# The Brothers Karamazov, They Carry Mitya Away

Братья Карамазовы · Fyodor Dostoevsky · Book IX — The Preliminary Investigation

Source: https://1732studios.com/books/karamazov/b9-c9. Data: https://1732studios.com/books/karamazov/b9-c9.json.


Когда подписан был протокол, Николай Парфенович торжественно обратился к обвиняемому и прочел ему «Постановление», гласившее, что такого-то года и такого-то дня, там-то, судебный следователь такого-то окружного суда, допросив такого-то (то есть Митю) в качестве обвиняемого в том-то и в том-то (все вины были тщательно прописаны) и принимая во внимание, что обвиняемый, не признавая себя виновным во взводимых на него преступлениях, ничего в оправдание свое не представил, а между тем свидетели (такие-то) и обстоятельства (такие-то) его вполне уличают, руководствуясь такими-то и такими-то статьями «Уложения о наказаниях» и т. д., постановил: для пресечения такому-то (Мите) способов уклониться от следствия и суда, заключить его в такой-то тюремный замок, о чем обвиняемому объявить, а копию сего постановления товарищу прокурора сообщить и т. д., и т. д.  
When the record had been signed, Nikolai Parfenovich turned solemnly to the accused and read out to him the "Committal Order", which declared that in such-and-such a year and on such-and-such a day, in such-and-such a place, the examining magistrate of such-and-such a district court, having interrogated such-a-one (that is, Mitya) as a person accused of this and that (every charge was set down with care) and taking into account that the accused, while not admitting himself guilty of the crimes laid against him, had offered nothing in his own defense, whereas the witnesses (so-and-so) and the circumstances (such-and-such) fully convicted him, and being guided by such-and-such articles of the "Statute of Punishments", and so on, had resolved: in order to bar such-a-one (Mitya) from any means of evading the investigation and the trial, to confine him in such-and-such a prison castle, of which the accused was to be informed, and a copy of the present order communicated to the deputy prosecutor, and so on, and so on.
> Short passive participle as a result: «подписан» is the short-form past passive participle of «подписать» ('to sign'); with «был» it forms a periphrastic passive stating a completed result — 'when the record had been signed.' Note the bookish inversion «подписан был» rather than «был подписан», which lends the clause a documentary solemnity.
> A chain of gerunds (деепричастия): The whole order is held together by a dense chain of adverbial participles: perfective past «допросив» ('having interrogated'), then imperfective present «принимая» ('taking into account') and «руководствуясь» ('being guided by'). Stacking gerunds this way is the very signature of bookish legal and 19th-century literary prose that Dostoevsky is parodying.
> Past active participle 'which declared': «гласившее» is the past active participle of «гласить» ('to state, to read [of a text]'), agreeing as neuter singular with «Постановление». It compresses a «которое гласило»-clause into one modifier — 'the order which declared…' — exactly the participial economy that makes literary Russian so compact.
> «обвиняемый» — 'the accused': A substantivized passive participle of «обвинять» ('to accuse') used as a noun, 'the accused / defendant,' here in the dative «обвиняемому» ('to the accused'). Such participle-nouns (the related «обвиняемого») thicken the legal texture of the passage — though «следователь» itself is not a participle but an agent noun in -тель.
> «тюремный замок» — a prison castle: Literally 'prison castle,' the period term for a fortified district jail (the «острог»). We keep the literal 'prison castle' for its grim, slightly archaic ring, matching the official document's register.

Словом, Мите объявили, что он от сей минуты арестант и что повезут его сейчас в город, где и заключат в одно очень неприятное место.  
In a word, Mitya was informed that from this minute he was a prisoner, and that he would be driven at once to the town, where he would be shut up in a very disagreeable place.
> «сей» — the bookish 'this': «сей» (here genitive feminine «сей минуты», 'from this minute') is the archaic literary demonstrative for 'this,' far more elevated than the everyday «этот». It tips the narrator into a period-formal register at the very moment Mitya's status changes.
> Impersonal 'they' and perfective futures: Both verbs are 3rd-person plural with no stated subject — the impersonal 'they' construction ('they will drive him… they will shut him up'), which English turns into a passive. «повезут» and «заключат» are perfective presents that carry future meaning: single, completed acts about to happen.
> «арестант» — a prisoner under arrest: «арестант» specifically means a person held in custody / a convict, sharper than the neutral «заключённый». Mitya is told that «он от сей минуты арестант» — the bare nominative complement of the zero-copula present ('he is, from this minute, a prisoner').

Митя, внимательно выслушав, вскинул только плечами.  
Mitya, having listened attentively, merely gave a shrug of the shoulders.
> Perfective gerund of prior action: «выслушав» is the perfective past gerund of «выслушать» ('to hear out'), naming an action completed before the main verb: 'having listened attentively, he then shrugged.' It shares Mitya's subject and sets the sequence of the two acts.
> Instrumental with a gesture verb: «плечами» is instrumental plural ('with the shoulders') after «вскинуть» — Russian regularly puts the body part one moves into the instrumental (пожать плечами, кивнуть головой). The particle «только» ('merely') tucked before it underlines how slight Mitya's response is.

— Что ж, господа, я вас не виню, я готов… Понимаю, что вам ничего более не остается.  
"Well, gentlemen, I do not blame you, I am ready… I understand that nothing else is left for you to do."
> «Что ж» — resigned 'well…': «ж» is the reduced form of the emphatic particle «же». «Что ж» is an idiomatic discourse opener of resignation or acceptance — 'well then, so be it' — coloring Mitya's words with weary readiness rather than a real question.
> Dative experiencer + genitive of negation: An impersonal construction: «вам» is the dative of the people affected ('for you'), and the negated subject «ничего» stands in the genitive — 'nothing else remains for you.' The dative-experiencer plus genitive-of-negation pattern is everywhere in Dostoevsky's inner speech.

Николай Парфенович мягко изъяснил ему, что свезет его тотчас же становой пристав Маврикий Маврикиевич, который как раз теперь тут случился…  
Nikolai Parfenovich gently explained to him that he would be conveyed at once by the district police officer Mavriky Mavrikievich, who happened to be on the spot just now…
> «случиться» — to happen to be present: Beyond 'to happen,' «случиться» here means 'to happen to be on the spot,' a slightly old-fashioned usage: «который как раз теперь тут случился» = 'who happened to be right there just now.' The reflexive «-ся» gives the verb its 'come about' sense.

— Стойте, — перебил вдруг Митя и с каким-то неудержимым чувством произнес, обращаясь ко всем в комнате.  
"Stop," Mitya suddenly broke in, and with a kind of irrepressible feeling he pronounced, turning to everyone in the room.
> Plural/polite imperative: «Стойте» is the imperative of «стоять» with the plural-polite ending «-те» — 'stop / wait,' addressed to the whole room. The same «-те» marks both several people and one person addressed respectfully.
> Gerund of simultaneous action: «обращаясь» is the imperfective present gerund of «обращаться» ('to turn / address oneself'), expressing what Mitya is doing at the same moment he speaks — 'turning to everyone.' The «-сь» (reflexive after a vowel) is built into the verb.
> «какой-то» — 'a kind of': «какой-то» ('some sort of, a kind of') is a hallmark of Dostoevsky's style, hedging and intensifying at once: «с каким-то неудержимым чувством» = 'with a kind of irrepressible feeling.' The «-то» marks the feeling as real but unnamed.

