чего же было оставаться на свете?» — raises Mitya's despair to almost biblical pitch.
> Impersonal «было оставаться» + «же»: «для чего… было оставаться?» is an impersonal rhetorical question with «было» plus infinitive — "what was the point of staying?". «же» adds insistent emphasis; the construction has no subject, the existential weight carried by the bare infinitive.

А теперь!  
But now!
> Contrastive «а» pivoting the thought: A single «А теперь!» ("But now!") swivels the whole reflection: «а» marks the sharp turn from the past's easier despair to the unbearable present. The verbless exclamation lets the contrast hang.

Теперь разве то, что тогда?  
Is it now as it was then?
> «разве» rhetorical question; «то… что» correlative: «разве» opens a rhetorical question expecting "no" — "is it really…?". The correlative «то… что» ("that which / the same as") compares now and then: "Is now the same as then?". The copula is, as always, absent.

Теперь с одним по крайней мере привидением, страшилищем, покончено: этот ее «прежний», ее бесспорный, фатальный человек этот исчез, не оставив следа.  
Now at least one of them is done with, one phantom, one specter: this "former" man of hers, her indisputable, fatal man—this one had vanished without leaving a trace.
> Impersonal passive «покончено с»: «с одним… покончено» — "with one [phantom] it is done" — the short passive «покончено» used impersonally with «с» + instrumental. «привидением, страшилищем» stand in the instrumental governed by «с».
> «привидение» and «страшилище»: «привидение» is a ghost or apparition; «страшилище» (from «страшный») is a monster, a fearful spectre. Mitya casts his rival, the Pole, as a haunting phantom — words of dread for what proved comically small.
> «прежний» and «фатальный»: «прежний» means "former, previous" — her old, first love. «фатальный» (a French/Latin borrowing) means fateful, fatal, destined; the quotation marks around «прежний» mark it as the household phrase for this looming figure from Grushenka's past.

Страшное привидение обратилось вдруг во что-то такое маленькое, такое комическое; его снесли руками в спальню и заперли на ключ.  
The terrible phantom had suddenly turned into something so small, so comical; they had carried him off bodily into the bedroom and locked him in with a key.
> Reflexive «обратиться во» + accusative: «обратиться во что-то» (reflexive) means "to turn into something"; «во» + accusative marks the result of transformation. The indefinite «что-то такое маленькое, такое комическое» (-то marking a specific-but-vague thing) shrinks the dreaded phantom to a comic trifle.
> Indefinite-personal «снесли», «заперли»: Two subjectless third-plural perfectives — "they carried him off and locked him in" — the indefinite-personal construction where "they" is no one in particular. «снесли руками» (carried bodily) and «заперли на ключ» (locked with a key) are crisp, complete acts.

Оно никогда не воротится.  
It will never come back.
> Negative concord; archaic «воротиться»: «никогда не воротится» again pairs the ни-word «никогда» (never) with «не» — obligatory concord. «воротится» is the folk-archaic reflexive variant of «возвратится / вернётся» (will return), perfective future.

Ей стыдно, и из глаз ее он уже видит теперь ясно, кого она любит.  
She is ashamed, and from her eyes he can now see clearly whom it is she loves.
> Dative-subject «ей стыдно»: «ей стыдно» is the impersonal experiencer pattern: dative «ей» (to her) plus the predicative «стыдно» — "she is ashamed," literally "to-her [it-is] shameful." The feeling has no nominative subject, only the one who feels it.
> Embedded question «кого она любит»: «кого она любит» is an indirect question, object of «видит» — "sees whom she loves." «кого» is the animate accusative of «кто», governed by «любит» inside the subordinate clause.

Ну вот теперь бы только и жить и… и нельзя жить, нельзя, о, проклятие!  
Well, so now, if only one could live, and… and one cannot live, one cannot, oh, a curse on it!
> «бы… жить» — the unattainable wish: «теперь бы только и жить» is a bare «бы» plus infinitive expressing a yearning, unreachable wish — "if only one could just live now." The «и» («только и жить») intensifies: "to do nothing but live." No subject — a pure impersonal longing.
> Impersonal «нельзя» + infinitive: «нельзя жить» — "one cannot live" — is the impersonal modal «нельзя» (it is not possible / not allowed) plus infinitive, with no subject. Its repetition («нельзя, нельзя») hammers the verdict against the preceding wish.

«Боже, оживи поверженного у забора! Пронеси эту страшную чашу мимо меня! Ведь делал же ты чудеса, господи, для таких же грешников, как и я! Ну что, ну что, если старик жив? О, тогда срам остального позора я уничтожу, я ворочу украденные деньги, я отдам их, достану из-под земли… Следов позора не останется, кроме как в сердце моем навеки! Но нет, нет, о, невозможные малодушные мечты! О, проклятие!»  
"God, bring back to life the man struck down by the fence! Let this terrible cup pass from me! You have worked miracles, Lord, for sinners just like me! Well, what if, what if the old man is alive? Oh, then I will wipe out the shame of all the rest of the disgrace, I will give back the stolen money, I will return it, I'll dig it up from under the earth… No trace of the disgrace will remain, except in my heart forever! But no, no, oh, impossible, faint-hearted dreams! Oh, a curse on it!"
> Church-Slavonic vocatives «Боже», «господи»: «Боже» and «господи» are old vocative forms — "O God," "O Lord" — surviving only in prayer and exclamation, where modern Russian otherwise lost the vocative case. Mitya's drunken cry slips straight into liturgical address.
> Imperatives of prayer; perfective futures of vow: The prayer opens with perfective imperatives — «оживи» (bring to life), «пронеси» (carry past) — the verbs of supplication. Then come perfective futures of resolve: «уничтожу, ворочу, отдам, достану» (I will wipe out, return, give back, dig up), each a vowed single act.
> «малодушный» — faint-hearted: «малодушный» literally "small-souled" (мало + душа) means cowardly, faint-hearted, lacking spirit. Mitya brands his hope of reprieve as a craven dream — self-lacerating moral vocabulary characteristic of him.

Но всё же как бы луч какой-то светлой надежды блеснул ему во тьме.  
Yet all the same a kind of ray of bright hope seemed to gleam to him in the darkness.
> «как бы» ("as if") + dative «ему»: «как бы» here means "as it were, as if" — softening the image to a seeming. «блеснул ему» uses the dative «ему» for the one to whom the ray gleamed (a dative of the affected person). «луч какой-то светлой надежды»: "some ray of bright hope."
> Archaic «во тьме»: «во тьме» (in the darkness) keeps the older «во» (vs «в») before the consonant cluster, and «тьма» is the elevated/poetic word for darkness over plain «темнота». The phrasing lifts the line toward the symbolic — light in the dark.

Он сорвался с места и бросился в комнаты — к ней, к ней опять, к царице его навеки!  
He tore himself from the spot and rushed into the rooms—to her, to her again, to the queen of his heart forever!
> Reflexive perfectives of sudden motion: «сорвался» (tore himself away) and «бросился» (flung himself, rushed) are both perfective reflexive verbs of abrupt, self-propelled motion. The -ся renders the violence inward and total — he hurls his whole self forward.
> «царица» — "queen," exalting Grushenka: «царица» (empress, queen) crowns Grushenka as the sovereign of his heart, echoing the song's «царевать» earlier. «навеки» (forever, for the ages) is bookish and absolute — the lover's hyperbole at full pitch.

«Да неужели один час, одна минута ее любви не стоят всей остальной жизни, хотя бы и в муках позора?»  
"Can it be that one hour, one minute of her love is not worth all the rest of life, even in the torments of disgrace?"
> «да неужели» — incredulous rhetorical question: «да неужели?» voices astonished disbelief — "can it really be that…?". With the negated verb «не стоят» (are not worth) it forms a rhetorical question whose unspoken answer is "surely they are worth it."
> Concessive «хотя бы» with «бы»: «хотя бы и…» means "even if, even though it be…" — a concession carrying the subjunctive «бы»: "even in the torments of disgrace." «в муках позора»: prepositional «в муках» + genitive «позора» (the torments of shame).

Этот дикий вопрос захватил его сердце.  
This wild question gripped his heart.
> Perfective «захватил»; demonstrative «этот»: «захватил» is perfective — a single seizing act, "gripped, seized." The demonstrative «этот» (this) ties the sentence back to the question just quoted, the topic-tracking that lets Russian reorder so freely. «его сердце»: accusative object.

«К ней, к ней одной, ее видеть, слушать и ни о чем не думать, обо всем забыть, хотя бы только на эту ночь, на час, на мгновение!»  
"To her, to her alone, to see her, to hear her, and to think of nothing, to forget everything, if only for this one night, for an hour, for a single moment!"
> Negative concord «ни о чём… не»: «ни о чём не думать» — "to think of nothing" — splits the negative pronoun around its preposition («ни о чём»), as Russian requires, and still keeps «не» on the verb. Three negatives, one meaning.
> Chain of bare infinitives of longing: The whole outburst is a string of infinitives — «видеть, слушать, не думать, забыть» (to see, to hear, not to think, to forget) — with no finite verb at all, voicing pure desire as unanchored yearning. «хотя бы только на эту ночь»: "if only for this one night."

Пред самым входом в сени, еще на галерейке, он столкнулся с хозяином Трифоном Борисычем.  
Right at the threshold of the entryway, still out on the little gallery, he ran into the innkeeper, Trifon Borisych.
> «сени» — the cold entry-passage: «Сени» (plural only) is the unheated vestibule or passage between the outer door and the living rooms of a Russian peasant house or inn — a buffer against the cold. The diminutive «галерейка» (little gallery) just before it is an open exterior walkway. This same «сени» becomes the subject of the folk dance-song the chorus later sings («Ах вы сени, мои сени»).
> Reflexive «столкнуться» + instrumental of «с»: «Столкнуться» (to collide / run into) is a reflexive verb in «-ся»; here the reciprocal sense — two people meeting head-on. The person met stands in the instrumental after «с» («с хозяином»), the case the preposition «с» (with) always governs.

Тот что-то показался ему мрачным и озабоченным и, кажется, шел его разыскивать.  
The man struck him as somehow gloomy and preoccupied, and seemed to have been looking for him.
> «Тот» tracking the topic: The demonstrative «тот» (lit. 'that one') here resumes the innkeeper from the previous sentence — a typical way Russian keeps track of who is meant when shifting subjects. We render it 'the man'.
> Instrumental predicate after «показаться»: After «показаться» (to seem) the predicate adjectives «мрачным и озабоченным» take the instrumental case — the same construction as after «быть» and «стать», framing a quality as how someone struck the observer. «Ему» is a dative experiencer: it seemed to him.

— Что ты, Борисыч, не меня ли искал?  
"What is it, Borisych — were you by any chance looking for me?"
> «ли» making a tentative question: The enclitic «ли» follows the focused word «меня» (me) to form a softened yes/no question — 'was it perhaps me you were looking for?' Combined with the negative «не», it produces the tentative, hopeful 'you weren't by any chance...?' so common in Dostoevsky's dialogue.

— Нет-с, не вас, — как бы опешил вдруг хозяин, — зачем мне вас разыскивать? А вы… где были-с?  
"No, sir, not for you," the innkeeper answered, suddenly seeming taken aback. "Why would I be looking for you? And you... where have you been, sir?"
> Perfective past «опешил» for a sudden turn: «Опешил» (was taken aback) is a perfective past — a single, completed change of state that punctuates the narrative, against the imperfective background. «Как бы» ('as if, sort of') hedges it: he seemed to be taken aback.
> Dative + infinitive: 'why should I': A subjectless construction: dative «мне» (to/for me) plus the infinitive «разыскивать» asks 'why is there any reason for me to hunt you down?' Russian frames such rhetorical 'why should I...?' questions impersonally, with the person in the dative rather than as a nominative subject.

— Что ты такой скучный? Не сердишься ли? Погоди, скоро спать пойдешь… Который час-то?  
"Why are you so glum? Surely you're not cross? Hold on, you'll be off to bed soon enough... What time is it?"
> «ли» again — 'you're not cross, are you?': Another «ли» question, now on the verb «сердишься» (you're angry), with «не». The pattern «Не …  ли?» seeks reassurance against a feared answer — 'surely you're not angry?' It is markedly more literary and probing than a bare question.
> Emphatic clitic «-то»: «Который час?» is the ordinary 'what time is it?' The appended clitic «-то» here is not the indefinite suffix but the emphatic topic-marker, lending the question a casual, insistent, almost impatient colouring — 'so what time is it, anyway?'
> Perfective future «пойдёшь»: «Пойдёшь» is the perfective verb «пойти» conjugated with present-tense endings to yield a future meaning — 'you'll go (off) to sleep'. There is no auxiliary; the future sits entirely in the ending.

— Да уж три часа будет. Надо быть, даже четвертый.  
"It'll be a good three o'clock by now. Must be — going on four, even."
> «Надо быть» — 'must be, probably': A colloquial parenthetical, «надо быть» functions as a hedge meaning 'it must be / I should think', estimating rather than asserting. The innkeeper uses it to revise his guess upward — 'three o'clock... must be going on four'.
> Ordinal for the hour: 'going on four': «Даже четвёртый» — literally 'even the fourth [hour]' — uses the ordinal numeral to mean the clock is into the fourth hour, i.e. past three and heading toward four. Russian counts the hour in progress, so 'the fourth' means somewhere between three and four.

