# The Brothers Karamazov, For a Moment the Lie Becomes Truth

Братья Карамазовы · Fyodor Dostoevsky · Epilogue

Source: https://1732studios.com/books/karamazov/epi-c2. Data: https://1732studios.com/books/karamazov/epi-c2.json.


Он поспешил в больницу, где теперь лежал Митя.  
He hurried to the hospital, where Mitya now lay.
> Perfective opens the scene: «поспешил» (he hurried) is perfective past — a single completed move that launches the narrative forward, as against the imperfective «лежал» (lay) that holds the background.
> «где» as a relative: Here «где» (where) introduces a relative clause attached to «больницу» (the hospital), and «лежал» is imperfective — a standing state, Mitya "lying" in hospital, not an event.

На второй день после решения суда он заболел нервною лихорадкой и был отправлен в городскую нашу больницу, в арестантское отделение.  
On the second day after the court's verdict he had fallen ill with a nervous fever and had been sent to our town hospital, to the ward for prisoners.
> Instrumental of the illness + archaic ending: «заболеть» (to fall ill with) governs the instrumental: one falls ill "by means of" the fever. Note the bookish 19th-century instrumental ending «-ою» for «-ой» — «нервною» = modern «нервной».
> Periphrastic passive with a short participle: «был отправлен» (was sent) is the past passive: «быть» plus the short-form past passive participle of «отправить». The short participle predicates a completed result, the standard way Russian states "was done."

Но врач Варвинский по просьбе Алеши и многих других (Хохлаковой, Лизы и проч.) поместил Митю не с арестантами, а отдельно, в той самой каморке, в которой прежде лежал Смердяков.  
But the doctor Varvinsky, at the request of Alyosha and many others (Madame Khokhlakova, Liza, and the rest), had placed Mitya not among the prisoners but apart, in that very little room in which Smerdyakov had once lain.
> Contrastive «а» after negation: The «не X, а Y» frame — "not among the prisoners, but apart" — is the classic corrective «а»: it cancels the first option and substitutes the second, a different job from «но».
> «который» in the prepositional: The relative «который» agrees with «каморке» in feminine singular but takes the case its own clause demands — here prepositional after «в» ("in which"), giving «в которой».
> «каморка» — a cramped little room: «каморка» is a poky closet of a room, the diminutive-flavoured word carrying a sense of meanness and confinement — fitting for a cell that had held the suicide Smerdyakov.

Правда, в конце коридора стоял часовой, а окно было решетчатое, и Варвинский мог быть спокоен за свою поблажку, не совсем законную, но это был добрый и сострадательный молодой человек.  
True, a sentry stood at the end of the corridor, and the window was barred, and so Varvinsky could be easy in his mind about the indulgence, not altogether legal, but he was a kind and compassionate young man.
> Past tense of «быть» with a predicate adjective: Russian drops the copula in the present but restores it in the past: «окно было решетчатое» (the window was barred). The long-form adjective stays in the nominative here, agreeing with «окно».
> Short adjective as predicate: «спокоен» is the short form of «спокойный», used predicatively after «быть»: "could be at ease." The short form names a state rather than a quality and is the bookish norm in such constructions.
> «поблажка» — an indulgence: «поблажка» is a lenience or bending of the rules in someone's favour, often slightly improper — exactly Varvinsky's "not altogether legal" kindness toward Mitya.

Он понимал, как тяжело такому, как Митя, прямо вдруг перешагнуть в сообщество убийц и мошенников и что к этому надо сперва привыкнуть.  
He understood how hard it would be for someone like Mitya to step abruptly, all at once, into the company of murderers and swindlers, and that one had first to grow accustomed to it.
> Dative-experiencer impersonal: «тяжело такому» (hard for such a one) is the dative-subject pattern: the person who finds it hard stands in the dative «такому» with no nominative subject and an invariable predicate «тяжело».
> Impersonal «надо» + infinitive: «надо привыкнуть» (one must grow used to it) is another subjectless construction — necessity expressed by «надо» plus an infinitive, the experiencer left unnamed and general.
> «перешагнуть» — to step across: Literally "to step over (a threshold)"; the prefix «пере-» marks crossing. Dostoevsky uses it figuratively for Mitya's abrupt passage into «сообщество убийц и мошенников», the company of murderers and swindlers.

Посещения же родных и знакомых были разрешены и доктором, и смотрителем, и даже исправником, всё под рукой.  
Visits from relatives and acquaintances, moreover, were permitted by the doctor, by the warden, and even by the police captain — everything quietly arranged.
> Passive with instrumental agents: «были разрешены» (were permitted) is the short-participle passive; the permitters are named in the instrumental of the agent — «доктором, смотрителем, исправником» — the standard way Russian marks "by whom."
> «всё под рукой» — all quietly fixed: Idiomatically "everything close at hand," but here implying that things were arranged informally, off the books — the whole apparatus of supervision relaxed for Mitya by personal good will.