— Господа, все мы жестоки, все мы изверги, все плакать заставляем людей, матерей и грудных детей, но из всех — пусть уж так будет решено теперь — из всех я самый подлый гад!  
"Gentlemen, we are all cruel, we are all monsters, we all make people weep — mothers and babes at the breast — but of all, let it be settled here and now, of all I am the basest reptile!
> Emphatic anaphora and word order: Mitya hammers the repeated «все мы» ('we all') to the front of each clause for rhetorical weight — the topic-comment freedom of Russian lets him pile the given 'all of us' first and drive toward the new charge last. The triple repetition is pure confessional rhetoric.
> «заставлять» + infinitive — to make someone do: «заставлять» ('to compel') takes an accusative object plus an infinitive: «плакать заставляем людей» = 'we make people weep.' Note the literary inversion that throws the infinitive «плакать» to the front for emphasis on the act of weeping itself.
> «изверг» — a monster: «изверг» is a strong, almost biblical word for a fiend or monster, one cast out of human kindness; the plural «изверги» heightens Mitya's self-flagellating rhetoric. It is far heavier than a mild 'brute.'
> «гад» / «подлый» — the basest reptile: «гад» is literally a creeping thing, a reptile or vermin, used as a term of utter contempt; «подлый» means 'base, vile.' «самый подлый гад» ('the basest reptile') is Mitya ranking himself at the bottom of creation — «самый» forms the superlative.

Пусть! Каждый день моей жизни я, бия себя в грудь, обещал исправиться и каждый день творил всё те же пакости.  
So be it! Every day of my life I have beaten my breast and vowed to mend my ways, and every day committed the same vile deeds.
> Beating one's breast: «бия» is an archaic present-active gerund of «бить» ('to beat'); the phrase «бия себя в грудь» = 'beating himself on the breast,' a gesture of fervent, repentant promising. The reflexive object «себя» points the blow back at the speaker himself.
> «Пусть!» — 'So be it!': «Пусть» normally introduces a third-person command ('let him…'), but standing alone as an exclamation it means 'so be it, let it be that way' — Mitya throwing his whole confession down like a gauntlet. We keep it as its own sharp clause.
> Imperfective past for habit: Both «обещал» ('promised/vowed') and «творил» ('committed') are imperfective past, framing the acts as a daily, repeated habit rather than single events — reinforced by «каждый день» ('every day'). The aspect is what makes the line about an endless, unbroken cycle.
> «пакость» — a vile, dirty deed: «пакость» is a low, dirty, spiteful act — 'filth, vile deeds' — colloquial and contemptuous. «всё те же пакости» = 'the same old vile deeds,' the «всё те же» stressing the dreary sameness.

Понимаю теперь, что на таких, как я, нужен удар, удар судьбы, чтоб захватить его как в аркан и скрутить внешнею силой.  
Now I understand that men like me need a blow, a blow of fate, to catch them as in a lasso and bind them by an outward force.
> Dative-style impersonal of need: An impersonal construction of necessity: «нужен удар» = 'a blow is needed,' with «удар» agreeing as the grammatical subject of «нужен». «на таких, как я» ('on men like me') marks who the blow must fall upon — the experiencer framed obliquely rather than as a nominative subject.
> «чтоб» + infinitive of purpose: «чтоб» (a reduced «чтобы») here governs infinitives «захватить» and «скрутить» to express purpose — 'in order to catch and bind.' With a single shared subject, чтобы takes the infinitive rather than the past-form irrealis.
> «аркан» — a lasso: «аркан» is a lasso or noose, a loanword from Turkic, evoking the catching of a wild horse. Mitya likens fate's grip to being roped «как в аркан» ('as in a lasso') and bound — a violent, physical image of forced redemption.

Никогда, никогда не поднялся бы я сам собой!  
Never, never would I have risen of my own accord!
> Conditional with бы: «поднялся бы» is the irrealis: past-tense verb plus the particle «бы» gives 'I would have risen.' With the doubled «Никогда, никогда» ('never, never') it becomes an impassioned counterfactual — Mitya insisting he never could have risen unaided.
> «сам собой» — of one's own accord: The set phrase «сам собой» (here 'by myself, of my own accord') uses the reflexive «собой», the instrumental of «себя». It stresses that the rising would have had to come from within, with no outside force.

Но гром грянул.  
But the thunder has struck.
> «гром грянул» — the thunder has struck: «грянуть» is an expressive perfective for a sudden crash or thunderclap; «гром грянул» ('the thunder broke') carries a near-biblical force of fate descending. It echoes the proverb «пока гром не грянет…» ('until the thunder strikes [a man won't cross himself]') — the blow Mitya just spoke of.

Принимаю муку обвинения и всенародного позора моего, пострадать хочу и страданием очищусь!  
I accept the torment of the accusation and of my public disgrace; I want to suffer, and through suffering I shall be cleansed!
> Instrumental of means + perfective future: «страданием» is instrumental ('by suffering, through suffering'), naming the means of cleansing. «очищусь» is the perfective future of the reflexive «очиститься» — 'I shall be cleansed,' a single completed result lying in the verb ending, not in any auxiliary.

Ведь, может быть, и очищусь, господа, а?  
For perhaps I shall be cleansed, gentlemen — eh?
> The appealing particle «ведь»: «ведь» appeals to shared understanding — 'after all, you see' — softening the bold claim into a half-question seeking agreement: 'For perhaps I shall be cleansed…' The particle «и» here is not 'and' but an emphatic 'even/really,' coloring «и очищусь» as 'I really may be cleansed.'

Но услышьте, однако, в последний раз: в крови отца моего не повинен!  
But hear me, all the same, for the last time: in my father's blood I am not guilty!
> Imperative of «услышать»: «услышьте» is the plural-polite imperative of the perfective «услышать» ('to hear'), more emphatic and solemn than the imperfective «слушайте» — 'hear me [out], once and for all.' Perfective imperatives press for a single, completed act of attention.
> Short adjective predicate + prepositional: «повинен» is the short-form predicative adjective 'guilty,' which takes «в» + prepositional to name the thing one is guilty of: «в крови… не повинен» = 'in [the matter of] my father's blood I am not guilty.' The short form gives the denial its absolute, solemn ring.

Принимаю казнь не за то, что убил его, а за то, что хотел убить и, может быть, в самом деле убил бы…  
I accept the punishment not because I killed him, but because I wanted to kill him and might, perhaps, have really done it…
> Correlative «за то, что» with contrastive «а»: The frame «не за то, что…, а за то, что…» ('not because…, but because…') sets a precise contrast, pivoting on the contrastive conjunction «а». «за то, что» literally 'for the [fact] that,' uses the correlative «то» picked up by the «что»-clause.
> Conditional «убил бы»: «убил бы» — past form plus «бы» — is the counterfactual 'I might have killed,' hedged by «может быть» ('perhaps') and «в самом деле» ('really, in fact'). Mitya distinguishes the deed he did not do from the intention he confesses to.

Но все-таки я намерен с вами бороться и это вам возвещаю.  
But all the same I intend to fight you, and this I proclaim to you.
> Fronted object + dative: «это» (the thing proclaimed) is fronted before the verb for emphasis, and «вам» is dative — the addressees 'to you.' «возвещать» is a lofty, almost scriptural verb ('to proclaim, herald'), elevating Mitya's defiance into a solemn announcement.

Буду бороться с вами до последнего конца, а там решит бог!  
I shall fight you to the very last, and there let God decide!
> Compound (imperfective) future: «Буду бороться» is the analytic imperfective future — conjugated «быть» plus the imperfective infinitive «бороться» ('to struggle'). It names an ongoing, sustained future action: 'I will [keep] fighting,' fitting «до последнего конца» ('to the very last').
> Contrastive «а» + perfective future: «а» here marks a shift to a new clause ('and then…'), and «решит» is the perfective future of «решить» — 'God will decide,' a single decisive act. Note the un-capitalized «бог»: this reflects the modern (Soviet) edition's normalization — in Dostoevsky's own period the word was conventionally capitalized as «Богъ».