— Кончим, кончим.  
"We'll finish up, we'll finish up."
> Perfective future, doubled for emphasis: «Кончим» is the perfective «кончить» (to finish) in the 1st-person plural future — 'we'll finish (and be done)'. The repetition is a colloquial reassurance. The perfective stresses completion: the festivities will be brought to a close.

— Помилуйте, ничего-с. Даже сколько угодно-с…  
"Heaven forbid, it's nothing, sir. Carry on as long as you please, sir..."
> «Помилуйте» — 'good heavens, not at all': Literally an imperative 'have mercy', «помилуйте» (polite plural) is a fixed exclamation of polite protest — 'goodness, don't mention it / heaven forbid'. It deflects an imagined imposition; here the innkeeper insists the late hour is no trouble at all.
> «сколько угодно» — 'as much as you please': «Сколько угодно» means 'as much as one likes, any amount', with «угодно» ('pleasing, desired') governing a dative of the person. Again capped with the servile «-с», it tells Mitya he may carry on as long as he wishes.

«Что с ним?» — мельком подумал Митя и вбежал в комнату, где плясали девки.  
"What's the matter with him?" Mitya wondered in passing, and he rushed into the room where the girls were dancing.
> Perfective entrance against imperfective background: «Вбежал» (ran in) is a perfective prefixed motion verb — the prefix «в-» adds the direction 'into' and makes the verb a completed event. Against it the imperfective «плясали» (were dancing) supplies the ongoing background scene.
> «девки» — peasant girls of the chorus: «Девка» means a young peasant or common woman, here the hired song-and-dance chorus; it lacks the genteel tone of «девушка» and would be coarse applied to a lady. Dostoevsky uses it neutrally for the village girls performing at the revel.

Но ее там не было.  
But she was not there.
> Genitive of negation in 'she was not there': A negated existential: «не было» (there was not) forces its subject into the genitive — hence «её» (genitive of «она»), not the nominative «она». Russian says, literally, 'of her there was not there'. The verb «было» stays in the fixed neuter singular.

В голубой комнате тоже не было; один лишь Калганов дремал на диване.  
She was not in the blue room either; only Kalganov was there, dozing on the sofa.
> «один лишь» — 'only, alone': «Один лишь» pairs the numeral/adjective «один» with the restrictive particle «лишь» (only) to mean 'one sole, only': Kalganov alone was there. «Лишь» is a slightly bookish synonym of «только».

Митя глянул за занавесы — она была там.  
Mitya glanced behind the curtains — she was there.
> «за» + accusative for motion behind: After the perfective «глянул» (glanced), «за занавесы» takes the accusative because «за» here expresses motion/direction 'behind' the curtains (the gaze goes behind them). With location alone, «за» would take the instrumental («за занавесами»).

Она сидела в углу, на сундуке, и, склонившись с руками и с головой на подле стоявшую кровать, горько плакала, изо всех сил крепясь и скрадывая голос, чтобы не услышали.  
She was sitting in the corner, on a trunk, having bowed down with her arms and her head onto the bed that stood beside it, and she was weeping bitterly, holding herself in with all her strength and muffling her voice so that no one would hear.
> Perfective past gerund «склонившись»: «Склонившись» (having bowed/bent down) is a perfective past деепричастие in «-вшись» — an indeclinable verb-adverb naming a prior, completed action that sets the scene for the main verb «плакала». It shares the subject 'she', and packs a whole clause into one word, a hallmark of literary narration.
> Imperfective gerunds for simultaneous action: «Крепясь» (steeling herself) and «скрадывая» (muffling) are imperfective present gerunds in «-ясь/-я», expressing actions going on at the same time as «плакала» (was weeping). Note the reflexive «-сь» on «крепясь». A chain of gerunds layers the simultaneous effort of her self-restraint.
> Purpose clause «чтобы» + past form: «Чтобы» (so that, in order that) opens a purpose clause and, fusing «что» with the irrealis «бы», requires the verb in the past form «услышали» — 'so that [people] would not hear'. The subjectless plural is the impersonal 'one / they', i.e. no one would overhear.
> «скрадывать» — to muffle, conceal: «Скрадывать» is a bookish, somewhat archaic verb meaning to soften, dampen, or steal away a sound or impression so it goes unnoticed — here she stifles her sobs. It shares a root with «красть» (to steal): she 'steals away' her own voice.

Увидав Митю, она поманила его к себе и, когда тот подбежал, крепко схватила его за руку.  
Catching sight of Mitya, she beckoned him to her, and when he had run up, she gripped him hard by the hand.
> Perfective gerund «увидав»: «Увидав» (catching sight of / having seen) is a perfective past gerund, the older variant in «-в» of «увидев». It marks the prior trigger — once she saw him — that launches the main perfective verbs «поманила» and «схватила».
> «тот» as 'he' in the subordinate clause: The demonstrative «тот» again stands in for a person — 'when he (the latter) ran up'. Using «тот» rather than «он» helps disambiguate who acts when two males are in play (Mitya runs up to her).
> «схватить за руку» — grab by the hand: The idiom «схватить кого за руку» grips a person 'by the hand': the body part takes «за» + accusative («за руку») while the person is the direct object «его». Russian routinely codes the seized body part this way rather than as a possessive.

— Митя, Митя, я ведь любила его! — начала она ему шепотом, — так любила его, все пять лет, всё, всё это время! Его ли любила али только злобу мою? Нет, его! Ох, его! Я ведь лгу, что любила только злобу мою, а не его! Митя, ведь я была всего семнадцати лет тогда, он тогда был такой со мной ласковый, такой развеселый, мне песни пел… Или уж показался тогда таким дуре мне, девчонке… А теперь, господи, да это не тот, совсем и не он. Да и лицом не он, не он вовсе. Я и с лица его не узнала. Ехала я сюда с Тимофеем и всё-то думала, всю дорогу думала: «Как встречу его, что-то скажу, как глядеть-то мы друг на друга будем?..» Вся душа замирала, и вот он меня тут точно из шайки помоями окатил. Точно учитель говорит: всё такое ученое, важное, встретил так важно, так я и стала в тупик. Слова некуда ввернуть. Я сначала думала, что он этого своего длинного поляка-то стыдится. Сижу смотрю на них и думаю: почему это я так ничего с ним говорить теперь не умею? Знаешь, это его жена испортила, вот на которой он бросил меня тогда да женился… Это она его там переделала. Митя, стыд-то какой! Ох, стыдно мне, Митя, стыдно, ох, за всю жизнь мою стыдно! Прокляты, прокляты пусть будут эти пять лет, прокляты! — И она опять залилась слезами, но Митину руку не выпускала, крепко держалась за нее.  
"Mitya, Mitya, but I did love him!" she began to him in a whisper. "I loved him so, all five years, the whole, the whole of that time! Was it him I loved, or only my own spite? No, it was him! Oh, it was him! I'm lying, you see, when I say I loved only my own spite and not him! Mitya, you know, I was only seventeen years old back then, and he was so tender with me then, so full of fun, he used to sing me songs... Or did he only seem that way then to me, a fool, a little girl... And now, Lord, why, this isn't the same man, it isn't him at all. His very face isn't him, not him in the least. I didn't even know him by his face. I rode out here with Timofey and kept thinking all the way, the whole road I thought: 'How shall I meet him, what shall I say to him, how shall we look at each other?..' My whole soul stood still, and then he doused me on the spot, as if from a slop-bucket. He talks like a schoolmaster: everything so learned, so weighty, he met me so grandly that I just came to a dead stop. There was nowhere to slip in a word. At first I thought he was ashamed of that long Pole of his. I sit there looking at them and thinking: why is it that I can't say a thing to him now? You know, it was his wife who spoiled him, the one he threw me over for back then and married... It was she who made him over there. Mitya, the shame of it! Oh, I'm ashamed, Mitya, ashamed, oh, I'm ashamed of my whole life! Cursed, let them be cursed, those five years, cursed!" And again she dissolved into tears, but she did not let go of Mitya's hand; she clung to it tightly.
> The particle «ведь» — 'but you see, after all': «Ведь» appeals to shared knowledge and pleads for understanding — 'but I did love him, you know'. It recurs all through Grushenka's outpouring («Я ведь лгу», «ведь я была»), each time tugging at Mitya to see the truth she insists on. English carries it only with stress or 'you see / after all'.
> «ли» dilemma and folk «али»: The «ли» on the fronted «его» poses a wrenching either/or: was it him I loved, or only my own spite? «Али» is a folk/archaic variant of «или» (or), coloring her speech with peasant intimacy. The objects «его» (animate accusative) and «злобу» are what she weighs.
> Genitive of age: «семнадцати лет»: 'I was seventeen' is rendered with the genitive «семнадцати лет» (lit. 'of seventeen years') — the construction «быть … лет» puts the age in the genitive after the numeral, and «лет» itself is the suppletive genitive plural of «год». «Всего» ('only, in all') stresses how young she was.
> Intensive prefix «раз-»: «развесёлый»: The prefix «раз-» on an adjective intensifies it: «развесёлый» is not merely 'merry' but 'thoroughly, riotously gay'. Compare «прекрасный». It evokes the carefree gaiety of the man who once courted her.
> «дура», «девчонка» — self-mockery in the dative: She heaps disparaging nouns on herself in the dative («такой дуре мне, девчонке» — 'to such a fool as I, a chit of a girl'), the case of the experiencer to whom he 'seemed' that way. «Девчонка» is the pejorative-affectionate diminutive of «девка/девушка», a silly young slip of a girl.
> «тот» vs «он»: 'not the same man': «Это не тот» means 'this isn't that (same) one' — «тот» pointing to the remembered man — while «не он» is 'not him'. The contrast of demonstrative and pronoun dramatizes her shock: the real man no longer matches the figure she had carried for five years.
> Future perfectives and «друг на друга»: «Встречу» and «скажу» are perfective futures (single completed acts) inside her remembered anxiety, while «глядеть будем» is the imperfective compound future (ongoing 'how will we be looking at each other'). «Друг на друга» is the reciprocal 'at one another', built from a frozen «друг … друга» that takes whatever case/preposition the verb needs.
> «помои» / «шайка» — doused from a slop-bucket: A vivid bathhouse image: «окатить помоями из шайки» is to slosh someone with dishwater/slops from a wooden wash-tub («шайка»). «Помои» (slops, dirty water; plural only) conveys utter contempt — he drenched her with cold humiliation the moment she arrived.
> Idiom «стать в тупик» — to be stumped: «Стать (or встать) в тупик» literally 'to come to a dead end' is an idiom for being utterly at a loss, baffled into silence. A «тупик» is a blind alley. She was so cowed by his grand manner that she could not find a word.
> Dismissive «-то» on «поляк»: «Поляк» is 'a Pole'; the clitic «-то» here adds a dismissive, topic-pointing flavour — 'that Pole (of his)'. The whole novel's quarrel with the two Poles next door colours her scorn; the diminutive contempt builds toward the «лайдак» insults to come.
> Relative «которой» in its own case: «На которой … женился» — 'whom he married'. The relative «который» agrees with its feminine antecedent (the wife) in gender, but takes the case its own clause demands: «жениться на ком» governs «на» + prepositional, hence «на которой». «Да» here is the folksy 'and'.
> Short passive participle «прокляты» + «пусть»: «Прокляты» is the short-form past passive participle of «проклясть» (to curse) — predicative, agreeing in number with «пять лет» — joined to the optative «пусть будут» ('let them be'): 'cursed, let them be cursed'. «Пусть» + future expresses a third-person command or imprecation.
> Genitive plural after 'five': 'Five years' is «пять лет»: numerals from five upward govern the genitive plural, and «лет» is the suppletive genitive plural standing in for «годов». Compare «два года» (gen. sg. after 2–4) with «пять лет» (gen. pl. after 5+).