Но в эти дни посетили Митю всего только Алеша да Грушенька.  
But in those days only Alyosha and Grushenka came to see Mitya.
> Verb-first word order for focus: The verb «посетили» opens and the subjects «Алеша да Грушенька» land last, in stressed comment position — the new, pointed information being precisely who came (and how few).
> Folksy «да» for «и»: «Алеша да Грушенька» uses «да» as a homely, slightly colloquial "and," warmer and more old-fashioned than «и» — a quiet texture-word common in narrative of this register.

Порывался уже два раза увидеться с ним Ракитин; но Митя настойчиво просил Варвинского не впускать того.  
Rakitin had already tried twice to get in to see him; but Mitya insistently begged Varvinsky not to let the man in.
> Imperfective «-ся» of repeated attempt: «порывался» (kept trying, made attempts) is imperfective, naming repeated, unfinished effort — reinforced by «два раза». The «-ся» here gives the verb its reflexive/middle "to strain, lunge" sense.
> «тот» as a distancing pronoun: «того» (genitive of «тот», "that one") is used coldly here for Rakitin instead of a name or «его» — a deliberate, contemptuous distancing that «тот» can carry.

Алеша застал его сидящим на койке, в больничном халате, немного в жару, с головою, обернутой полотенцем, смоченным водою с уксусом.  
Alyosha found him sitting on his cot, in a hospital gown, slightly feverish, his head wrapped in a towel soaked in water and vinegar.
> Participle in the instrumental — "found him sitting": «застать» (to find/catch someone in a state) takes a predicative instrumental: «сидящим» is the present active participle of «сидеть» in the instrumental, agreeing with «его» — "found him [as] sitting."
> A chain of past passive participles: Two past passive participles stack up — «обернутой» (wrapped) and «смоченным» (soaked) — each agreeing with its noun and each taking an instrumental of means («полотенцем», «водою»). This dense participial layering is a hallmark of literary description.

Он неопределенным взглядом посмотрел на вошедшего Алешу, но во взгляде все-таки промелькнул как бы какой-то испуг.  
He looked with a vague gaze at Alyosha as he came in, yet in that gaze there flickered all the same a kind of fright.
> Past active participle as a modifier: «вошедшего» (who had come in) is the past active participle of «войти», declined to agree with «Алешу» in the accusative — a compact participle doing the work of a whole "as he came in" clause.
> Perfective flash + hedging «как бы»: «промелькнул» (flickered, flashed) is perfective — a single instantaneous event. «как бы какой-то» ("a kind of, as it were") softens and blurs the impression, a very Dostoevskian narratorial hedge.

Вообще с самого суда он стал страшно задумчив.  
Indeed, ever since the trial he had grown dreadfully withdrawn.
> «стать» + short adjective — entering a state: «стал задумчив» (became withdrawn) pairs the change-of-state verb «стать» with the short adjective «задумчив»; «стать» commonly takes a short-form predicate to mark a new condition coming on.
> «страшно» as an intensifier: Literally "frighteningly," «страшно» here simply means "dreadfully, terribly" — a colloquial intensifier ("dreadfully withdrawn"), drained of its literal fear.

Иногда по получасу молчал, казалось что-то туго и мучительно обдумывая, забывая присутствующего.  
Sometimes he would fall silent for half an hour at a stretch, seeming to turn something over heavily and painfully in his mind, forgetting whoever was present.
> Imperfective gerunds — simultaneous action: «обдумывая» (turning over) and «забывая» (forgetting) are imperfective present gerunds («деепричастие»), naming actions going on at the same time as «молчал». They share Mitya's subject and pile the attendant circumstances onto the main verb.
> Distributive «по» + dative: «по получасу» means "for [stretches of] half an hour each" — the distributive «по» with the dative, expressing a repeated quantity of time across repeated occasions ("sometimes for half an hour at a time").
> Participle used as a noun: «присутствующего» is the present active participle of «присутствовать» (to be present), here substantivized to mean "the one present" — declined like an animate masculine noun in the accusative.

Если же выходил из задумчивости и начинал говорить, то заговаривал всегда как-то внезапно и непременно не о том, что действительно ему надо было сказать.  
And if he did rouse himself from his reverie and begin to speak, he would always start up somehow abruptly and invariably about something other than what he really needed to say.
> Imperfectives of habit in a generalizing «если…то»: The whole sentence describes a recurring pattern, so every verb is imperfective: «выходил», «начинал», «заговаривал». The «если… то» frame here is not a one-off condition but a "whenever… then" generalization.
> Connective particle «же»: Here «же» is not emphatic but a soft connective/contrastive — "and as for when he did rouse himself…" — picking up the thread from the previous sentence about his silences.
> «непременно» — without fail: «непременно» means "unfailingly, invariably, for certain." It recurs in this chapter (also «успокоил твою совесть» below), lending Mitya's and Alyosha's speech an insistent, fated weight.