Прощайте, господа, не сердитесь, что я за допросом кричал на вас, о, я был тогда еще так глуп…  
Farewell, gentlemen, do not be angry that I shouted at you during the interrogation — oh, I was still so foolish then…
> Negated imperative + reflexive: «не сердитесь» is the negated imperative of the reflexive «сердиться» ('to be angry') — 'don't be angry.' Imperfective is the norm for a negated command (a prohibition on a state), and the «что»-clause gives the reason: 'that I shouted at you.'
> «за допросом» — during the interrogation: Here «за» + instrumental «допросом» means 'during / in the course of' an activity (compare «за обедом» 'at dinner'), not 'behind.' So «за допросом кричал» = 'shouted during the interrogation.'

Чрез минуту я арестант, и теперь, в последний раз, Дмитрий Карамазов, как свободный еще человек, протягивает вам свою руку.  
In a minute I shall be a prisoner, and now, for the last time, Dmitry Karamazov, as a still-free man, holds out his hand to you.
> «чрез» — the archaic «через»: «чрез» is the contracted, bookish-poetic form of «через» ('in, after [a span of time]'): «Чрез минуту» = 'in a minute.' The non-pleophonic, Church-Slavonic-flavored spelling lifts the register at this farewell moment.
> Speaking of oneself in the third person: Mitya names himself in full — «Дмитрий Карамазов» as a nominative subject — and uses the present «протягивает» ('holds out') of himself, a theatrical third-person self-reference. «свою руку» uses the reflexive possessive «свой» ('his own hand'), pointing back to the clause's subject.

Прощаясь с вами, с людьми прощусь!..  
Bidding you farewell, I bid farewell to all men!.."
> Gerund + reflexive future, with a pun on aspect: «Прощаясь» is the imperfective present gerund of «прощаться» ('bidding farewell, in the act of'), while «прощусь» is the perfective future of the same reflexive verb ('I shall take my leave'). The chiastic line — same verb in gerund and finite form — makes the farewell to these men a farewell to all mankind.
> Instrumental after «с»: «с людьми» — «с» + instrumental — means 'with/from people [all men]'; «прощаться с кем-то» ('to bid farewell to someone') governs this instrumental. «людьми» is the irregular instrumental plural of «человек/люди».

Голос его задрожал, и он действительно протянул было руку, но Николай Парфенович, всех ближе к нему находившийся, как-то вдруг, почти судорожным каким-то жестом, припрятал свои руки назад.  
His voice trembled, and he did indeed stretch out his hand, but Nikolai Parfenovich, who stood nearest to him, somehow all at once, with an almost convulsive sort of gesture, tucked his own hands behind him.
> Past active participle as modifier: «находившийся» is the past active participle of «находиться» ('to be located'), agreeing with Nikolai Parfenovich — 'who stood nearest to him.' The phrase «всех ближе» ('nearest of all') is a comparative «ближе» plus genitive «всех», a common way to form a superlative.
> The particle «было» — an aborted action: The unstressed particle «было» after a perfective past marks an action begun but interrupted or undone: «протянул было руку» = 'he had started to / did go to stretch out his hand [but…].' It sets up the rebuff that immediately follows.
> «припрятать» — to tuck quietly away: The prefix «при-» on «прятать» ('to hide') adds a sense of doing it slightly, quietly, surreptitiously — 'tucked his hands away.' «свои руки» ('his own hands') uses the reflexive possessive «свой».

Митя мигом заметил это и вздрогнул.  
Mitya noticed it in an instant and gave a start.
> «мигом» — in an instant: «мигом», a frozen instrumental of «миг» ('a blink, instant'), works as an adverb meaning 'in a flash, instantly.' Such instrumental-adverbs (compare «шёпотом» 'in a whisper') are common in lively narration.
> Perfective of a single start: «вздрогнул» (perfective of «вздрагивать», 'to give a start, shudder') names one sudden, completed reaction — 'gave a start.' The «в-…-ну-» pattern marks a momentary, instantaneous act, a perfect partner to «мигом».

Протянутую руку свою тотчас же опустил.  
He at once let his outstretched hand drop.
> Past passive participle as attribute + fronted object: «протянутую» is the past passive participle of «протянуть» ('stretched out'), agreeing with «руку» in the accusative — 'his outstretched hand.' The whole object phrase is thrown to the front before the verb «опустил» for emphasis on the hand that must now drop.

— Следствие еще не заключилось, — залепетал Николай Парфенович, несколько сконфузясь, — продолжать будем еще в городе, и я, конечно, с моей стороны готов вам пожелать всякой удачи… к вашему оправданию…  
"The investigation is not yet concluded," Nikolai Parfenovich faltered, somewhat disconcerted, "we shall continue it later in the town, and I, of course, for my part am ready to wish you every success… toward your acquittal…"
> «залепетать» — to begin babbling: The prefix «за-» on «лепетать» ('to babble, prattle') is inceptive — 'started to babble/falter.' The choice paints Nikolai Parfenovich's flustered, indistinct speech as he tries to recover from the awkward refused handshake.
> Gerund of attendant state: «сконфузясь» is the perfective past gerund of «сконфузиться» ('to become embarrassed'), describing the state Nikolai Parfenovich falls into as he speaks; «несколько» softens it to 'somewhat.' The «-сь» is the reflexive after a vowel.
> Reflexive «-ся» as intransitive 'conclude': «заключилось» is the reflexive/middle of «заключить» — here intransitive 'the investigation has not concluded' (it concludes by itself), versus the transitive «заключить его в тюрьму» 'to confine him.' The «-ся» turns the act of closing into a self-contained event.

Собственно же вас, Дмитрий Федорович, я всегда наклонен считать за человека, так сказать, более несчастного, чем виновного…  
"As for you yourself, Dmitry Fyodorovich, I have always been inclined to regard you as a man, so to speak, more unfortunate than guilty…"
> Comparative «более… чем»: «более… чем» builds an explicit comparison — 'more unfortunate than guilty.' Both adjectives stand in the accusative («несчастного», «виновного») agreeing with the animate object «вас» governed by «считать за». The famous formula sums up the novel's view of Mitya.
> «считать за» — to regard as: «считать кого-то за кого-то» is an idiom 'to take/regard someone as someone' (with «за» + accusative). «наклонен» is a short-form predicate adjective, 'inclined' — «я всегда наклонен считать вас за…» = 'I have always been inclined to regard you as…'.

Мы вас все здесь, если только осмелюсь выразиться от лица всех, все мы готовы признать вас за благородного в основе своей молодого человека, но увы! увлеченного некоторыми страстями в степени несколько излишней…  
"All of us here — if only I may venture to speak in the name of all — all of us are ready to acknowledge you for a young man noble at bottom, but, alas, carried away by certain passions to a somewhat excessive degree…"
> Conditional clause with «если»: «если только» ('if only, provided that') opens a conditional; «осмелюсь» is the perfective future of the reflexive «осмелиться» ('to dare') — 'if I may venture.' The whole clause is a polite hedge inserted into his pronouncement on Mitya's behalf.
> Past passive participle + instrumental agent: «увлеченного» is the past passive participle of «увлечь» ('to carry away'), in the accusative agreeing with «вас» ('you, carried away…'). The cause «некоторыми страстями» ('by certain passions') stands in the instrumental — the standard case for the agent/means of a passive.
> «в основе своей» — at bottom: «в основе своей» literally 'in its foundation,' an idiom for 'fundamentally, at bottom.' «благородного… молодого человека» = 'a noble young man'; «увы!» ('alas') signals the polite pivot to his fault.

Маленькая фигурка Николая Парфеновича выразила под конец речи самую полную сановитость.  
The little figure of Nikolai Parfenovich, by the end of his speech, expressed the very fullest dignity.
> «сановитость» — dignitary's gravity: «сановитость» is the air of grave importance befitting a «сановник» (a high official, dignitary). Applied to the «маленькая фигурка» ('little figure') of the diminutive Nikolai Parfenovich, the word is gently ironic — a small man swelling to the fullest official dignity.
> Diminutive «фигурка»: «фигурка» is the diminutive of «фигура» ('figure'), shrinking and faintly belittling — 'little figure.' Paired with «маленькая» ('little'), the diminutive doubles the irony against the man's puffed-up gravity.