— Митя, голубчик, постой, не уходи, я тебе одно словечко хочу сказать, — прошептала она и вдруг подняла к нему лицо. — Слушай, скажи ты мне, кого я люблю? Я здесь одного человека люблю. Который это человек? вот что скажи ты мне. — На распухшем от слез лице ее засветилась улыбка, глаза сияли в полутьме. — Вошел давеча один сокол, так сердце и упало во мне. «Дура ты, вот ведь кого ты любишь», — так сразу и шепнуло сердце. Вошел ты и всё осветил. «Да чего он боится?» — думаю. А ведь ты забоялся, совсем забоялся, говорить не умел. Не их же, думаю, он боится — разве ты кого испугаться можешь? Это меня он боится, думаю, только меня. Так ведь рассказала же тебе, дурачку, Феня, как я Алеше в окно прокричала, что любила часочек Митеньку, а теперь еду любить… другого. Митя, Митя, как это я могла, дура, подумать, что люблю другого после тебя! Прощаешь, Митя? Прощаешь меня или нет? Любишь? Любишь?  
"Mitya, my darling, wait, don't go, I want to tell you just one little word," she whispered, and suddenly raised her face to him. "Listen, tell me — whom do I love? There is one man here whom I love. Who is that man? There, tell me that." On her face, swollen with weeping, a smile broke out; her eyes shone in the half-dark. "A falcon flew in just now, and my heart sank within me. 'You fool, that's the one you love,' my heart whispered to me at once. You came in, and everything lit up. 'But what is he afraid of?' I think. And you really were afraid, completely afraid, you couldn't get a word out. It isn't them he's afraid of, I think — could anyone ever frighten you? It's me he's afraid of, I think, only me. So Fenya did tell you, you silly thing, how I shouted out the window to Alyosha that I'd loved my Mitenka for a little hour, and now I was going off to love... another. Mitya, Mitya, how could I, fool that I am, ever have thought I loved another after you! Do you forgive me, Mitya? Do you forgive me or not? Do you love me? Do you love me?"
> «голубчик» — 'my dear little dove': «Голубчик», the diminutive of «голубь» (dove/pigeon), is one of Russian's warmest terms of endearment — 'dear one, darling'. It pairs naturally with «словечко» (a wee word) just after, the whole sentence saturated with affectionate diminutives.
> Diminutive «словечко»: «Словечко» is the affectionate diminutive of «слово» (word) — 'a little word, just a word'. The suffix «-ечко» minimizes and endears, softening her urgent plea into something coaxing and tender.
> «давеча» — 'a little while ago': «Давеча» is a rustic, old-fashioned adverb meaning 'just now, a short while back'. It recurs throughout the chapter (carried over from the existing note on «сокол») and marks the folksy, colloquial register of the speakers.
> Emphatic «так … и» + perfective «упало»: The frame «так … и» wraps the verb for vivid emphasis — 'my heart just sank'. «Упало» is perfective past (a single completed drop), and the construction conveys an action's sudden, total occurrence. Compare «так сразу и шепнуло», «так и стала» nearby.
> «разве» — incredulous question: «Разве» introduces a rhetorical question expecting the answer 'no' — 'as if you could ever be frightened of anyone!' Note «кого», the animate genitive/accusative of «кто», governed by «испугаться» (to take fright at someone), which demands the genitive.
> Particle «же» and the dative «дурачку»: The emphatic «же» insists — 'so Fenya did tell you, after all'. «Дурачку» is an affectionate diminutive of «дурак» (fool → 'silly thing') in the dative, in apposition to «тебе»: Fenya told you, you silly dear.
> «Митенька» — the tenderest form of the name: Mitya's name climbs an affectionate ladder: Дмитрий → Митя → Митенька. The «-енька» suffix is the most intimate, caressing diminutive; she uses it precisely when confessing she loved him 'for a little hour' («часочек», itself a diminutive of 'hour').
> Conditional-of-disbelief with «как»: «Как это я могла подумать» — 'how could I ever have thought' — uses past «могла» (she, feminine) plus the perfective infinitive «подумать» in an exclamation of self-reproach. «Это» here is an emphatic filler ('how on earth'), and «дура» is again her self-directed 'fool'.

Она вскочила и схватила его обеими руками за плечи.  
She sprang up and seized him by the shoulders with both hands.
> Instrumental of means + «за плечи»: «Обеими руками» (with both hands) is the instrumental of means — the tool of the action — while the seized body part takes «за» + accusative («за плечи»). «Обеими» is the feminine form of the collective numeral «оба/обе» (both).

Митя, немой от восторга, глядел ей в глаза, в лицо, на улыбку ее, и вдруг, крепко обняв ее, бросился ее целовать.  
Mitya, mute with rapture, gazed into her eyes, at her face, at her smile, and suddenly, clasping her tightly, he flung himself into kissing her.
> Short adjective «немой» + «от» of cause: «Немой от восторга» — 'mute from rapture'. The preposition «от» + genitive («восторга») names the cause of a state, a frequent way Russian links an emotion to its physical effect (mute, pale, trembling 'from' something).
> Perfective gerund + «броситься» + infinitive: «Обняв» (having embraced) is a perfective past gerund marking the prior act; «бросился целовать» pairs the reflexive «броситься» (to fling oneself) with the imperfective infinitive «целовать» to mean 'fell to kissing her'. The gerund + main-verb structure compresses the rush of feeling into one breath.

— А простишь, что мучила? Я ведь со злобы всех вас измучила. Я ведь старикашку того нарочно со злобы с ума свела… Помнишь, как ты раз у меня пил и бокал разбил? Запомнила я это и сегодня тоже разбила бокал, за «подлое сердце мое» пила. Митя, сокол, что ж ты меня не целуешь? Раз поцеловал и оторвался, глядит, слушает… Что меня слушать! Целуй меня, целуй крепче, вот так. Любить, так уж любить! Раба твоя теперь буду, раба на всю жизнь! Сладко рабой быть!.. Целуй! Прибей меня, мучай меня, сделай что надо мной… Ох, да и впрямь меня надо мучить… Стой! Подожди, потом, не хочу так… — оттолкнула она его вдруг. — Ступай прочь, Митька, пойду теперь вина напьюсь, пьяна хочу быть, сейчас пьяная плясать пойду, хочу, хочу!  
"And will you forgive me for tormenting you? It was out of spite that I tortured the lot of you. Why, it was out of spite that I deliberately drove that old fellow out of his wits... Do you remember the time you drank at my place and smashed a glass? I remembered that, and today I smashed a glass too — I drank to 'my own base heart.' Mitya, my falcon, why aren't you kissing me? You kissed me once and then broke off, you look, you listen... What's there to listen to about me! Kiss me, kiss me harder, like that. If you're going to love, then love! I'll be your slave now, your slave for life! How sweet it is to be a slave!.. Kiss me! Beat me, torment me, do what you like with me... Oh, yes, I really ought to be tormented... Stop! Wait, later, I don't want it like this..." She suddenly pushed him away. "Go off now, Mitka, I'm going to go and drink some wine, I want to be drunk, I'm going to dance drunk right now, I want to, I want to!"
> Perfective future «простишь» + reported «что»: «Простишь?» is 'will you forgive?' — perfective future of «простить». «Что мучила» is a «что»-clause naming the deed forgiven ('for that I tormented [you]'), with imperfective «мучила» for the drawn-out, repeated cruelty. «А» opens with the contrastive 'and/but'.
> Pejorative diminutive «старикашка»: «Старикашка» belittles «старик» (old man) with the contemptuous suffix «-ашк-» — a 'wretched little old man'. Here she means old Fyodor Pavlovich Karamazov, whom she led on out of spite; the same scornful word later becomes her nickname for Maximov (at s155), balanced against the endearing «старичок» elsewhere.
> Idiom «свести с ума» — drive out of one's wits: «Свести с ума» (lit. 'to lead down from the mind') means to drive someone mad — here, to madden/infatuate him deliberately. «Со злобы» ('out of spite') gives the motive, «от/с» + genitive naming the inner cause.
> Compound future «буду» with a noun predicate: «Буду» (1st sg. future of «быть») here governs the predicate noun «раба» (female slave). Note the zero copula is impossible in the future, so «быть» surfaces; the predicate noun is in the nominative «раба» (not instrumental) for vehement, identifying emphasis — 'your slave I shall be'.
> Impersonal «сладко» + instrumental predicate: A subjectless evaluative construction: the neuter predicative «сладко» ('it is sweet') plus infinitive «быть», whose predicate noun «рабой» now stands in the instrumental — the usual case for the complement of an infinitival «быть». Contrast the nominative «раба» just above, chosen there for pathos.
> Imperatives in «-и» and «-й»: A cascade of commands: «прибей» (beat) and «сделай» (do) form imperatives in «-й» after a vowel-stem, while «мучай» likewise; «сделай» is perfective (one act), «мучай» imperfective (sustained). The string enacts her masochistic abandon.
> Rough diminutive «Митька»: After the tender «Митенька» she now snaps «Митька» — the «-ка» form is brusque, familiar, even dismissive ('Mitka, off with you'). Dostoevsky uses the swing across the name's diminutives to track her volatile mood within a single speech.
> Short adjective «пьяна» as predicate: «Пьяна» is the short (predicative) feminine form of «пьяный» (drunk), used here as the complement of «быть»: 'I want to be drunk'. The short form is the bookish/predicative one, marking a state rather than attributing a quality before a noun.

Она вырвалась от него из-за занавесок.  
She tore herself away from him out from behind the curtains.
> Reflexive «вырваться» + compound preposition «из-за»: «Вырвалась» (tore herself free) is reflexive «-ся», a middle/change-of-state sense. «Из-за занавесок» uses the compound preposition «из-за» ('out from behind') + genitive, neatly tracing her motion from behind the curtains.

Митя вышел за ней как пьяный.  
Mitya followed her out like a drunken man.
> «за» + instrumental: 'after her': With «вышел» (went out) the preposition «за» + instrumental «ней» means 'after, in pursuit of' — he followed out after her. (Contrast «за» + accusative for going to fetch something.) «Как пьяный» — 'like a drunk man' — foreshadows the delirium to come.

«Да пусть же, пусть, что бы теперь ни случилось — за минуту одну весь мир отдам», — промелькнуло в его голове.  
"Let it be, then, let it be — whatever may happen now, for a single minute I would give up the whole world," flashed through his head.
> Optative «пусть» with intensifying «да … же»: «Пусть» ('let it be') forms a third-person/abstract command — here a fatalistic 'so be it'. The framing «да … же» piles on emphasis, «да» as an emphatic opener and «же» insisting. Together they voice Mitya's reckless surrender to whatever comes.
> Concessive «что бы ни» — 'whatever may happen': The frame «что бы ни + past» means 'no matter what (happens)'. The «бы» is the irrealis particle, «ни» the concessive 'whatever/however', and «случилось» the past form required after «бы». Note negative concord is suspended: this «ни» concedes rather than negates.
> Perfective future + topicalized object: «Отдам» is the perfective future of «отдать» (to give up/away). The object «весь мир» (the whole world) is fronted for weight before the verb — 'the whole world I'd give up' — a stress-bearing word order typical of impassioned speech.

Грушенька в самом деле выпила залпом еще стакан шампанского и очень вдруг охмелела.  
Grushenka did in fact drain another glass of champagne in one gulp, and suddenly grew very tipsy.
> «залпом» — 'in one gulp / at a draught': «Залпом» is the instrumental of «залп» (a volley/salvo) frozen into an adverb: to drink 'at one go, in a single draught', as a gun fires a volley. The military metaphor underlines the suddenness of her drinking down the champagne.
> «охмелеть» — to grow tipsy: «Охмелеть» (perfective, from «хмель», intoxication/hops) means to become tipsy, the prefix «о-» marking the onset of the state. It recurs as the chapter's keynote of mounting drunkenness, alongside «опьянеть».

Она уселась в кресле, на прежнем месте, с блаженною улыбкой.  
She settled into the armchair, in her former place, with a blissful smile.
> Reflexive «усесться» + prepositional of place: «Уселась» (settled herself down) is reflexive «-ся», the prefix «у-» adding a settled, comfortable nuance. «В кресле» and «на прежнем месте» are both prepositional of location after «в»/«на»; «прежнем» ('former') agrees with «месте» in the prepositional.
> Archaic instrumental ending «-ою»: «С блаженною улыбкой» — 'with a blissful smile', instrumental after «с». The adjective ending «-ою» (for modern «-ой») is the longer, bookish/poetic variant of the feminine instrumental, common in 19th-century prose and lending a literary cadence.

Щеки ее запылали, губы разгорелись, сверкавшие глаза посоловели, страстный взгляд манил.  
Her cheeks flushed, her lips glowed, her sparkling eyes grew languid, her passionate gaze beckoned.
> Inchoative perfectives in a parallel chain: Three perfective past verbs followed by one imperfective — «запылали» (flared up), «разгорелись» (kindled), «посоловели» (grew bleary), and the imperfective «манил» ('kept beckoning') — paint her transformation. The prefixes «за-»/«раз-» mark the inchoative onset of a state; the chain of completed changes builds the rush of her arousal.
> Past active participle «сверкавшие»: «Сверкавшие» (sparkling, that had been sparkling) is a past active participle from imperfective «сверкать», declined as a plural attributive adjective agreeing with «глаза». It compresses 'eyes that were sparkling' into one modifier — bookish and economical.
> «посоловеть» — eyes grown bleary with drink: «Посоловеть» is an expressive, colloquial verb for eyes turning dull, glazed, languid — specifically the heavy-lidded look of drunkenness or drowsiness. It captures the precise shift from her sparkling to a swimming gaze as the wine takes hold.

Даже Калганова как будто укусило что-то за сердце, и он подошел к ней.  
Even Kalganov felt something bite at his heart, as it were, and he went up to her.
> Impersonal 'something bit at his heart': A vivid impersonal: the neuter «что-то» (something) is the vague subject, «Калганова» the accusative object, and «за сердце» ('at the heart', «за» + accusative) the spot struck — 'something seemed to bite Kalganov at the heart'. «Как будто» ('as if') hedges the figure.

— А ты слышал, как я тебя давеча поцеловала, когда ты спал? — пролепетала она ему. — Опьянела я теперь, вот что… А ты не опьянел? А Митя чего не пьет? Что ж ты не пьешь, Митя, я выпила, а ты не пьешь…  
"And did you hear how I kissed you just now, while you were asleep?" she babbled at him. "I'm tipsy now, that's what... And aren't you tipsy? And why isn't Mitya drinking? Why aren't you drinking, Mitya? I've had a drink, and you aren't drinking..."
> «пролепетать» — to babble, prattle: «Пролепетать»/«лепетать» is to babble like a child or a tipsy person — soft, half-coherent murmuring. Dostoevsky chooses it (and «лепетала» later) to render Grushenka's drunken, tender, run-on speech.
> Genitive-of-negation echo in «чего»: «Чего не пьёт?» — 'why doesn't he drink?'. Here «чего» (genitive of «что») works as a colloquial 'why / what for', and the negated «не пьёт» fits the broader pull of negation toward the genitive. The «а» openers chain her tipsy questions one after another.

— Пьян! И так пьян… от тебе пьян, а теперь и от вина хочу. — Он выпил еще стакан и — странно это ему показалось самому — только от этого последнего стакана и охмелел, вдруг охмелел, а до тех пор всё был трезв, сам помнил это.  
"I'm drunk! Drunk as it is... drunk on you, and now I want to be drunk on wine too." He drank off another glass, and — strangely enough, as it seemed to him afterward — it was only from this last glass that he grew tipsy, suddenly tipsy, whereas until then he had been perfectly sober, as he himself remembered.
> Non-standard «от тебе» in tipsy speech: «От» governs the genitive, so standard Russian needs «от тебя» ('drunk on you'). Mitya's slurred «от тебе» (using the dative/prepositional «тебе») is a deliberate solecism — Dostoevsky letting grammar slip to show the wine taking hold.
> Focusing «только … и»: The frame «только … и» pins the focus: 'it was only from this last glass that he got tipsy'. «От … стакана» is «от» + genitive of cause. The construction isolates the single, paradoxical trigger of his sudden intoxication after a sober night.
> Short adjective «трезв» + «до тех пор»: «Трезв» is the short predicative form of «трезвый» (sober), stating a temporary condition — he had been sober. «До тех пор» ('until then', «до» + genitive of «тот») sets the time boundary; «всё» here is the adverbial 'all the while, still'.

С этой минуты всё завертелось кругом него, как в бреду.  
From that minute on, everything began to spin around him, as if in a delirium.
> Reflexive «завертеться» + «бред»: «Завертелось» is reflexive «-ся» (intransitive 'began to spin'), with the inchoative prefix «за-» marking onset. «Как в бреду» ('as in a delirium', «в» + prepositional) names the chapter — «Бред», Delirium — and signals the dreamlike unreliability of what Mitya is about to experience.

Он ходил, смеялся, заговаривал со всеми, и всё это как бы уж не помня себя.  
He walked about, laughed, struck up conversation with everyone, and all of it as though he were already not himself.
> Gerund «не помня себя» + reflexive «себя»: «Не помня себя» is an imperfective gerund (negated) — 'not remembering himself', i.e. beside himself, out of his senses. «Себя» is the reflexive pronoun (no nominative) pointing back to the subject. «Как бы уж» softens and intensifies: 'as though already not himself'.

Одно лишь неподвижное и жгучее чувство сказывалось в нем поминутно, «точно горячий уголь в душе», — вспоминал он потом.  
One single, fixed, burning feeling alone made itself felt in him every moment, "like a hot coal in the soul," as he recalled it afterward.
> Reflexive «сказываться» — 'made itself felt': «Сказывалось» is the reflexive/middle of «сказать» — 'made itself felt, told upon him'. Imperfective for the constant, recurring sensation; «поминутно» ('every minute') reinforces the repetition. The subject «одно … чувство» is fronted and split by its modifiers for weight.
> «точно» — 'just like, as if': «Точно» (lit. 'exactly') is used here as a comparative 'as if, just like', introducing the quoted image 'like a hot coal in the soul'. This «точно» of simile recurs throughout the chapter («точно из шайки», «точно учитель») and is a favourite Dostoevskian connective.

Он подходил к ней, садился подле нее, глядел на нее, слушал ее…  
He kept going up to her, sitting down beside her, gazing at her, listening to her...
> Imperfectives for repeated action: Four imperfective past verbs in a row, all naming habitual, repeated acts — he kept going up, kept sitting, kept gazing, kept listening. The imperfective (against the perfectives that move the plot) freezes the scene into a recurring loop, mirrored by the trailing ellipsis.

Она же стала ужасно как словоохотлива, всех к себе подзывала, манила вдруг к себе какую-нибудь девку из хора, та подходила, а она или целовала ее и отпускала, или иногда крестила ее рукой.  
She, for her part, had grown terribly talkative; she called everyone over to her, would suddenly beckon to herself some girl from the chorus, and when she came up, would either kiss her and let her go, or sometimes make the sign of the cross over her with her hand.
> Contrastive «же» + short adjective: Here «же» is not emphatic but lightly contrastive — 'she, for her part'. «Стала … словоохотлива» uses «стать» with the short predicative adjective «словоохотлива» (talkative), the bookish predicate form. «Ужасно как» ('terribly, awfully') is colloquial intensification.
> Iterative imperfectives with «или … или»: The whole sentence runs in iterative imperfectives — «подзывала», «манила», «подходила», «целовала», «крестила» — to describe what habitually happened each time. «Или … или» ('either … or') offers the alternating outcomes; «та» tracks 'the girl (who came up)'.

Еще минутку, и она могла заплакать.  
Another moment, and she might have burst into tears.
> Accusative of duration «минутку» + 'could weep': «Ещё минутку» is the accusative «минутку» (diminutive of «минута») used for a short span of time — 'one more little minute'. The terse 'X more, and Y' frame implies a conditional; «могла заплакать» pairs «мочь» with the inchoative perfective «заплакать» (to burst out crying).

Развеселял ее очень и «старикашка», как называла она Максимова.  
The "old fellow," as she called Maximov, amused her greatly too.
> Verb-first word order for focus: The clause opens with the verb «развеселял» (kept amusing, imperfective), pushing the real subject — «старикашка», the comic Maximov — to the stressed end position. This inversion makes him the 'new' information: who, besides Mitya, was cheering her up.

Он поминутно подбегал целовать у нее ручки «и всякий пальчик», а под конец проплясал еще один танец под одну старую песенку, которую сам же и пропел.  
Every minute he came running up to kiss her little hands "and every little finger," and toward the end he danced one more dance to an old little song, which he himself sang.
> Diminutives «ручки», «пальчик», «песенка»: Maximov's gallantry drips with diminutives — «ручки» (little hands), «пальчик» (little finger), «песенка/песенку» (little song). The suffixes «-к-/-ик-» make the gestures dainty and faintly absurd, matching his obsequious clowning.
> Relative «которую» + emphatic «сам же и»: «Которую» (whom/which, feminine accusative) introduces the relative clause modifying «песенку», taking the accusative as the object of «пропел». «Сам же и» triple-stacks emphasis — 'which he himself, no less, sang' — «сам» (himself), «же» and «и» all underscoring that he both danced and sang it.

В особенности с жаром подплясывал за припевом:  
He danced with particular ardor to the refrain:
> «припев» — the refrain: «Припев» is the recurring refrain or chorus of a song (from «припевать», to sing along). «Подплясывал … за припевом» — he capered 'to the refrain'. The folk-song that follows is built on exactly such a repeating animal-sound припев.

Свинушка хрю-хрю, хрю-хрю, Телочка му-му, му-му, Уточка ква-ква, ква-ква, Гусынька га-га, га-га. Курочка по сенюшкам похаживала, Тюрю-рю, рю-рю, выговаривала, Ай, ай, выговаривала!  
Little piggy goes oink-oink, oink-oink, / Little heifer goes moo-moo, moo-moo, / Little duck goes quack-quack, quack-quack, / Little goose goes honk-honk, honk-honk. / The little hen went strutting through the passage, / Tyuru-ryu, ryu-ryu, she'd cluck it out, / Aye, aye, she'd cluck it out!
> A barnyard of diminutives: The nonsense ditty strings affectionate animal diminutives — «свинушка» (piggy), «тёлочка» (little heifer), «уточка» (ducky), «гусынька» (little goose), «курочка» (little hen) — each with the caressing «-ушк-/-очк-/-еньк-» suffixes that give Russian folk song its tender, sing-song charm.
> «похаживала» + folk diminutive «сенюшки»: «Похаживала» is an iterative-diminutive verb (from «ходить» via «-ива-» plus «по-») meaning 'kept strutting/sauntering about' — a leisurely, repeated strolling. «Сенюшки» is the doubly-endeared folk diminutive of «сени» (the entry-passage), the same word that opened the chapter and that names the next song.

— Дай ему что-нибудь, Митя, — говорила Грушенька, — подари ему, ведь он бедный. Ах, бедные, обиженные!.. Знаешь, Митя, я в монастырь пойду. Нет, вправду, когда-нибудь пойду. Мне Алеша сегодня на всю жизнь слова сказал… Да… А сегодня уж пусть попляшем. Завтра в монастырь, а сегодня попляшем. Я шалить хочу, добрые люди, ну и что ж такое, бог простит. Кабы богом была, всех бы людей простила: «Милые мои грешнички, с этого дня прощаю всех». А я пойду прощения просить: «Простите, добрые люди, бабу глупую, вот что». Зверь я, вот что. А молиться хочу. Я луковку подала. Злодейке такой, как я, молиться хочется! Митя, пусть пляшут, не мешай. Все люди на свете хороши, все до единого. Хорошо на свете. Хоть и скверные мы, а хорошо на свете. Скверные мы и хорошие, и скверные и хорошие… Нет, скажите, я вас спрошу, все подойдите, и я спрошу; скажите мне все вот что: почему я такая хорошая? Я ведь хорошая, я очень хорошая… Ну так вот: почему я такая хорошая? — Так лепетала Грушенька, хмелея всё больше и больше, и наконец прямо объявила, что сейчас сама хочет плясать. Встала с кресел и пошатнулась. — Митя, не давай мне больше вина, просить буду — не давай. Вино спокойствия не дает. И всё кружится, и печка, и всё кружится. Плясать хочу. Пусть все смотрят, как я пляшу… как я хорошо и прекрасно пляшу…  
"Give him something, Mitya," Grushenka kept saying. "Make him a present, he's poor, after all. Ah, the poor, the wronged ones!.. You know, Mitya, I'm going to go into a convent. No, truly, one day I'll go. Alyosha said words to me today that will last my whole life... Yes... But for today, let's dance, then. Tomorrow the convent, but today let's dance. I want to be naughty, good people — and what of it, God will forgive. If I were God, I'd forgive everyone: 'My dear little sinners, from this day on I forgive you all.' And I'll go and beg forgiveness: 'Forgive a foolish woman, good people, that's all.' A beast is what I am. But I want to pray. I gave away an onion. A wicked woman like me wants to pray! Mitya, let them dance, don't get in the way. All the people in the world are good, every last one. It's good in the world. Even if we're vile, still it's good in the world. We're vile and good, both vile and good... No, tell me, I'll ask you, all of you come over, and I'll ask; tell me this, all of you: why am I so good? For I am good, I am very good... Well, then: why am I so good?" So Grushenka prattled on, growing more and more tipsy, and at last announced point-blank that she now wanted to dance herself. She rose from the armchair and swayed. "Mitya, don't give me any more wine, even if I beg for it — don't give it me. Wine gives no peace. And everything is spinning, the stove too, everything is spinning. I want to dance. Let them all watch how I dance... how beautifully and finely I dance..."
> Perfective imperative + dative recipient: «Подари» is the perfective imperative of «подарить» (to make a gift of) — a single, completed act — with the recipient in the dative «ему». Contrast the more general «дай ему что-нибудь» just before; «что-нибудь» is the non-specific 'anything at all'.
> Folk conditional «кабы» + «бы»: «Кабы» is a folk/archaic conditional conjunction equal to «если бы» ('if only'). The irrealis is built with past-tense forms plus «бы»: «была … простила» — 'were I God, I would forgive everyone'. «Богом» is the instrumental predicate after «быть».
> Self-naming: «грешнички», «баба», «зверь»: Grushenka's vocabulary of moral self-reckoning: «грешнички» (dear little sinners, an affectionate diminutive of «грешник») whom God-as-she would pardon; «баба» (a coarse word for a peasant woman, here self-deprecating 'foolish woman'); «зверь» ('a beast'). The diminutive tenderness toward sinners contrasts the harsh nouns she flings at herself.
> Gerund «хмелея» + intensifying comparative: «Хмелея» is the imperfective gerund of «хмелеть» (growing tipsy), naming the state that accompanies her prattling. «Всё больше и больше» ('more and more') uses the comparative «больше» doubled with «всё» to express steady increase.
> Imperfective imperative «не давай» under negation: A negative command takes the imperfective imperative: «не давай» (don't give), not the perfective «не дай». «Вина» is the partitive/genitive of negation ('any wine'). Russian regularly switches to the imperfective for prohibitions — 'don't be giving me wine'.

Намерение было серьезное: она вынула из кармана беленький батистовый платочек и взяла его за кончик, в правую ручку, чтобы махать им в пляске.  
Her intention was a serious one: she drew from her pocket a little white cambric handkerchief and took it by one corner in her right hand, the better to wave it in the dance.
> Diminutives + «батист» (cambric): «Беленький» (nice and white, diminutive-expressive of «белый»), «платочек» (little handkerchief). «Батистовый» derives from «батист», fine cambric/lawn linen — a dainty, ladylike cloth. The pile of diminutives marks the handkerchief as a precious, feminine prop for the dance.
> Purpose «чтобы» + instrumental of means: «Чтобы махать им» — 'in order to wave it'. Here «чтобы» governs an infinitive (same subject), no «бы»-past needed. «Им» is the instrumental: «махать» (to wave) takes its object in the instrumental, the case of the thing wielded.

Митя захлопотал, девки затихли, приготовясь грянуть хором плясовую по первому мановению.  
Mitya bustled about; the girls fell silent, ready to strike up a dance-tune in chorus at the first signal.
> Reflexive gerund «приготовясь» + instrumental «хором»: «Приготовясь» is a perfective gerund of reflexive «приготовиться» (having made ready). «Хором» is the instrumental of «хор» used adverbially — 'in chorus, all together'. «Грянуть» (to strike up, burst out) is a vivid perfective for the sudden onset of the song.
> «мановение» — a bookish 'wave, beck': «Мановение» (a wave or nod of command, as in «по мановению руки») is an elevated, literary word — 'at the first signal/beck'. Its solemn register sits with mock-grandeur over the homely scene of village girls waiting to start a dance-tune.