У Мити мелькнуло было вдруг, что вот этот «мальчик» сейчас возьмет его под руку, уведет в другой угол и там возобновит с ним недавний еще разговор их о «девочках».  
It flashed for a moment through Mitya's mind that this "boy" was about to take him by the arm, lead him off into another corner, and there resume their recent conversation about "the girls."
> Impersonal «мелькнуло» + «было»: An impersonal neuter verb «мелькнуло» ('it flashed') with «у Мити» ('through Mitya's [mind]') — there is no nominative subject; the «что»-clause supplies the content. The particle «было» again marks a thought that flickered up and was at once dismissed.
> Sequence of perfective futures: Three perfective presents-as-futures — «возьмет», «уведет», «возобновит» — line up the imagined chain of single completed acts ('will take… lead off… resume'). Aspect alone, with no auxiliary, projects the whole little scene Mitya pictures.

Но мало ли мелькает совсем посторонних и не идущих к делу мыслей иной раз даже у преступника, ведомого на смертную казнь.  
But what a host of utterly extraneous, irrelevant thoughts will sometimes flash even through the mind of a criminal being led to his execution.
> «мало ли» + genitive subject: The idiom «мало ли» (literally 'is it few…?') means 'no end of, any number of, you never know how many.' The counted noun «мыслей» stands in the genitive plural after this quantity expression — 'what a host of thoughts flash by.' The particle «ли» gives it its rhetorical shrug.
> Bookish present passive participle «ведомого»: «ведомого» is the rare, archaic present passive participle of «вести» ('to lead'), agreeing in the genitive with «преступника» — 'of a criminal being led [to execution].' The -м- passive participle is markedly bookish and lifts the sentence to a grave, generalizing register.

— Господа, вы добры, вы гуманны — могу я видеть ''ее'', проститься в последний раз? — спросил Митя.  
"Gentlemen, you are kind, you are humane — may I see ''her'', say good-bye for the last time?" asked Mitya.
> Short-form predicate adjectives: «добры» and «гуманны» are short-form plural adjectives ('kind,' 'humane') used predicatively after the zero copula — 'you are kind, you are humane.' The short form gives the address a heightened, almost formulaic appeal as Mitya pleads for a favor.
> Modal «мочь» + infinitives: «могу я видеть… проститься?» is a permission question — «мочь» ('to be able / may') plus the imperfective «видеть» and perfective «проститься». The perfective «проститься в последний раз» ('to say goodbye for the last time') frames it as one final, complete act.

— Без сомнения, но в видах… одним словом, теперь уж нельзя не в присутствии…  
"Without a doubt, but in view of… in a word, now it can only be done in our presence…"
> Impersonal «нельзя» + double negation: «нельзя» is an impersonal predicative ('it is not permitted, one can't'), needing no subject. Combined with «не в присутствии» it yields a tangled double negative — 'now it can't [be done] except in [our] presence' — Nikolai Parfenovich's flustered officialese, broken off mid-thought.
> «в видах» — in view of: «в видах [чего-то]» is a bureaucratic idiom 'with a view to, in consideration of,' here left dangling — «но в видах…» ('but in view of…'). The clipped phrase captures the magistrate's embarrassed groping for a formula.

— Пожалуй, присутствуйте!  
"Very well, be present, then!"
> Imperative «присутствуйте» + «пожалуй»: «присутствуйте» is the plural-polite imperative of «присутствовать» ('to be present') — 'be present, then.' «Пожалуй» here is a particle of grudging concession, 'very well, all right then,' giving Mitya's permission its careless, defiant edge.

Привели Грушеньку, но прощание состоялось короткое, малословное и Николая Парфеновича не удовлетворившее.  
Grushenka was brought in, but the farewell was a short one, sparing of words, and one that left Nikolai Parfenovich unsatisfied.
> Subjectless 'they brought': «Привели» is 3rd-person plural past with no stated subject — the impersonal 'they brought / Grushenka was brought in,' which English renders as a passive. Fronting the verb before the object «Грушеньку» keeps the new arrival as the focus.
> Past active participle with negation: «не удовлетворившее» is the past active participle of «удовлетворить» ('to satisfy'), neuter to agree with «прощание» — 'a farewell… that did not satisfy Nikolai Parfenovich.' The object «Николая Парфеновича» is animate accusative (= genitive), pulled before the participle in bookish order.
> «малословный» — sparing of words: «малословный» (from «мало» 'little' + «слово» 'word') means 'of few words, laconic' — the farewell was 'short and sparing of words.' A transparent but expressive compound that paints the terseness of the parting.

Грушенька глубоко поклонилась Мите.  
Grushenka bowed low to Mitya.
> Dative of the person bowed to: «поклониться» ('to bow') takes a dative object — «Мите» ('to Mitya') — the person toward whom the bow is directed. «-ся» marks the verb as a self-directed act (one bows oneself).

— Сказала тебе, что твоя, и буду твоя, пойду с тобой навек, куда бы тебя ни решили.  
"I told you I was yours, and I shall be yours; I will go with you for ever, wherever they decide to send you.
> Dropped pronoun + zero copula + future: Grushenka drops «я» throughout — «Сказала… буду» ('I told you… I shall be'). «что твоя» has no copula in the present ('that [I am] yours'), while «буду твоя» is the compound future of «быть» ('I will be yours'). The bare possessive «твоя» carries the whole vow.
> «куда бы… ни» — wherever: The frame «куда бы… ни» builds a universal concessive — 'wherever [they] decide [to send you].' «бы» supplies the irrealis and «ни» the sweeping 'no matter,' with the impersonal plural «решили» again standing for 'they.' A compact, idiomatic 'wherever.'

Прощай, безвинно погубивший себя человек!  
Farewell, man who has destroyed himself though guiltless!"
> Past active participle + reflexive «себя»: «погубивший» is the past active participle of «погубить» ('to ruin, destroy'), agreeing with «человек» — 'a man who has destroyed himself.' The object «себя» is the reflexive pronoun pointing back to that same man; «безвинно» ('guiltlessly') sharpens the tragic paradox.
> «безвинно» — though guiltless: «безвинно» ('without guilt, innocently'), from «без» + «вина» ('guilt'), insists that Mitya is innocent of the crime even as he is being ruined — Grushenka's verdict against the court's. The word ties directly to Mitya's own «не повинен» a few lines earlier.

Губки ее вздрогнули, слезы потекли из глаз.  
Her lips quivered, and the tears streamed from her eyes.
> Diminutive «губки»: «губки» is the diminutive plural of «губы» ('lips') — 'her [dear little] lips.' The affectionate diminutive lets the narrator regard Grushenka tenderly at the very moment her lips tremble and the tears come.
> Inceptive perfective + «из» + genitive: «потекли» is the perfective of «течь» ('to flow') with «по-» marking the onset — 'the tears began to stream.' «из глаз» ('from her eyes') is «из» + genitive plural, the standard 'out of' construction.

— Прости, Груша, меня за любовь мою, за то, что любовью моею и тебя сгубил!  
"Forgive me, Grusha, for my love — for having ruined you too with my love!"
> Imperative «прости» + diminutive address: «Прости» is the singular imperative of the perfective «простить» ('to forgive'), an intimate command matching the «ты» level. «Груша» is the affectionate short form of «Грушенька / Аграфена», the name Mitya uses in tenderness.
> Instrumental of means «любовью»: «любовью» is instrumental ('with/by my love'), the means by which he ruined her: «любовью моею… сгубил» = 'I ruined you with my love.' The postposed «моею» (an older, fuller instrumental ending beside modern «моей») lends a lyrical, archaic cadence.

Митя хотел и еще что-то сказать, но вдруг сам прервал и вышел.  
Mitya wanted to say something more as well, but suddenly broke off of his own accord and went out.
> Indefinite «что-то»: «что-то» ('something [specific but unnamed]') is the indefinite pronoun with the «-то» clitic: Mitya meant to say some definite further thing, which the narrator leaves unspecified. «хотел… сказать» pairs the modal-like «хотеть» with a perfective infinitive.
> Intensifier «сам» + perfectives: «сам» ('himself, of his own accord') intensifies the subject, stressing that Mitya broke off on his own. «прервал» and «вышел» are perfectives marking two crisp, completed acts — 'broke off and went out.'

Кругом него тотчас же очутились люди, не спускавшие с него глаз.  
At once people gathered around him, never taking their eyes off him.
> Past active participle + genitive of negation: «не спускавшие» is the past active participle of «спускать» ('to take [eyes] off'), agreeing with «люди» — 'people who never took their eyes off him.' Under negation the object «глаз» appears in the genitive, the genitive of negation; «с него» is «с» + genitive 'off him.'
> «очутиться» — to find oneself somewhere: «очутиться» ('to turn up, suddenly find oneself in a place') exists only in the reflexive «-ся» form and only as a perfective — «очутились люди» = 'people appeared/gathered.' It conveys the sudden, almost involuntary materializing of the crowd around Mitya.

Внизу у крылечка, к которому он с таким громом подкатил вчера на Андреевой тройке, стояли уже готовые две телеги.  
Below, by the little porch up to which he had driven with such a clatter the day before on Andrei's troika, two carts already stood ready.
> Diminutive «крылечко»: «крылечко» is the diminutive of «крыльцо» ('porch, front steps'), here genitive «крылечка» — 'the little porch.' The cozy diminutive sets the homely inn against the grim carts waiting below.
> Relative «который» in the dative: «к которому» — the relative pronoun «который» governed by «к» into the dative — opens a relative clause: 'the porch up to which he had driven.' «который» agrees with «крылечку» in being neuter singular but takes the case its own role («к» + dative) demands.

Маврикий Маврикиевич, приземистый плотный человек, с обрюзглым лицом, был чем-то раздражен, каким-то внезапно случившимся беспорядком, сердился и кричал.  
Mavriky Mavrikievich, a squat, thickset man with a bloated face, was put out about something — some sudden disorder that had cropped up — and was angry and shouting.
> «приземистый», «обрюзглый» — squat and bloated: «приземистый» ('squat, low to the ground') and «обрюзглый» ('flabby, bloated, puffy') are vivid descriptive adjectives sketching Mavriky's coarse, heavy physical type — the unflattering portrait priming us for his rudeness.
> Instrumental of cause + short passive participle: «раздражен» is the short past passive participle of «раздражить» ('to irritate') with «был» — 'was irritated.' Its cause stands in the instrumental: «чем-то» ('by something'), restated as «каким-то… беспорядком» ('by some disorder'), the case that names the agent of a passive.
> Past active participle as adjective: «случившимся» is the past active participle of the reflexive «случиться» ('to happen'), in the instrumental agreeing with «беспорядком» — 'some disorder that had suddenly cropped up.' A neat example of a participle doing the work of a full «который»-clause inside a noun phrase.

Как-то слишком уже сурово пригласил он Митю взлезть на телегу.  
He invited Mitya to climb into the cart somehow far too sternly.
> Stacked adverbial particles: The opening piles up hedging and intensifying adverbs/particles: «как-то» ('somehow'), «слишком» ('too'), «уже/уж» ('already, by now'), «сурово» ('sternly') — 'somehow far too sternly by now.' This layering of attitude-words is pure Dostoevskian texture.
> «взлезть» — to clamber up: «взлезть» (the prefix «вз-» 'up' on «лезть» 'to clamber') means 'to climb/clamber up onto'; «на телегу» is «на» + accusative for motion onto the cart. The slightly ungainly verb suits the clumsy business of mounting a peasant cart.

«Прежде, как я в трактире поил его, совсем было другое лицо у человека», — подумал Митя влезая.  
"Before, when I stood him drinks at the tavern, the man had quite a different face," thought Mitya as he climbed up.
> Imperfective past for repeated treating: «поил» is the imperfective past of «поить» ('to give to drink, stand drinks') — the imperfective frames it as a habitual courtesy Mitya used to do ('when I stood him drinks'), not a single round. «поить» is the causative of «пить» ('to drink').
> Gerund of simultaneous action «влезая»: «влезая» is the imperfective present gerund of «влезать» ('to climb in') — 'thought Mitya as he was climbing up.' The gerund pins the thought to the very act of mounting the cart, sharing Mitya's subject.

С крылечка спустился вниз и Трифон Борисович.  
Trifon Borisovich too came down off the little porch.
> Inversion with additive «и»: The verb «спустился» ('came down') precedes its subject, which is held to the end and marked by additive «и» ('too, also') — «спустился… и Трифон Борисович» = 'Trifon Borisovich too came down.' Russian's free order lets the new arrival land last for effect.

У ворот столпились люди, мужики, бабы, ямщики, все уставились на Митю.  
At the gates a crowd of people had gathered — peasants, peasant women, drivers — all of them staring at Mitya.
> Reflexive verbs of crowding and staring: «столпились» ('crowded together,' from «толпа» 'crowd') and «уставились» ('fixed their stare') are both perfective «-ся» verbs of collective bodily action. The «-ся» here is the middle/intransitive, the crowd acting on and arranging itself.

— Прощайте, божьи люди! — крикнул им вдруг с телеги Митя.  
"Farewell, people of God!" Mitya suddenly called out to them from the cart.
> «Прощайте» — farewell as forgiveness: «Прощайте» is the plural-polite imperative of «прощать» ('to forgive') used as 'farewell' — etymologically 'forgive [me as we part].' In Mitya's penitent mouth the literal sense of asking forgiveness is fully alive, echoed by the crowd's «И нас прости».

— И нас прости, — раздались два-три голоса.  
"Forgive us too," two or three voices answered.
> Fronted object «нас» + singular imperative: The object «нас» ('us') is thrown to the front for emphasis, with additive «И» ('us too'): «И нас прости» = 'forgive us too.' «прости» is the singular imperative of «простить», the crowd answering Mitya's appeal in kind — a moment of mutual forgiveness.

— Прощай и ты, Трифон Борисыч!  
"Farewell to you as well, Trifon Borisych!"
> Contracted patronymic «Борисыч»: «Борисыч» is the colloquial contraction of «Борисович» ('son of Boris') — the relaxed, familiar form heard in everyday speech. Mitya's «Прощай и ты, Трифон Борисыч!» mixes the informal singular «Прощай» and «ты» with this folksy clipped patronymic.

Но Трифон Борисыч даже не обернулся, может быть уж очень был занят.  
But Trifon Borisych did not so much as turn around — perhaps he was simply too busy.
> «даже не» + reflexive perfective: «даже не обернулся» = 'did not even turn around,' with «даже» ('even') sharpening the negation of «обернуться» (perfective reflexive 'to turn round'). The «-ся» makes the turning a self-directed motion of the body.
> «уж» — colloquial intensifier: «уж» here is not 'already' but an emphatic particle, 'just, simply, really' — «уж очень был занят» = 'was simply too busy.' «занят» is the short passive participle 'occupied,' and «может быть» frames it as the narrator's guess.

Он тоже чего-то кричал и суетился.  
He too was shouting about something and bustling about.
> Genitive «чего-то» + reflexive «суетился»: «чего-то» is the indefinite 'about something' in the genitive (the object of vague shouting), with the «-то» clitic marking it as a real but unnamed thing. «суетился» is the imperfective reflexive «суетиться» ('to fuss, bustle'), the imperfective painting the ongoing commotion.