Максимов, узнав, что Грушенька хочет сама плясать, завизжал от восторга и пошел было пред ней подпрыгивать, припевая:  
Maximov, on learning that Grushenka wanted to dance herself, squealed with delight and set off to prance about before her, singing:
> Perfective gerund «узнав» + reported «что»: «Узнав» (on learning, having learned) is a perfective past gerund giving the prior cause of his squealing. «Что Грушенька хочет … плясать» is a reported-fact clause with «что»; «сама» ('herself') stresses that she means to dance in person.
> The frustrative particle «было»: «Было» (here unstressed, after a perfective past) marks an action begun but not carried through — the 'frustrative': he set off to prance, but (as the next sentence shows) was driven off. «Пред» is the bookish/archaic form of «перед» (before, in front of) + instrumental.

Ножки тонки, бока звонки, Хвостик закорючкой.  
Slender of leg, ringing of flank, / A little curled-up tail.
> Short adjectives + diminutives in the ditty: Folk-song economy: «тонки», «звонки» are short predicative adjectives ('legs [are] slender, flanks [are] ringing'), and «ножки», «хвостик» are diminutives. «Закорючкой» is the instrumental of «закорючка» (a little hook/squiggle) used adverbially — 'the tail [curled up] in a little hook'.

Но Грушенька махнула на него платочком и отогнала его:  
But Grushenka waved her handkerchief at him and drove him off:
> Perfectives «махнула»/«отогнала» + instrumental: «Махнула» is the semelfactive perfective of «махать» (one wave of the hand), governing the instrumental «платочком» (with the handkerchief); «на него» ('at him', «на» + accusative) directs the gesture. «Отогнала» (drove off) is a second perfective completing the action.

— Ш-шь! Митя, что ж нейдут? Пусть все придут… смотреть. Позови и тех, запертых… За что ты их запер? Скажи им, что я пляшу, пусть и они смотрят, как я пляшу…  
"Sh-sh! Mitya, why don't they come? Let everyone come... to watch. Call those others too, the locked-up ones... What did you lock them in for? Tell them I'm dancing, let them watch too, how I dance..."
> Archaic «нейдут» (= не идут) + «ж»: «Нейдут» is the older fused negative of «идти» — «не идут» ('they don't come'), with «не» written together with the verb, a 19th-century colloquial-archaic form. «Что ж» ('so why', «же» reduced to «ж») gives the impatient prod.
> Imperative «позови» + past passive participle «запертых»: «Позови» is the perfective imperative ('call'). «Запертых» is the past passive participle of «запереть» (to lock up), declined here as a substantivized animate-accusative plural — 'the locked-up ones'. «И тех» — 'those others too', the demonstrative pointing to the Poles behind the locked door.

Митя с пьяным размахом подошел к запертой двери и начал стучать к панам кулаком.  
Mitya, with a drunken sweep, went up to the locked door and began to pound on it at the Poles with his fist.
> «начать» + imperfective infinitive; instrumental «кулаком»: Phase verbs like «начать» (to begin) require an imperfective infinitive — «стучать» (to knock), an ongoing activity. «Кулаком» is the instrumental of means ('with his fist'); «к панам» ('at the Poles', «к» + dative) marks the addressees of the pounding.

— Эй вы… Подвысоцкие! Выходите, она плясать хочет, вас зовет.  
"Hey, you... Podvysotskys! Come out, she wants to dance, she's calling for you."
> Imperative «выходите» + dropped pronouns: «Выходите» is the polite/plural imperative 'come out'. The two following clauses drop the subject pronoun 'she' — recoverable from the verb endings «хочет», «зовёт» (3rd sg.) — a routine economy. «Вас зовёт»: 'is calling you' (accusative «вас»).

— Лайдак! — прокричал в ответ который-то из панов.  
"Łajdak!" one of the Poles shouted back in reply.
> Indefinite «который-то»: «Который-то из панов» — 'one or other of the Poles', a specific but unidentified one. The clitic «-то» on «который» (which) marks a known-to-exist but unnamed referent; «из панов» ('of the Poles') is the partitive genitive after «из».

— А ты по́длайдак! Мелкий ты подлечоночек; вот ты кто.  
"And you're an arch-łajdak! A petty little scoundrel of a thing, that's what you are."
> Mitya's coinages: «подлайдак», «подлечоночек»: Mitya throws the Pole's «лайдак» back with comic prefixes and suffixes: «по́длайдак» (intensive «под-» or a blend with «подлый», 'arch-scoundrel') and «подлечоночек», a nonce diminutive piling «подлец» (villain) with caressing-belittling «-ёночек» — 'a wretched little baby-villain'. The wordplay mocks the Poles' pretensions.

— Перестали бы вы над Польшей-то насмехаться, — сентенциозно заметил Калганов, тоже не под силу себе охмелевший.  
"You really ought to stop jeering at Poland," Kalganov remarked sententiously, himself tipsy beyond his measure.
> Softening conditional «бы» as polite urging: «Перестали бы вы … насмехаться» — past form «перестали» + «бы» used not as a real conditional but to soften an admonition into 'you really ought to stop...'. «Насмехаться над» (to mock) governs «над» + instrumental («над Польшей»); «-то» topicalizes Poland.
> Past active participle «охмелевший» + idiom «не под силу»: «Охмелевший» is the past active participle of «охмелеть» (grown tipsy), agreeing with Kalganov — 'who had got tipsy'. «Не под силу себе» ('beyond his own strength', «под силу» + dative «себе») means more than he could handle: tipsier than he could carry.

— Молчи, мальчик! Если я ему сказал подлеца, не значит, что я всей Польше сказал подлеца. Не составляет один лайдак Польши. Молчи, хорошенький мальчик, конфетку кушай.  
"Quiet, boy! If I called him a scoundrel, that doesn't mean I called all Poland a scoundrel. One łajdak doesn't make up Poland. Quiet, pretty boy, suck on a sweet."
> Conditional «если» + dative addressee: A real (indicative) conditional with «если» — no «бы», a factual 'if I called him...'. Note the idiom «сказать кому подлеца» 'to call someone a scoundrel', with the person in the dative («ему», «всей Польше») and the epithet «подлеца» in the animate accusative.
> Imperfective imperative «кушай» + diminutive: «Кушай» is the imperfective imperative of «кушать» (to eat, a polite/folksy synonym of «есть») — 'have a sweet, suck on a candy'. «Конфетку» is the diminutive of «конфета». The condescending 'pretty boy, suck a sweet' belittles young Kalganov.

— Ах какие! Точно они не люди. Чего они не хотят мириться? — сказала Грушенька и вышла плясать.  
"Oh, what people! As if they weren't human. Why won't they make it up?" said Grushenka, and stepped out to dance.
> Colloquial «чего» for 'why' + reflexive «мириться»: «Чего» (genitive of «что») serves colloquially as 'why, what for'. «Мириться» (to make peace, be reconciled) is a reflexive «-ся» verb of reciprocal/middle sense — 'why won't they make it up?' «Точно они не люди» — «точно» again as 'as if'.

Хор грянул: «Ах вы сени, мои сени».  
The chorus struck up: "Ah, my passage, my passage of mine."

Грушенька закинула было головку, полуоткрыла губки, улыбнулась, махнула было платочком и вдруг, сильно покачнувшись на месте, стала посреди комнаты в недоумении.  
Grushenka started to throw her little head back, to half-part her lips, smiled, started to wave the handkerchief — and suddenly, swaying hard where she stood, she stopped in the middle of the room, bewildered.
> Frustrative «было» twice; diminutives: Twice the frustrative «было» marks an action started but cut short — she began to throw back her head and to wave the kerchief, then froze. «Головку», «губки», «платочком» are diminutives. The structure builds the abortive gesture that her dizziness interrupts.
> Perfective gerund «покачнувшись» + «стать»: «Покачнувшись» (having swayed) is a perfective gerund giving the immediate prior motion; «стала посреди комнаты» uses «стать» in its literal 'came to a stand' sense. «В недоумении» ('in bewilderment', «в» + prepositional) describes her dazed halt.

— Слаба… — проговорила она измученным каким-то голосом, — простите, слаба, не могу… Виновата…  
"I'm weak..." she said in some exhausted voice. "Forgive me, I'm weak, I can't... I'm to blame..."
> Short adjective «слаба» as a predicate: «Слаба» is the short feminine form of «слабый» (weak), predicative — 'I'm weak'. The short form here states a momentary condition (faint, overcome), exactly the nuance the bookish predicative form carries. «Виновата» in the same breath is likewise short ('[I'm] to blame').

Она поклонилась хору, затем принялась кланяться на все четыре стороны поочередно:  
She bowed to the chorus, then began bowing to all four sides in turn:
> «приняться» + imperfective infinitive: «Принялась» (set about, from reflexive «приняться») is a phase verb taking the imperfective infinitive «кланяться» (to bow, itself «-ся»). «На все четыре стороны» — 'to all four sides', «на» + accusative for direction — is a fixed expression for bowing all around.

— Виновата… Простите…  
"I'm to blame... Forgive me..."
> «виновата» / «простите» — guilt and pardon: «Виновата» (short adj., f.) is 'I'm guilty / to blame / I'm sorry', and «простите» the polite imperative 'forgive [me]'. This paired refrain of guilt and plea for pardon is a deep keynote of the novel's moral world — sounded here through a tipsy girl's bows.

— Подпила, барынька, подпила, хорошенькая барынька, — раздавались голоса.  
"She's had a drop, the little mistress, had a drop, the pretty little mistress," voices rang out.
> «подпить» + diminutive «барынька»: «Подпила» (from «подпить») means 'has had a drop too many, is a bit drunk' — the prefix «под-» softens it to 'tipsy' rather than dead drunk. «Барынька» is the affectionate diminutive of «барыня» (mistress/lady), the chorus-girls' fond name for Grushenka.

— Они напились-с, — разъяснил, хихикая, девушкам Максимов.  
"They've had a drink, sir," Maximov explained to the girls with a giggle.
> Reflexive «напиться» + servile «-с»: «Напились» is the perfective reflexive «напиться» (to drink one's fill, get drunk), the prefix «на-» marking 'to satiety'. The plural «они» with the deferential «-с» is Maximov's mock-polite way of explaining to the girls that 'they've had a drink, sir'.
> Gerund «хихикая» + dative addressees: «Хихикая» (giggling) is an imperfective gerund of simultaneous action — he explained 'while giggling'. «Девушкам» is the dative of the addressees (to the girls), and «разъяснил» a perfective ('made clear, explained').

— Митя, отведи меня… возьми меня, Митя, — в бессилии проговорила Грушенька.  
"Mitya, take me away... carry me, Mitya," Grushenka said feebly.
> Perfective imperatives of plea: «Отведи» (lead me away) and «возьми» (take me) are perfective imperatives — single, decisive acts she begs of him. «Отведи» is a prefixed motion verb ('lead off'). The bare commands, with «меня», convey her helpless reliance on Mitya.
> «в бессилии» — prepositional of state: «В бессилии» ('in [her] powerlessness/faintness', «в» + prepositional of «бессилие») describes the manner of her speaking — feebly, drained of strength. The abstract noun in «-ие» is itself a slightly bookish, Church-Slavonic-flavored formation.

Митя кинулся к ней, схватил ее на руки и побежал со своею драгоценною добычей за занавески.  
Mitya rushed to her, caught her up in his arms, and ran off with his precious prize behind the curtains.
> Three perfectives in a rush: The sentence is a chain of perfective past verbs — «кинулся» (threw himself), «схватил» (snatched up), «побежал» (set off running) — each a single completed event clicking forward. Perfectives are how Russian narrates an action that unfolds blow by blow.
> Instrumental after «с», with old long endings: «С» (with) governs the instrumental: «со свое́ю драгоце́нною добы́чей». The endings «-ою/-ою» are the older, fuller bookish variants of modern «-ой», common in 19th-century prose and giving the phrase a slightly heightened, ironic-mock-heroic ring.
> “His precious prize”: «добы́ча» is properly a hunter's catch or spoils of war; applied to Grushenka, whom Mitya carries off in his arms, it casts him half as a conquering predator. The mock-elevated tone is deliberately Dostoevskian.

«Ну уж я теперь уйду», — подумал Калганов и, выйдя из голубой комнаты, притворил за собою обе половинки дверей.  
"Well, now I'll be off," thought Kalganov, and going out of the blue room, he pulled both halves of the door shut behind him.
> Perfective gerund «выйдя»: «вы́йдя» is the perfective past gerund («деепричастие») of «выйти» — 'having gone out'. It names a completed action prior to the main verb «притворил», all sharing Kalganov as subject: having left the room, he pulled the doors to.
> Reflexive «собою» and the double doors: «за собо́ю» — 'behind himself' — uses the reflexive pronoun «себя» (instrumental «собой/собою»), pointing back to the clause's subject. «обе полови́нки» are the two leaves of a double door, an «-инк-» diminutive that simply names the door-halves.

Но пир в зале гремел и продолжался, загремел еще пуще.  
But the revelry in the hall thundered on and went on, breaking out louder than ever.
> Imperfective duration, then a perfective surge: «греме́л» and «продолжа́лся» are imperfective pasts holding the revelry as ongoing noise; then «загреме́л» — perfective with the inceptive prefix «за-» — marks the sudden flare-up ('broke out roaring'). Russian routinely lets «за-» turn a verb into 'began to do' as a single event.
> “Worse / harder / louder”: «пу́ще» is an archaic-folksy comparative meaning 'all the more, even harder'. It survives in fixed phrases («пуще прежнего», 'worse than ever') and lends the line a fairy-tale, oral colour.

Митя положил Грушеньку на кровать и впился в ее губы поцелуем.  
Mitya laid Grushenka on the bed and pressed a kiss to her lips.
> Instrumental of manner: “with a kiss”: «впи́лся» (fastened onto, dug into) takes «в её гу́бы» (accusative of motion-toward after «в»), while «поцелу́ем» is a bare instrumental of means — 'by/with a kiss'. The naked instrumental, with no preposition, is the case's pure 'instrument' use.
> “Fastened onto”: «впи́ться» (perf.) is to bite, sting, or dig in — used of teeth, claws, or a clinging stare. Of a kiss it is fierce and consuming, far stronger than a neutral «поцеловал».

— Не трогай меня… — молящим голосом пролепетала она ему, — не трогай, пока не твоя… Сказала, что твоя, а ты не трогай… пощади… При тех, подле тех нельзя. Он тут. Гнусно здесь…  
"Don't touch me..." she said to him in a pleading voice. "Don't touch me until I'm yours... I said I'd be yours, but don't you touch me... spare me... With them here, beside them, it can't be done. He's here. It's vile here..."
> Negated imperfective imperative: «не тро́гай» is the imperfective imperative of «трогать». Russian strongly prefers the imperfective under «не» for prohibitions — 'don't (ever) touch', a standing ban — where a perfective imperative would warn against a single feared event.
> «пока не» — “until”: «пока́ не» introduces a 'not until' clause: 'don't touch me until (I'm) yours'. Here the verb is gapped to a bare predicate «твоя» — 'until [I'm] yours' — with the zero copula typical of the present tense.
> “She faltered out”: «пролепета́ть» is to babble, lisp, or murmur brokenly, as a child or someone overcome. It marks Grushenka's plea as half-incoherent, pressed out under emotion.
> Impersonal «нельзя» with «при»/«подле»: «нельзя́» is an impersonal predicative — 'it can't be / it's not allowed' — with no subject. «при тех» ('in the presence of those [people]', prepositional after «при») and «по́дле тех» ('beside those', archaic preposition + genitive) stack two ways of saying 'with them right here'.
> “It's vile / loathsome here”: «гну́сный/гну́сно» is a strong moral word — base, foul, vile — not mere distaste. Grushenka's «гнусно здесь» registers spiritual revulsion at consummating their love amid the drunken Poles and her former keeper.

— Послушен! Не мыслю… благоговею!.. — бормотал Митя. — Да, гнусно здесь, о, презренно. — И, не выпуская ее из объятий, он опустился подле кровати на пол, на колена.  
"I obey! I would not dream of it... I worship you!.." Mitya muttered. "Yes, it's vile here — oh, it's contemptible." And without releasing her from his embrace, he sank down beside the bed onto the floor, onto his knees.
> Short adjective as predicate: «послу́шен» is the short (predicative) form of «послушный» (obedient): 'I am obedient / I obey'. The short adjective can only stand as a predicate and here gives Mitya's submission a clipped, absolute, vow-like force.
> “I revere / worship”: «благогове́ть» is to feel reverent awe, the word for veneration before the holy. Lifting it from the altar to Grushenka, Mitya makes her an object of worship — the religious vocabulary Dostoevsky pours over earthly passion.
> Imperfective gerund of simultaneity: «не выпуска́я» is the imperfective present gerund of «выпускать» — 'while not letting (her) go'. Negated, it frames the main action «опустился» as happening without his releasing her: he sank down still holding her.
> “Onto his knees” — old plural: «на колена» is the archaic accusative plural of «колено»; modern Russian says «на колени». The dropped «-и» is a 19th-century / Church-Slavonic-flavoured form fitting Mitya's gesture of kneeling as if in prayer.

— Я знаю, ты хоть и зверь, а ты благородный, — тяжело выговорила Грушенька, — надо, чтоб это честно… впредь будет честно… и чтоб и мы были честные, чтоб и мы были добрые, не звери, а добрые… Увези меня, увези далеко, слышишь… Я здесь не хочу, а чтобы далеко, далеко…  
"I know you're a beast, but you're a noble one," Grushenka brought out heavily. "It has to be honest... from now on it will be honest... and we must be honest too, we must be good, not beasts but good... Take me away, take me far off, do you hear... I don't want to be here, I want it far, far away..."
> Concessive «хоть и… а» and the contrastive «а»: «хоть и… а…» is a concessive frame: 'though (you're) X, yet Y'. The pivot «а» is the mild contrastive conjunction marking a turn — 'beast, and yet noble'. Note the zero copula: «ты… зверь», «ты благородный», no 'are'.
> «чтобы» with the irrealis past: After «надо» ('it must be that…') Grushenka uses «чтоб(ы)» + past-form verbs — «чтоб и мы были честные» — the willed/hypothetical mood. «чтобы» always pairs with a past-tense verb (or, gapped, a bare predicate) to express a desired outcome, not a stated fact.
> Perfective imperative «увези»: «увези́» is the perfective imperative of «увезти» (to carry off, by vehicle) — a single, decisive command, 'take me away (for good)'. The doubling «увези… увези» is pure pleading repetition.
> “She brought out (with effort)”: «вы́говорить» here means to utter, get words out — and «тяжело́ выговорила» stresses the labour of it: she forces the words out heavily, exhausted by drink and feeling.

— О да, да, непременно! — сжимал ее в объятиях Митя, — увезу тебя, улетим… О, всю жизнь за один год отдам сейчас, чтобы только знать про эту кровь!  
"Oh yes, yes, without fail!" Mitya pressed her in his arms. "I'll carry you off, we'll fly away... Oh, I'd give up my whole life for a single year right now, only to know about this blood!"
> Perfective simple future = vow: «увезу́» and «улети́м» are perfective verbs conjugated like a present, which gives future meaning: 'I'll carry you off', 'we'll fly away'. No auxiliary 'will' — the future lives in the ending, and the perfective makes each a promised single event.
> «за» + accusative: “in exchange for”: «за один год» — 'for/in exchange for a single year' — uses «за» + accusative in its 'trade' sense. Mitya would barter «всю жизнь» (his whole life, accusative direct object) against one year, only to know the truth about the blood.

— Какая кровь? — в недоумении переговорила Грушенька.  
"What blood?" Grushenka repeated in bewilderment.
> “In bewilderment”: «недоуме́ние» is puzzlement, the state of not understanding — literally 'non-comprehension'. The prepositional phrase «в недоумении» is a stock way to name the manner of an utterance.
> Prefix «пере-» as “again”: Here «переговори́ла» carries the «пере-» sense of repetition/echo — she 'said back, repeated' his word «кровь» as a question. The same prefix elsewhere means 'across' or 'redo'; context fixes which.

— Ничего! — проскрежетал Митя. — Груша, ты хочешь, чтобы честно, а я вор. Я у Катьки деньги украл… Позор, позор!  
"Never mind!" Mitya ground out. "Grusha, you want it to be honest, and I'm a thief. I stole money from Katka... The disgrace, the disgrace!"
> “He ground out (through his teeth)”: «проскрежета́ть» is to grate, gnash, grind — «скрежет зубо́в» is the 'gnashing of teeth'. Of speech it means words forced out through clenched teeth, in anguish or fury.
> Diminutives of intimacy and contempt: «Груша» is the bare affectionate diminutive of Grushenka (Agrafena); «Ка́тька», from Katerina Ivanovna, carries the rougher, slightly demeaning «-ка» suffix. The two names mark Mitya's gulf of feeling between the two women in a single breath.
> Zero-copula identification: «я вор» — 'I [am] a thief' — has no verb 'to be': the Russian present simply juxtaposes subject and a nominative predicate noun. The bare equation gives Mitya's self-accusation its blunt finality.

— У Катьки? Это у барышни? Нет, ты не украл. Отдай ей, у, меня возьми… Что кричишь? Теперь всё мое — твое. Что нам деньги? Мы их и без того прокутим… Таковские чтобы не прокутили. А мы пойдем с тобою лучше землю пахать. Я землю вот этими руками скрести хочу. Трудиться надо, слышишь? Алеша приказал. Я не любовница тебе буду, я тебе верная буду, раба твоя буду, работать на тебя буду. Мы к барышне сходим и поклонимся оба, чтобы простила, и уедем. А не простит, мы и так уедем. А ты деньги ей снеси, а меня люби… А ее не люби. Больше ее не люби. А полюбишь, я ее задушу… Я ей оба глаза иголкой выколю…  
"From Katka? From the young lady? No, you didn't steal. Give it back to her — and as for me, take me... Why are you shouting? Now everything of mine is yours. What's money to us? We'd squander it anyway... People like us could never help squandering it. Better that you and I go off and plow the land. I want to scratch at the earth with these very hands. One has to toil, do you hear? Alyosha told me so. I'll not be your mistress, I'll be faithful to you, I'll be your slave, I'll work for you. We'll go to the young lady and bow to her, the two of us, so she'll forgive us, and then we'll leave. And if she won't forgive, we'll leave all the same. And you, carry the money to her — but love me... And don't love her. Don't love her anymore. And if you do, I'll strangle her... I'll put both her eyes out with a needle..."
> Perfective past under negation: «ты не укра́л» negates a perfective past — 'you did not (in fact) steal', denying the completed act outright. Contrast the imperfective «не воровал», which would deny the activity or habit of stealing.
> Topic-comment with zero copula: «Тепе́рь всё моё — твоё» — 'now everything (that is) mine [is] yours' — links two pronoun-adjectives with no verb. The dash marks the missing copula; the order topicalises «всё моё» and lands the new point, «твоё», last.
> “Squander it” and “the likes of us”: «прокути́ть» is to blow money in riotous carousing (a «кутёж» is a binge). «Таковские», a folksy-derisive form of «таковский», means 'people of that sort, the likes of us' — Grushenka's tipsy self-mockery about wastrels.
> Plowing the land — the dream of penitent labour: «паха́ть зе́млю» (to plow the earth) and «скрести́» (to scrape/scratch at) voice a longing for honest peasant toil as redemption. «Труди́ться надо» — 'one must labour' — echoes a moral commonplace of the age, here traced to Alyosha.
> Compound imperfective future: «работать… буду» is the imperfective future: «буду» (future of «быть») + imperfective infinitive, naming ongoing future action — 'I will be working / will keep working for you'. Note the Russian ear hears «раба́ твоя́ бу́ду» (I'll be your slave) on the same быть, with the noun supplied.
> Conditional without «если»: «А не прости́т, …уе́дем» drops «если»: a bare 'and (if she) won't forgive, we'll leave anyway' — common in lively speech, where the future-perfective verb alone carries the condition. «и так» = 'all the same, anyway'.
> Instrument in the instrumental: «иго́лкой» is a bare instrumental of means — 'with a needle' — modifying «вы́колю» ('I'll put out'). Both verbs are perfective futures: jealous, decisive threats. The case alone, no preposition, names the instrument.

— Тебя люблю, тебя одну, в Сибири буду любить…  
"It's you I love, you alone — even in Siberia I'll love you..."
> Fronted accusative object: Word order puts the object «тебя́» first for emphasis — 'It's you I love, you alone'. Free case-marking lets Russian move the object ahead of the verb to stress it; «одну́» (accusative fem.) agrees with «тебя».

— Зачем в Сибирь? А что ж, и в Сибирь, коли хочешь, всё равно… работать будем… в Сибири снег… Я по снегу люблю ехать… и чтобы колокольчик был… Слышишь, звенит колокольчик… Где это звенит колокольчик? Едут какие-то… вот и перестал звенеть.  
"Why Siberia? Well, what of it — Siberia too, if you like, it's all the same... we'll work... in Siberia there's snow... I love riding over the snow... and let there be little sleigh-bells... Listen, a bell is ringing... Where is that bell ringing? Somebody's driving up... there, it's stopped ringing."
> Archaic «коли» = “if”: «ко́ли» is a folksy/archaic conjunction for «если» (if): 'Siberia too, if you like'. It belongs to colloquial-rustic and 19th-century speech and suits Grushenka's drowsy, peasant-tinged murmuring.
> «чтобы» of wish + past «был»: «и чтобы колоко́льчик был» — 'and let there be a little bell' — is a free-standing «чтобы» + past form expressing a wish/desideratum, no main verb needed. The irrealis «был» is obligatory after «чтобы».
> The little sleigh-bell: «колоко́льчик» is the diminutive of «ко́локол» (bell) — here the small harness-bell of a Russian troika or sleigh, whose ringing announces an approaching traveller. Its sound threads the whole delirium scene and, ironically, signals the arriving police.
> Indefinite «какие-то»: «каки́е-то» — 'some (people), I don't know who' — uses the «-то» particle for a specific-but-unidentified referent. With the imperfective «е́дут» (are driving/riding) it conjures vague figures approaching out of the snow.

Она в бессилии закрыла глаза и вдруг как бы заснула на одну минуту.  
Feebly she closed her eyes, and suddenly seemed to fall asleep for a single minute.
> «в бессилии» — prepositional of state: «в бесси́лии» (in helplessness/weakness) is the prepositional after «в», naming the state in which she acts. «бесси́лие» is 'powerlessness' — the «без-» privative + «сила» (strength).
> Hedging «как бы»: «как бы» ('as if, sort of') softens the verb to a seeming: she 'seemed to / as it were fell asleep'. This hedging particle, sprinkled through the passage, keeps the whole scene at the edge of the dreamlike.