Оказалось, что на второй телеге, на которой должны были сопровождать Маврикия Маврикиевича двое сотских, еще не всё было в исправности.  
It turned out that on the second cart, on which two village constables were to escort Mavriky Mavrikievich, not everything was yet in order.
> Impersonal «оказалось, что»: «Оказалось, что…» is an impersonal neuter past of «оказаться» ('to turn out') — 'it turned out that…,' a subjectless frame introducing the «что»-clause. The «-ся» again carries the 'come about, prove to be' sense.
> Relative «которой» + collective numeral: «на которой» ('on which') is the relative «который» in the prepositional after «на», opening the relative clause. «двое сотских» uses the collective numeral «двое» (for groups of people), which governs the genitive plural «сотских» — 'two constables.'

Мужичонко, которого нарядили было на вторую тройку, натягивал зипунишко и крепко спорил, что ехать не ему, а Акиму.  
The little peasant who had been told off to drive the second troika was pulling on his shabby coat and arguing stoutly that it was not he who ought to go, but Akim.
> Pejorative diminutive «мужичонко»: «мужичонко» applies the belittling, pitying suffix «-онк-» to «мужик» ('peasant') — 'a wretched / insignificant little peasant.' Unlike the affectionate diminutives, this one diminishes with a shade of contempt, exactly the narrator's amused-condescending eye on the squabble.
> Pejorative diminutive «зипунишко»: A «зипун» is a coarse peasant homespun coat; the suffix «-ишк-» makes «зипунишко» 'a shabby, sorry little coat.' The two pejorative diminutives «мужичонко» and «зипунишко» side by side steep the whole scene in shabby, comic poverty.
> «было» + dative of the one to go: «нарядили было» — impersonal 'they had told [him] off [to drive],' with «было» marking a plan now being undone. In «ехать не ему, а Акиму» the dative names who is to go: 'not he, but Akim ought to go' — a dative-with-infinitive of obligation, pivoting on contrastive «а».

Но Акима не было; за ним побежали; мужичонко настаивал и молил обождать.  
But Akim was not there; they had run to fetch him; the little peasant kept insisting and begged them to wait.
> Genitive of negation in an absence: «Акима не было» = 'Akim was not [there]' — the negated existential «не было» forces its subject into the genitive, «Акима». This obligatory genitive of absence is one of the genitive of negation's core jobs.
> Impersonal 'they' + chain of pasts: «за ним побежали» is the subjectless 'they ran for him' («за» + instrumental = 'to fetch'). The string «настаивал и молил обождать» mixes imperfectives of insisting/imploring with the perfective infinitive «обождать» ('to wait a while,' a folksy «об-» prefix on «ждать').

— Ведь это народ-то у нас, Маврикий Маврикиевич, совсем без стыда! — восклицал Трифон Борисыч.  
"You see what our folk are like, Mavriky Mavrikievich — without any shame at all!" exclaimed Trifon Borisych.
> «ведь» + the topic clitic «-то»: «Ведь» appeals to shared knowledge ('you see, after all'), while «-то» on «народ-то» emphasizes the known topic — 'our folk, you see.' «без стыда» is «без» + genitive, 'without [any] shame.' The particles together give Trifon's complaint its buttonholing, conspiratorial tone.
> «восклицать» — to exclaim: «восклицал» ('exclaimed') is a notch more bookish and theatrical than «кричал» ('shouted'), suited to Trifon's performative indignation as he plays to the police officer. The imperfective frames it as his ongoing outburst.

— Тебе Аким третьего дня дал четвертак денег, ты их пропил, а теперь кричишь.  
"Akim gave you a quarter-rouble the day before yesterday, you drank it away, and now you're shouting.
> Perfective «пропить» — to drink away: The prefix «про-» on «пить» ('to drink') gives «пропить» the sense 'to squander on drink, drink away'; «ты их пропил» = 'you drank it [the money] away.' The fronted pronoun «ты» is emphatic and accusatory in Trifon's rebuke.
> «третьего дня» — the day before yesterday: «третьего дня» (literally 'on the third day [back]') is a fixed genitive-of-time idiom meaning 'the day before yesterday' — a slightly old-fashioned way of dating the gift.

Доброте только вашей удивляюсь с нашим подлым народом, Маврикий Маврикиевич, только это одно скажу!  
I only marvel at your kindness with our base folk, Mavriky Mavrikievich — that's the one thing I'll say!"
> «удивляться» + dative: «удивляться» ('to marvel at, wonder at') governs the dative — «доброте… вашей» ('at your kindness'). The object is fronted for emphasis and split by «только» ('only'): 'It is only your kindness I marvel at.' «-ся» is built into the verb.
> Instrumental after «с»: «с нашим подлым народом» — «с» + instrumental, 'with our base folk' — names the company in which the kindness is shown. Note the full adjective agreement «нашим подлым» (instrumental) with «народом».

— Да зачем нам вторую тройку? — вступился было Митя, — поедем на одной, Маврикий Маврикич, небось не взбунтуюсь, не убегу от тебя, к чему конвой?  
"But why do we need a second troika?" Mitya tried to put in. "Let's go on the one, Mavriky Mavrikich — I daresay I won't mutiny, I won't run off from you, what's the escort for?"
> Opening «да» + dative of need: Sentence-initial «да» is not 'yes' but a discourse particle of mild objection — 'but, come now.' «нам… тройку» is an elliptical dative-of-need question ('what do we need a second troika for?'), the dative naming the people for whom.
> «небось» + perfective futures: «небось» is a colloquial modal particle, 'I daresay, I suppose, surely.' It frames the two perfective futures «не взбунтуюсь» ('I won't mutiny') and «не убегу» ('I won't run off') as Mitya's wry reassurance to his guard.
> «конвой» — armed escort: «конвой» is a military/police escort guarding a prisoner in transit. Mitya's «к чему конвой?» ('what's the escort for?') is half-joking, half-wounded — he sees no need to be guarded as a flight risk.

— А извольте, сударь, уметь со мной говорить, если еще не научены, я вам не ''ты'', не извольте тыкать-с, да и советы на другой раз сберегите… — свирепо отрезал вдруг Мите Маврикий Маврикиевич, точно обрадовался сердце сорвать.  
"And kindly learn how to speak to me, sir, if you haven't been taught yet — I'm not 'thou' to you, kindly don't address me familiarly, sir, and save your advice for another time…" Mavriky Mavrikievich suddenly snapped savagely at Mitya, as though glad to vent his spleen.
> Don't address me as ты: Russian has two 'you': informal «ты» and respectful «вы». «тыкать» means 'to address someone with «ты»' (presumptuously familiar), so «я вам не ты» = 'I'm not «ты» to you.' The clitic «-с» appended to words («тыкать-с») is an old deferential/ironic marker of servile politeness; English has no exact equivalent, so we lean on 'sir' and 'familiarly' to carry the prickly tone of rank.
> «извольте» + infinitive — frosty politeness: «извольте» (imperative of «изволить», 'to be so good as to') plus an infinitive is a stiff, cold command — 'kindly [learn to] speak.' Its over-polite formality is precisely what makes Mavriky's rebuke so cuttingly ironic.
> «сорвать сердце» — to vent one's spleen: «сорвать сердце [на ком-то]» is an idiom 'to vent one's anger, take it out on someone.' «точно обрадовался сердце сорвать» = 'as though glad to vent his spleen' — Mavriky seizing on Mitya as a target for his bad mood.

Митя примолк.  
Mitya fell silent.
> «примолкнуть» — to fall quiet: «примолк» is the perfective of «примолкнуть» ('to grow silent, hush'), with «при-» softening it to 'fell a little quiet, subsided into silence' — a single completed turn into stillness. The terse one-word sentence lets Mitya's silence land with full weight after the rebuff.