Колокольчик в самом деле звенел где-то в отдалении и вдруг перестал звенеть.  
A bell was in fact ringing somewhere in the distance, and suddenly it stopped ringing.
> “In actual fact” — «в самом деле»: «в са́мом де́ле» means 'really, in actual fact' — the narrator confirms the bell was no dream. The imperfective «звене́л» holds the ringing as ongoing background until the perfective «переста́л» cuts it off.
> Indefinite place «где-то»: «где́-то» ('somewhere', specific but unknown) pairs the «-то» particle with the interrogative «где». «в отдале́нии» — 'in the distance' — is a bookish noun built on «даль/далеко».

Митя склонился головою к ней на грудь.  
Mitya bowed his head onto her breast.
> Instrumental of the body part: «склони́лся голово́ю» — 'bowed down with his head' — names the body part doing the bending in the instrumental (older «-ою» for «-ой»). Russian regularly puts the relevant body part in the instrumental: «кивнуть головой», «пожать плечами».
> Middle «-ся»: a change of posture: «склони́ться» (with reflexive «-ся») is intransitive 'to bend/bow down', the middle counterpart of transitive «склонить». The «-ся» turns the action inward onto the subject's own body.

Он не заметил, как перестал звенеть колокольчик, но не заметил и того, как вдруг перестали и песни, и на место песен и пьяного гама во всем доме воцарилась как бы внезапно мертвая тишина.  
He did not notice when the bell stopped ringing, but neither did he notice how the songs, too, suddenly broke off, and how, in place of song and drunken uproar, a kind of sudden, dead silence settled over the whole house.
> Parallel «как»-clauses after «не заметил»: Both halves hang 'he didn't notice how…' on «как»-clauses; the second adds the correlative «и того́, как» ('also that…'), where «того» is the genitive of «то» governed by the negated verb, anticipating the clause. The parallel «не заметил… но не заметил и» builds the sentence's slow, hypnotic accumulation.
> Inceptive «-ся» perfective: «воцари́ться» — literally 'to enthrone itself', from «царь» — means a silence 'reigned / settled in'. The «-ся» makes it intransitive and the «во-…-ся» frame inceptive: a sudden dead stillness took the throne over the whole house.
> “Drunken uproar”: «гам» is a din of many voices, a babel of shouting. «пья́ного га́ма» (genitive) sets the carousers' noise against the «мёртвая тишина» (dead silence) that replaces it — the hush that announces the law.

Грушенька открыла глаза.  
Grushenka opened her eyes.
> Perfective: a single completed act: «откры́ла» (perfective past) reports one finished event — 'opened (her) eyes'. After the long imperfective stillness of the previous sentences, this clipped perfective snaps the narrative back to motion.

— Что это, я спала? Да… колокольчик… Я спала и сон видела: будто я еду, по снегу… колокольчик звенит, а я дремлю. С милым человеком, с тобою еду будто. И далеко-далеко… Обнимала-целовала тебя, прижималась к тебе, холодно будто мне, а снег-то блестит… Знаешь, коли ночью снег блестит, а месяц глядит, и точно я где не на земле… Проснулась, а милый-то подле, как хорошо…  
"What's this — was I asleep? Yes... the little bell... I was asleep and dreamed a dream: that I was driving along, over the snow... a bell ringing, and I dozing. With a dear man, with you I was driving, it seemed. And far, far away... I was embracing you, kissing you, pressing close to you, I felt cold, it seemed, and the snow glittered... You know, when the snow glitters at night and the moon looks down, it's as if I were somewhere not of this earth... I woke up, and my dear one was beside me — how good it was..."
> «будто» introducing a dream: «бу́дто» ('as if / as though') opens the content of the dream: 'I dreamed that I was driving…'. The imperfective «е́ду» (am driving) and «дремлю́» (am dozing) hold the dream as a flowing, durative present-in-the-past.
> Imperfective verbs of caress: «обнима́ла», «целова́ла», «прижима́лась» are all imperfective pasts — repeated, continuous actions of embracing, kissing, pressing close. «прижима́лась» carries reflexive «-ся» ('pressed myself against you'). The string paints the dream as ongoing, not finished.
> Dative «мне холодно» + the «-то» on «снег»: «хо́лодно мне» is the impersonal dative-experiencer pattern — 'I (felt) cold', no nominative subject. The clitic «-то» on «снег-то» topicalises the snow ('but the snow, now, it glitters'), a warm colloquial highlighting.
> «коли»-conditional, «месяц» = moon: Again «коли» = 'when/if'. «ме́сяц» here means the moon (its older, folk-poetic sense, beside its meaning 'month'); «гляди́т» personifies it as 'looking down', deepening the unearthly note of 'as if I were not on this earth'.
> “My dear one, right beside”: «ми́лый» as a noun is 'dear one, sweetheart'; with topicalising «-то» it is tender and intimate. «по́дле» ('beside, close by') is a slightly archaic preposition/adverb that recurs through the scene.

— Подле, — бормотал Митя, целуя ее платье, грудь, руки.  
"Beside you," Mitya muttered, kissing her dress, her breast, her hands.
> Imperfective gerund «целуя»: «целу́я» is the imperfective present gerund of «целовать» — 'kissing', a continuous action accompanying «бормотал». The piled-up accusative objects «платье, грудь, руки» trace the path of his kisses.

И вдруг ему показалось что-то странное: показалось ему, что она глядит прямо пред собой, но не на него, не в лицо ему, а поверх его головы, пристально и до странности неподвижно.  
And suddenly something strange seemed to come over him: it seemed to him that she was gazing straight ahead of her, but not at him, not at his face, but over the top of his head, fixedly and with a strange stillness.
> Dative-subject «показалось»: «показа́лось ему́» — 'it seemed to him' — is impersonal: the experiencer «ему» stands in the dative, the verb is fixed neuter, and a «что»-clause supplies the content. This dative-of-the-experiencer is the very grammar of Dostoevsky's inner life.
> Negative parallelism resolved by «а»: A chain of denials «не на него, не в лицо… а поверх…» ('not at him, not in the face, but over his head') is closed by the contrastive «а», which corrects to what is actually so. «по́верх» ('over the top of', + genitive) is a bookish compound preposition.
> “Fixedly and uncannily still”: «при́стально» is to gaze fixed and intent; «до стра́нности неподви́жно» — 'to the point of strangeness motionless'. The «до + genitive» frame ('to the degree of…') intensifies the eerie stillness foreshadowing the watchers behind the curtain.

Удивление вдруг выразилось в ее лице, почти испуг.  
Astonishment suddenly showed in her face, almost fright.
> Abstract noun as subject; «-ся» middle: The abstract «удивле́ние» (astonishment) is the grammatical subject, and «вы́разилось» (perfective, reflexive «-ся») means 'expressed itself, showed'. Russian readily lets an emotion be the actor — astonishment 'showed itself' in her face.

— Митя, кто это оттуда глядит сюда к нам? — прошептала она вдруг.  
"Mitya, who is that, looking over here at us from there?" she suddenly whispered.
> «оттуда»/«сюда»: there-to-here directionals: The directional adverbs pair up: «отту́да» ('from there', source) and «сюда́» ('to here', goal), with «кто это» fronting the question. Russian distinguishes location («там/здесь») from motion-from («оттуда») and motion-to («сюда»).
> Perfective «прошептала»: «прошепта́ть» (perf.) — 'to whisper out, say in a whisper' — the «про-» giving a single completed utterance. With «вдруг» ('suddenly') it marks the abrupt break of her dreamy mood into alarm.

Митя обернулся и увидел, что в самом деле кто-то раздвинул занавеску и их как бы высматривает.  
Mitya turned and saw that someone had indeed drawn back the curtain and was, as it were, peering at them.
> Indefinite «кто-то» + tense shift: «кто́-то» ('someone', specific-unknown, «-то») does two things: the perfective «раздви́нул» (had drawn the curtain apart, a finished act) then the imperfective present «высма́тривает» ('is peering at them'), shifting into the live, ongoing now of the menace.
> Hedging «как бы» again: The recurring «как бы» ('as it were, sort of') keeps even this sharp observation tentative, filtered through Mitya's stunned perception — they were, 'as it were', spying on him.

Да и не один как будто.  
And not just one person, it seemed.
> «да и» + negated «не один»: «Да и» links and adds emphasis — 'and what's more'. «не оди́н» literally 'not one (alone)' = 'more than one', and «как будто» ('it seemed') hedges. A terse, ominous fragment with no verb at all.

Он вскочил и быстро ступил к смотревшему.  
He sprang up and quickly stepped toward the one who was looking.
> Past active participle as a noun: «к смотре́вшему» — 'toward the one who was looking' — is the past active participle of «смотреть» in «-вш-», declined like an adjective and used substantively (the looker), governed by «к» in the dative. A compact, bookish way to name the person by his action.

— Сюда, пожалуйте к нам сюда, — не громко, но твердо и настойчиво проговорил ему чей-то голос.  
"This way, kindly come over here to us," someone's voice said to him — not loud, but firm and insistent.
> Polite imperative «пожалуйте»: «пожа́луйте» is an old courteous imperative — 'kindly come / be so good as to come'. Now archaic, it lends the summons a formal, official politeness (the law inviting Mitya 'over here'), faintly menacing under the courtesy.
> Indefinite possessive «чей-то»: «че́й-то» — 'someone's' — is the interrogative-possessive «чей» plus «-то», marking an as-yet-unidentified speaker. It agrees with «голос» (masc.): 'someone's voice'.

Митя выступил из-за занавески и стал неподвижно.  
Mitya stepped out from behind the curtain and stood stock-still.
> Compound preposition «из-за»: «из-за» ('out from behind', + genitive) combines two prepositions to give a precise path of motion: he stepped out from behind the curtain. «из-за заве́ски» — genitive «занавески».
> «стал» + adverb: came to a standstill: «стал неподви́жно» — 'stood / came to stand motionless'. Here «стать» is the verb of taking up a position, and «неподви́жно» is an adverb of manner. Russian uses «стал» both for 'became' and, as here, 'stopped/took a stance'.

Вся комната была полна людьми, но не давешними, а совсем новыми.  
The whole room was full of people, but not the earlier ones — entirely new ones.
> «полна» + instrumental of the filler: «полна́» is the short adjective 'full' (fem.), and what fills goes in the instrumental: «полна́ людьми́» — 'full of people'. The instrumental of contents is standard after «полный/полон».
> Contrast «не… а» in the instrumental: «не да́вешними, а… но́выми» — 'not the earlier ones, but quite new ones' — keeps the instrumental from «людьми» across the «не… а» correction. «да́вешний» ('of a while ago, the earlier') is a colloquial-archaic adjective.

Мгновенный озноб пробежал по спине его, и он вздрогнул.  
A momentary chill ran down his spine, and he shuddered.
> “A momentary chill ran down”: «озно́б» is a shiver, the cold shudder of fear or fever; «по спине́» ('down the back', «по» + dative) traces its path. The whole phrase is an idiom for a frisson of dread, sealed by «вздрогнул» (he gave a shudder).
> «по» + dative of the path: «по спине́» uses «по» governing the dative to mean 'along/over the surface of' — the chill ran the length of his back. «по» + dative is the standard 'along/about a surface' construction.

Всех этих людей он узнал в один миг.  
All these people he recognized in an instant.
> Fronted accusative object: The object «всех этих людей» (animate accusative = genitive plural form) is fronted before the subject «он» for emphasis: 'All these people he recognized…'. The animate accusative «всех… людей» borrows the genitive ending, as animate masculines and all animate plurals do.

Вот этот высокий и дебелый старик, в пальто и с фуражкой с кокардой, — это исправник, Михаил Макарыч.  
There, this tall, portly old man in an overcoat, with a peaked cap bearing a cockade — that is the police captain, Mikhail Makarych.
> Presentative «вот… это»: «Вот этот… — это исправник» is the presentative pattern: «вот» points ('there, this one') and the resumptive «это» equates with a bare nominative predicate, no copula. The whole roll-call of officials is built on this pointing 'this one is X' frame.
> “Portly, stout”: «дебе́лый» is a somewhat bookish-old word for thick-set, fleshy, well-fed — applied to the «высо́кий» (tall) old police captain, it sketches a solid, imposing official body.

А этот «чахоточный» опрятный щеголь, «всегда в таких вычищенных сапогах», — это товарищ прокурора.  
And this "consumptive," trim dandy, "always in such well-polished boots" — that is the assistant prosecutor.
> “Consumptive, trim dandy”: «чахо́точный» means consumptive (tubercular); «щёголь» is a dandy, a man fastidious about dress, and «опря́тный» trim/neat. The guillemet-quoted epithets are Mitya's own remembered, mocking words for the man — characterisation by recalled gossip.
> Past passive participle «вычищенных»: «вы́чищенных» is the past passive participle of «вычистить» (to clean thoroughly), in «-енн-», declined like an adjective: 'in such well-polished boots'. The participle names the boots as the things acted-upon — cleaned to a shine.

«У него хронометр в четыреста рублей есть, он показывал».  
"He has a chronometer worth four hundred roubles — he showed it off."
> «в» + accusative of worth, and the numeral: «в четы́реста рубле́й» ('worth four hundred roubles') uses «в» + accusative to state value. The numeral «четыреста» here governs the genitive plural «рублей», the case demanded by numbers five and above (and hundreds).

А этот молоденький, маленький, в очках… Митя вот только фамилию его позабыл, но он знает и его, видел: это следователь, судебный следователь, «из Правоведения», недавно приехал.  
And this young, small one, in spectacles... Mitya had only just now forgotten his surname, but he knows him too, has seen him: this is the examining magistrate, the investigating magistrate, "from the School of Jurisprudence," newly arrived.
> Tense slide into Mitya's live mind: The narration slips from past «позабы́л» (had forgotten) into the present «зна́ет… ви́дел» — free indirect speech that puts us inside Mitya's racing recognition in the present moment. «позабы́ть» is a slightly colloquial perfective of «забыть».
> Diminutive adjectives of smallness: «моло́денький» (with «-еньк-») softens 'young' to 'youngish, ever so young'; paired with «ма́ленький» (little) it makes the magistrate seem boyish and slight — a tone of faint condescension that the small man's gravity will belie.

А этот вот — становой, Маврикий Маврикич, этого-то уж он знает, знакомый человек.  
And this one here — the district officer, Mavriky Mavrikich; him he knows well enough, a familiar man.
> Particles «-то» and «уж»: Two emphatic particles pile up: «-то» topicalises «этого» ('this one, now') and «уж» insists ('him, at least, he certainly does know'). Such clustered particles carry the very texture of Mitya's inner exclamation.

Ну, а эти с бляхами, эти зачем же?  
Well, and these with the badges — what are they here for?
> Insistent «же» in a question: «заче́м же?» — 'whatever are they here for?' — the particle «же» pressing the question with puzzled urgency. The bare «эти… эти» (these… these), no verb, mimics Mitya's darting, fragmentary survey of the strangers.

И еще двое каких-то, мужики… А вот там в дверях Калганов и Трифон Борисыч…  
And two more of some sort, peasants... And there in the doorway, Kalganov and Trifon Borisych...
> Collective numeral «двое» + indefinite: «дво́е» is the collective numeral for counting people (especially males), governing the genitive plural «каки́х-то» — 'a couple of some sort'. «каких-то» ('some, unidentified', «-то») keeps the peasants vague in Mitya's confused glance.

— Господа… Что это вы, господа? — проговорил было Митя, но вдруг, как бы вне себя, как бы не сам собой, воскликнул громко, во весь голос:  
"Gentlemen... What is this you're doing, gentlemen?" Mitya started to say, but suddenly, as if beside himself, as if not by his own will, he cried out loudly, at the top of his voice:
> The particle «было» — an action begun and broken off: «было» after a perfective past marks an action that was started but interrupted or undone — 'Mitya began to say… (but)'. This special «было» is a fine point of 19th-century narrative, signalling a thwarted or aborted act.
> Hedged «вне себя» / «не сам собой»: «вне себя́» ('beside himself') and «не сам собо́й» ('not himself, not by his own will') both use the reflexive «себя/собой». Doubled «как бы… как бы» hedges them: he cried out, as it were, not of his own volition.
> “At the top of his voice”: «во весь го́лос» is a fixed idiom — 'at full voice, with all his lungs'. The «во весь…» frame ('to the full extent of…') also gives «во весь рост» (at full height), «во весь опор» (at full gallop).

— По-ни-маю!  
"I un-der-stand!"
> Syllable-by-syllable «понимаю»: «понима́ю» is the imperfective present 'I understand'. Dostoevsky breaks it into shouted syllables «По-ни-ма-ю!» to render Mitya's frenzied, drawn-out cry — typography doing the work of a stage direction.

Молодой человек в очках вдруг выдвинулся вперед и, подступив к Мите, начал, хоть и осанисто, но немного как бы торопясь:  
The young man in spectacles suddenly came forward and, stepping up to Mitya, began — with dignity, yet a little as though hurrying:
> Perfective gerund «подступив»: «подступи́в» — perfective past gerund of «подступить» (to step up to) — names the prior completed move: 'having stepped up to Mitya, he began…'. «к Мите» is dative after «к»; the gerund shares the subject of «начал».
> Concessive «хоть и… но» + gerund «торопясь»: «хоть и осанисто, но… торопясь» — 'with dignity, yet… as if hurrying'. «осанисто» is an adverb (with a stately bearing); «торопя́сь» is the imperfective gerund of reflexive «торопиться» (to hurry), describing the manner of «начал».

— Мы имеем к вам… одним словом, я вас попрошу сюда, вот сюда, к дивану… Существует настоятельная необходимость с вами объясниться.  
"We have a matter to put to you... in a word, I will ask you to come here, over here, to the sofa... There is a pressing necessity to have an explanation with you."
> Perfective future as a soft request: «попрошу́» (perfective future, 'I will ask') used of the present moment is a courteous, slightly officious way to make a request — 'I'll (have to) ask you (to come) here'. The magistrate's polished formula sets the legal tone.
> Bureaucratic register: «существу́ет настоя́тельная необходи́мость объясни́ться» — 'there exists a pressing necessity to have it out' — is stiff officialese, the magistrate retreating into formula. «объясни́ться» (reflexive «-ся») is 'to have an explanation, talk things through'.

— Старик! — вскричал Митя в исступлении, — старик и его кровь!.. По-ни-маю!  
"The old man!" Mitya cried out in a frenzy. "The old man and his blood!.. I un-der-stand!"
> “In a frenzy / transport”: «исступле́ние» is a state of frenzy, ecstasy, or being beside oneself — a key Dostoevskian word for the over-wrought soul. «в исступле́нии» (prepositional after «в») names the pitch of Mitya's outcry.

И как подкошенный сел, словно упал, на подле стоявший стул.  
And as if cut down, he sat — rather, he dropped — onto the chair standing beside him.
> “As if cut down (like mown grass)”: «как подко́шенный» is a fixed simile — 'as if scythed down', from «косить» (to mow). It describes a person collapsing as suddenly and limply as cut grass. Paired with «словно упал» ('as though he fell'), it makes Mitya drop rather than sit.
> Past active participle «стоявший»: «по́дле стоя́вший стул» — 'the chair (that was) standing beside (him)' — uses the past active participle «стоя́вший» (of «стоять») as an attributive modifier, with «по́дле» (beside). It packs a whole «который стоял подле» relative clause into one phrase.

— Понимаешь? Понял! Отцеубийца и изверг, кровь старика отца твоего вопиет за тобою! — заревел внезапно, подступая к Мите, старик исправник.  
"You understand? You've grasped it! Parricide and monster, the blood of your old father cries out against you!" the old police captain suddenly roared, advancing on Mitya.
> Church-Slavonic verb form «вопиет»: «вопие́т» is the Slavonicizing form of 'cries out' (beside everyday «вопи́т»), its «-ие-» and solemn tone belonging to the sacred register of Scripture and prayer. Such glagol-style archaisms turn the captain's roar into a prophetic denunciation.
> “Parricide and monster”: «отцеуби́йца» is a parricide — 'father-killer', from «отец» + «убить». «и́зверг» is a monster, a fiend cast out of humanity. Together they hurl the gravest possible names at Mitya in a single breath.

Он был вне себя, побагровел и весь так и трясся.  
He was beside himself, turned purple, and was shaking all over.
> Reflexive «трясся» + emphatic «так и»: «трясся́» (past of reflexive «трястись», to shake/tremble) is the intransitive 'shook all over'; «так и трясся» uses the emphatic «так и» for an action breaking out vividly — 'was just shaking all over'. «побагрове́л» ('turned crimson') is an inceptive perfective.
> «вне себя» — beside oneself: «вне себя́» ('outside oneself') is an idiom for being beside oneself with emotion, using the reflexive «себя» (here genitive after «вне», + genitive). The captain mirrors the very frenzy he condemns in Mitya.

— Но это невозможно! — вскричал маленький молодой человечек. — Михаил Макарыч, Михаил Макарыч! Это не так, не так-с!.. Прошу позволить мне одному говорить… Я никак не мог предположить от вас подобного эпизода…  
"But this is impossible!" cried the small young fellow. "Mikhail Makarych, Mikhail Makarych! This won't do, it won't do, sir!.. I beg you to let me speak alone... I could never have supposed such an outburst from you..."
> The deferential particle «-с»: «не так-с» appends the obsequious enclitic «-с» (a contraction of «сударь», 'sir') to mark deference and agitation. Pervasive in 19th-century speech to superiors, «-с» is a tiny marker of social hierarchy now wholly extinct.
> «никак не» + genitive object: «никак не мог» — 'could in no way / never have' — uses «никак» («ни-» word) with negative concord on «не мог». The object «подо́бного эпизо́да» stands in the genitive of negation under the negated verb.

— Но ведь это же бред, господа, бред! — восклицал исправник, — посмотрите на него: ночью, пьяный, с беспутной девкой и в крови отца своего… Бред! Бред!  
"But this is delirium, gentlemen, delirium!" the police captain exclaimed. "Just look at him: at night, drunk, with a dissolute wench and stained with his father's blood... Delirium! Delirium!"
> Particles «ведь» and «же» stacked: «ведь» appeals to shared sense ('but surely, after all') and «же» insists — 'but this is delirium, surely!'. Two modal particles in one short cry pack the captain's exasperated certainty. «бред» (delirium) is the chapter's title-word.
> Reflexive «своего» and stacked phrases: A list of damning circumstances: «но́чью» (instrumental of time, 'at night'), «пья́ный» (drunk), «с… де́вкой» (instrumental after «с»), «в крови́ отца́ своего́». The reflexive possessive «своего́» ties the father back to Mitya — his own father's blood.
> “A dissolute wench”: «де́вка» is a coarse, demeaning word for a girl/woman (vs respectful «девушка»), and «беспу́тный» means dissolute, off the right path («без» + «путь»). The captain's scorn lands on Grushenka in two contemptuous words.

— Я вас изо всех сил попрошу, голубчик Михаил Макарыч, на сей раз удержать ваши чувства, — зашептал было скороговоркой старику товарищ прокурора, — иначе я принужден буду принять…  
"I beg you with all my might, my dear Mikhail Makarych, to restrain your feelings just this once," the assistant prosecutor started to whisper rapidly to the old man, "otherwise I shall be obliged to take..."
> “My dear” — «голубчик»: «голу́бчик» (little dove, from «голубь») is a tender, coaxing form of address, here softening the prosecutor's urgent rebuke of the captain. «Мака́рыч» is the contracted patronymic «Макарович». The affection is strategic — a plea to restrain himself.
> Archaic demonstrative «сей»: «сей» ('this') is the bookish-archaic demonstrative, surviving in set phrases like «на сей раз» (this time), «сию минуту», «до сих пор». In running 19th-century prose it sounds elevated and slightly official.
> Short passive participle «принужден» + future: «принужде́н бу́ду» — 'I shall be obliged/forced' — joins the short past passive participle «принужде́н» (of «принудить», to compel) to the future of «быть». This is the periphrastic passive in the future, broken off mid-threat.

Но маленький следователь не дал докончить; он обратился к Мите и твердо, громко и важно произнес:  
But the small magistrate would not let him finish; he turned to Mitya and, firmly, loudly, and gravely, pronounced:
> «дать» + infinitive: 'let / allow': «не дал доко́нчить» — 'did not let (him) finish' — uses «дать» + infinitive in its causative 'allow' sense, negated. «доко́нчить» (perfective, 'to finish off') is the completed end of speaking he was denied.
> Triple adverbial of manner: Three adverbs «твёрдо, гро́мко и ва́жно» ('firmly, loudly, and gravely/with importance') stack before the perfective «произнёс' (pronounced). «ва́жно» here means 'with weighty self-importance', framing the magistrate's solemn formula.

— Господин отставной поручик Карамазов, я должен вам объявить, что вы обвиняетесь в убийстве отца вашего, Федора Павловича Карамазова, происшедшем в эту ночь…  
"Retired Lieutenant Karamazov, sir, I must inform you that you are charged with the murder of your father, Fyodor Pavlovich Karamazov, committed this very night..."
> Reflexive-passive «обвиняетесь»: «обвиня́етесь» (imperfective, reflexive «-сь») is the «-ся» passive: 'you are (being) accused'. The charge, «в уби́йстве» (prepositional after «в»), takes the construction «обвинять в чём» (to accuse of). The «-ся» passive is the normal way to state such a formal accusation.
> Past active participle «происшедшем»: «происше́дшем» is the past active participle of «произойти» (to happen, occur), agreeing with «убийстве» in the prepositional — 'the murder that occurred this night'. The participle, again, compresses a «которое произошло» clause into the noun phrase.

Он что-то и еще сказал, тоже и прокурор как будто что-то ввернул, но Митя хоть и слушал, но уже не понимал их.  
He said something further too, and the prosecutor also seemed to slip in a word, but although Mitya listened, he no longer understood them.
> Imperfectives of a failing mind: «слу́шал» and «не понима́л» are imperfective pasts — ongoing, durative states: he was listening but no longer understanding. The imperfective captures the continuous fog descending over Mitya's comprehension.
> “Slipped in a word”: «вверну́ть» (perfective) literally 'to screw in', figuratively to slip or interject a remark into talk. «что́-то ввернул» — 'put in some word or other' — with «что-то» (something, unspecified, «-то»).

Он диким взглядом озирал их всех…  
He stared around at them all with a wild gaze...
> Instrumental of manner «диким взглядом»: «ди́ким взгля́дом» — 'with a wild gaze' — is the instrumental of manner/means with «озира́л» (imperfective, scanned/looked round at). «их всех» is the animate accusative ('them all'). The imperfective holds the staring as an unbroken, dazed sweep over the room.
---

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.