Он весь покраснел.  
He flushed all over.
> Perfective past: the blush as a single event: «Покраснел» is the perfective past of «краснеть/покраснеть», marking a single completed change of state — he turned red, all at once. The prefix «по-» seals the imperfective process «краснеть» (to be reddening) into one accomplished moment.
> «весь» — 'all over', 'entirely': Here «весь» («the whole of him») works adverbially with the subject: he reddened entirely, his whole self. It is the same word as 'all/whole' but applied to a person it conveys total, bodily involvement.

Чрез мгновение ему стало вдруг очень холодно.  
A moment later he suddenly felt very cold.
> Dative subject of feeling cold: There is no nominative subject: the experiencer «ему» (to him) stands in the dative and the predicate «холодно» is an invariable neuter form. This impersonal frame — 'it became cold to him' — is Russian's standard way of reporting an inner sensation.
> «стало» — became, perfective: «Стало» (neuter perfective past of «стать») marks the onset of the state as a single completed event: the cold set in. With «холодно» it gives the inceptive 'he came to feel cold'.
> «чрез» — bookish 'through/after': «Чрез» is the elevated, contracted variant of «через» ('through, after'), typical of 19th-century literary prose; «чрез мгновение» = 'a moment later'. «Мгновение» ('instant') is itself a bookish noun.

Дождь перестал, но мутное небо всё было обтянуто облаками, дул резкий ветер прямо в лицо.  
The rain had stopped, but the murky sky was still all draped with clouds, and a sharp wind blew straight into his face.
> Past passive participle with instrumental agent: «Было обтянуто» is the periphrastic passive: the short past passive participle «обтянуто» (neuter, agreeing with «небо») joined to «было». The covering agent, «облаками» ('with clouds'), stands in the instrumental — the regular case for the means in a passive.
> Perfective event against imperfective backdrop: «Перестал» (perfective) reports the rain's stopping as a single event, while «дул» (imperfective past of «дуть») paints the wind as an ongoing background — the standard aspectual interplay of scene-setting narration.
> «мутный» — turbid, murky: «Мутный» literally describes cloudy, opaque liquid (water you cannot see through); transferred to the sky it gives a dull, smeared, leaden quality — exactly the bleak overcast that mirrors Mitya's mood.

«Озноб, что ли, со мной», — подумал Митя, передернув плечами.  
"A chill coming on me, perhaps," thought Mitya, giving a twitch of his shoulders.
> «что ли» — the hedging particle: «Что ли» tags an uncertain guess onto the statement — 'a chill, or what?', 'a chill, perhaps'. It is colloquial and tentative, voicing Mitya's half-formed self-diagnosis. Note too the zero copula: 'a chill [is] with me'.
> Perfective gerund: 'having twitched': «Передернув» is the perfective past gerund («деепричастие») of «передёрнуть», naming an action completed by the same subject as «подумал» — he gave a shudder of the shoulders as he thought it. The instrumental «плечами» ('with his shoulders') marks the body part set in motion.

Наконец влез в телегу и Маврикий Маврикиевич, уселся грузно, широко и, как бы не заметив, крепко потеснил собою Митю.  
At last Mavriky Mavrikievich too climbed into the cart, settled himself heavily and broadly, and, as though without noticing it, pressed hard against Mitya, crowding him.
> Inversion and the additive «и»: The subject «Маврикий Маврикиевич» is held back to the end, after the verb — the new, weighted information landing last, in Russian's topic-comment rhythm. The «и» before the name here means 'too, as well' ('Mavriky also climbed in'), not 'and'.
> Reflexive «-ся» vs the pronoun «собою»: «Уселся» carries the reflexive clitic «-ся» (he settled himself down). Distinct from it is the full reflexive pronoun «собою» (instrumental of «себя») in «потеснил собою» — 'crowded Mitya with his own body'. The pair nicely contrasts the bound clitic with the free pronoun.
> «как бы» + perfective gerund: 'as if not having noticed': «Как бы» softens into 'as though, seemingly', and «не заметив» is the negated perfective past gerund of «заметить» — 'as if without having noticed'. The construction lets Dostoevsky stage a deliberate act passed off as inadvertent.
> «грузно» — heavily, ponderously: «Грузно» (from «груз», 'load') describes settling down with bulk and weight — a man lowering his heft. Paired with «широко» ('broadly') it makes Mavriky a deliberate, space-taking presence pressed against the prisoner.

Правда, он был не в духе, и ему сильно не нравилось возложенное на него поручение.  
True, he was out of temper, and the errand laid upon him was sorely not to his liking.
> Dative experiencer with «нравиться»: «Нравиться» works backwards from English: the thing liked — «поручение» ('the errand') — is the grammatical subject, and the person is the dative «ему». Negated, «ему не нравилось» means 'the errand was not to his liking'.
> Past passive participle as modifier: «Возложенное» is a past passive participle (from «возложить», 'to lay upon') used attributively, agreeing with neuter «поручение»: 'the errand laid upon him'. It condenses a whole relative clause ('the errand that had been laid on him') into one bookish word.
> «не в духе» — out of sorts: The set phrase «не в духе» means 'in a bad mood, out of temper' (literally 'not in spirit'). Its positive twin «в духе» means in good humour.
> «возложить» — to lay (a duty) upon: «Возложить» is an elevated verb for entrusting a charge or duty to someone — 'to lay upon', as a burden or commission. The choice dignifies the disagreeable task and marks Mavriky's resentment of an order he cannot refuse.

— Прощай, Трифон Борисыч! — крикнул опять Митя, и сам почувствовал, что не от добродушия теперь закричал, а со злости, против воли крикнул.  
"Farewell, Trifon Borisych!" Mitya called out again, and felt himself that he had shouted it now not out of good nature but out of spite — shouted it against his own will.
> Genitive after «от», «со», «против»: A chain of prepositions all governing the genitive of cause and source: «от добродушия» ('out of good nature'), «со злости» ('out of spite'), «против воли» ('against [his] will'). The «не... а» frame ('not X but Y') sharpens the self-correction.
> «со злости» — out of spite/anger: «Злость» is hot, peevish anger or spite; «со злости» (with the genitive) means an act done from a surge of it. Note «со» rather than «с» before the consonant cluster «зл-», a regular phonetic expansion.

Но Трифон Борисыч стоял гордо, заложив назад обе руки и прямо уставясь на Митю, глядел строго и сердито и Мите ничего не ответил.  
But Trifon Borisych stood proudly, both hands clasped behind his back, and, staring straight at Mitya, looked on sternly and angrily, and made Mitya no answer at all.
> Two gerunds setting the pose: Both «заложив» (perfective, 'having put') and «уставясь» (a literary perfective gerund of the perfective «уставиться», 'staring', alongside «уставившись») are «деепричастия» sharing Trifon's subject, stacking attendant actions onto the main verb «глядел» — a hallmark of dense literary narration.
> Negative concord with dative recipient: «Ничего... не ответил» shows Russian's obligatory double negation: the negative pronoun «ничего» co-occurs with «не» on the verb — 'answered nothing'. «Мите» is the dative of the person addressed ('to Mitya').
> «уставиться» — to fix one's stare: «Уставиться (на)» means to stare fixedly, to fasten one's eyes on someone — a hard, unblinking gaze. The gerund «уставясь» renders Trifon's silent, accusing fixation on the man he believes a murderer.

— Прощайте, Дмитрий Федорович, прощайте! — раздался вдруг голос Калганова, вдруг откуда-то выскочившего.  
"Farewell, Dmitry Fyodorovich, farewell!" came the sudden voice of Kalganov, who had suddenly darted out from somewhere.
> Past active participle replacing a relative clause: «Выскочившего» is the past active participle of «выскочить» ('to dart out'), in the genitive to agree with «Калганова» — 'of Kalganov, who had darted out'. It packs a whole «который»-clause into a single trailing modifier.
> Indefinite «-то»: 'from somewhere': The clitic «-то» on «откуда» ('from where') makes it the specific-but-unknown indefinite 'from somewhere' — a definite place exists, the narrator just doesn't name it. Contrast «откуда-нибудь» ('from anywhere at all').

Подбежав к телеге, он протянул Мите руку.  
Running up to the cart, he held out his hand to Mitya.
> Perfective gerund + dative after «к»: «Подбежав» is the perfective past gerund of «подбежать» ('to run up to') — 'having run up' — describing the action just prior to «протянул». The goal «к телеге» takes the dative, the case the preposition «к» always governs.
> Dative indirect object: «Мите» is the dative — the person to whom the hand is extended — alongside the accusative direct object «руку». The pattern verb + dative recipient + accusative thing is the core ditransitive frame ('held out his hand to Mitya').

Был он без фуражки.  
He was without his cap.
> Inversion and genitive after «без»: Fronting the verb «был» before the pronoun «он» gives a slightly archaic, descriptive cadence ('He was, [this Kalganov], without a cap'). «Без» governs the genitive «фуражки» — the regular case after this preposition of absence.

Митя успел еще схватить и пожать его руку.  
Mitya still managed to seize and press his hand.
> «успеть» + perfective infinitives: just managed in time: «Успеть» ('to manage in time') governs two perfective infinitives, «схватить» and «пожать», each viewing its act as a single completed grasp and squeeze accomplished before the cart pulls away. «Ещё» adds 'still, just' — barely in time.

— Прощай, милый человек, не забуду великодушия! — горячо воскликнул он.  
"Farewell, dear fellow, I'll not forget your generosity!" he exclaimed warmly.
> Genitive of negation: The negated object «великодушия» ('generosity') stands in the genitive, not the accusative — the genitive of negation, especially natural with an abstract noun: 'I shall not forget [any of] your generosity'. «Забуду» is the perfective future ('I will [come to] forget').
> «милый человек» — dear fellow: «Милый» ('dear, kind, sweet') used in direct address as «милый человек» is a warm, slightly emotional 'dear man / good fellow'. From Mitya, on the brink of being carried off, it is heartfelt gratitude, not mere politeness.
> «великодушие» — magnanimity: «Великодушие» (literally 'great-souledness', from «великая душа») is a key Dostoevskian virtue: noble generosity of spirit, big-heartedness. Mitya seizes on Kalganov's kindness as exactly that — soul rather than mere favour.

Но телега тронулась, и руки их разнялись.  
But the cart moved off, and their hands were parted.
> Middle «-ся»: things that move and part of themselves: Both verbs carry «-ся» in its intransitive/middle sense: «тронулась» ('set off, started moving') and «разнялись» ('came apart') present the cart and the clasped hands as separating on their own, without a stated agent — the parting simply happens.
> Post-posed possessive «их»: The frozen possessive «их» ('their') follows its noun in «руки их» rather than preceding it. This inversion is a literary, slightly elevated word order; the everyday order would be «их руки».

Зазвенел колокольчик — увезли Митю.  
The little bell jingled — they carried Mitya away.
> Inceptive «за-» and a subjectless 'they': «Зазвенел» uses the inchoative prefix «за-»: the bell 'began to ring / rang out'. «Увезли» is a subjectless third-person plural — 'they carried Mitya off' — where the unnamed 'they' is the impersonal agent, a very common Russian construction.
> «колокольчик» — the little harness bell: A diminutive of «колокол» ('bell'), the «колокольчик» is the small bell hung under the arch of a Russian troika or post-horse, jingling as the team moves. Its sound is the iconic note of departure on the road — here, the bell that bears Mitya away into captivity.

А Калганов забежал в сени, сел в углу, нагнул голову, закрыл руками лицо и заплакал, долго так сидел и плакал, — плакал, точно был еще маленький мальчик, а не двадцатилетний уже молодой человек.  
And Kalganov ran off into the entry, sat down in a corner, bowed his head, covered his face with his hands, and wept; he sat like that for a long while and wept — wept as though he were still a little boy and not a young man already twenty years old.
> A chain of perfectives driving the action: Five perfective past verbs fire in sequence, each a single completed act moving the scene forward: ran off, sat, bowed, covered, burst into tears. The «за-» on «заплакал» is inceptive — 'began to weep' — opening the sustained crying that follows.
> Imperfectives for the drawn-out weeping: After the perfective onset, «сидел» and the repeated «плакал» switch to the imperfective past to dwell on duration — he sat and wept, and went on weeping. «Долго» ('for a long time') reinforces the imperfective's sense of extended process.
> «точно» as 'as if' + contrastive «а не»: «Точно» here is not 'exactly' but the comparative 'as if, just like' (= «как будто»). The «а не» frame ('and not / but not') contrasts the boy he seemed with the grown «молодой человек» he is — the soft contrastive «а» pivoting between the two images.

О, он поверил в виновность. Мити почти вполне!  
Oh, he believed in Mitya's guilt almost completely!
> «поверить в» + accusative: «Верить/поверить в» ('to believe in') governs «в» plus the accusative «виновность» — he came to believe in [Mitya's] guilt. The perfective «поверил» marks the belief as a settled conviction now reached. «О, ...» opens the sentence with an exclamatory sigh of the narrator's voice.
> «виновность» — guilt, culpability: «Виновность» is the abstract noun 'guiltiness, culpability' (from «виноватый», 'guilty'), more juridical than «вина» ('guilt, fault'). It frames Kalganov's belief as a verdict on whether Mitya did the deed.

«Что же это за люди, какие же после того могут быть люди!» — бессвязно восклицал он в горьком унынии, почти в отчаянии.  
"What sort of people are these — what kind of people can there be after this!" he exclaimed incoherently, in bitter dejection, almost in despair.
> «что за» / «какие» + the indignant «же»: «Что за люди» is the idiom 'what sort of people' (with «за» fossilised, the noun staying nominative), echoed by «какие... люди» ('what kind of people'). The particle «же», twice, loads the question with indignant emphasis — 'what on earth kind of people'.
> Predicate «люди» with «могут быть»: «Могут быть люди» links the modal «могут» ('can') to «быть» plus the predicate «люди»; here, with «какие», the complement stays nominative as the questioned subject: 'what kind of people can there be'. «После того» = 'after that, after such a thing'.
> «уныние» — dejection, despondency: «Уныние» is heavy low spirits, dejection — in Orthodox moral vocabulary one of the soul's besetting sins (acedia, spiritual despondency). «В горьком унынии» ('in bitter dejection') gives Kalganov's collapse a faintly spiritual weight beyond mere sadness.

Не хотелось даже и жить ему в ту минуту на свете.  
He had no wish even to go on living in the world at that moment.
> Impersonal «не хотелось» + dative experiencer: The impersonal «хотелось» (neuter, reflexive «-ся») with the dative «ему» means 'he did not even feel like living' — desire framed as something happening to him, not chosen by him. «Даже и» ('even') intensifies; the negated «не хотелось жить» is a softened, involuntary 'he had no wish to live'.
> «в ту минуту» — accusative of time: The demonstrative «ту» (feminine accusative of «тот») with «минуту» forms the time phrase 'at that moment'. «В» + accusative is the regular way to pin an action to a point in time.

«Стоит ли, стоит ли!» — восклицал огорченный юноша.  
"Is it worth it, is it worth it!" exclaimed the grief-stricken youth.
> Impersonal «стоит» + the particle «ли»: «Стоит ли» is the impersonal 'is it worth it?' — «стоит» ('it is worth') with the yes/no particle «ли» making the question. The doubled, exclamatory repetition turns the genuine question into a cry of despair: 'is it even worth it!'
> «юноша» and «огорчённый»: «Юноша» is the bookish, slightly elevated word for a youth, a young man (warmer and more lyrical than «молодой человек»). «Огорчённый» is the past passive participle of «огорчить» ('to grieve, distress'), here adjectival: 'the grief-stricken youth'.
---

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.