Иногда с страданием смотрел на брата.  
Now and then he would look at his brother with suffering in his eyes.
> Instrumental of manner after «с»: «с страданием» (with suffering) is «с» plus the instrumental, expressing the manner of looking. Note also that Russian keeps «с страданием» rather than easing to «со» here — a permitted, slightly weightier variant.

С Грушенькой ему было как будто легче, чем с Алешей.  
With Grushenka he seemed somehow more at ease than with Alyosha.
> Dative subject + comparative predicate: «ему было легче» (it was easier for him) is the dative-experiencer impersonal: no nominative subject, the person in the dative «ему», and the invariable comparative «легче» as predicate.
> Comparative «легче» with «чем»: «легче» is the suppletive-flavoured comparative of «лёгкий/легко» (easier), and the standard of comparison follows «чем» — "easier… than with Alyosha."

Правда, он с нею почти и не говорил, но чуть только она входила, всё лицо его озарялось радостью.  
True, he scarcely spoke with her at all, but the moment she came in his whole face would light up with joy.
> Two imperfectives of habitual co-occurrence: «входила… озарялось» are both imperfective past, describing a repeated pairing — every time she came in, his face would light up. «чуть только» ("the moment that") marks the habitual trigger.
> Middle «-ся» + instrumental of means: «озарялось» (lit "was lit up") is the «-ся» middle/intransitive of «озарить», and «радостью» is the instrumental of what does the lighting — his face "shone with joy."

Алеша сел молча подле него на койке.  
Alyosha sat down beside him on the cot in silence.
> Perfective seating + archaic «подле»: «сел» is perfective (a single completed action). «подле» (beside, near) is a bookish, somewhat archaic preposition governing the genitive «него» — more literary than the everyday «рядом с».

В этот раз он тревожно ждал Алешу, но не посмел ничего спросить.  
This time he had been waiting anxiously for Alyosha, but he did not dare ask anything.
> Negative concord: «не… ничего»: "Did not dare ask anything" is in Russian a double negative — «не посмел» plus «ничего» — the obligatory negative concord, where the verb keeps «не» even though «ничего» is already negative.

Он считал согласие Кати прийти немыслимым и в то же время чувствовал, что если она не придет, то будет что-то совсем невозможное.  
He thought it inconceivable that Katya would consent to come, and at the same time he felt that if she did not come, something altogether impossible would follow.
> Object + instrumental predicate after «считать»: «считать» (to consider) takes a direct object and an instrumental complement naming what it is judged to be: «считал согласие… немыслимым» — "considered [her] consent inconceivable."
> Real conditional in the future: A genuine (not hypothetical) condition: «если… то» with perfective futures «придет» and «будет». No «бы» here — this is a real possibility about to happen, not an irrealis wish.

Алеша понимал его чувства.  
Alyosha understood his feelings.

— Трифон-то, — заговорил суетливо Митя, — Борисыч-то, говорят, весь свой постоялый двор разорил: половицы подымает, доски отдирает, всю «галдарею», говорят, в щепки разнес — всё клада ищет, вот тех самых денег, полторы тысячи, про которые прокурор сказал, что я их там спрятал.  
"That Trifon now," Mitya began fussily, "Borisych, I mean — they say he's torn his whole posting-inn to pieces: pulling up the floorboards, ripping off the planks, smashing the whole 'galdarey' to splinters, they say — all of it hunting for treasure, for those very banknotes, the fifteen hundred the prosecutor said I'd hidden there.
> Topic-marking clitic «-то»: The hyphenated «-то» here is not the indefinite suffix but the topicalizing clitic, flagging "that Trifon, you know the one" — pinning down a known referent. It gives Mitya's blurted speech its excited, gossipy lurch.
> «галдарея» — mangled «галерея»: A deliberately illiterate folk-deformation of «галерея» (gallery/veranda), set in quotation marks to flag it as the innkeeper's own peasant pronunciation — a touch of social mimicry in Mitya's report.
> Genitive object of «искать»: «искать» (to seek) classically governs the genitive of an abstract or indefinite goal: «клада ищет», "is searching for treasure" — the genitive marking the sought-for, not-yet-found object.

Как приехал, так, говорят, тотчас и пошел куролесить.  
The moment he got back, they say, he set to running riot.
> «как… так и» — the moment that: The correlative «как… так (и)» links two perfectives «приехал… пошел» to mean "the very moment he arrived, he set off [doing]" — an immediate-sequence frame, here heightened by «тотчас» (at once).
> «куролесить» — to run riot: A vivid colloquial verb meaning to carry on wildly, kick up a rumpus, behave outrageously. «пошел куролесить» = "he set to raising hell" — earthy, expressive register suited to Mitya's voice.

Поделом мошеннику!  
Serves the rogue right!
> «поделом» + dative — serves him right: «поделом» is a fixed exclamation "it serves [him] right," taking the dative of the person who deserves it: «поделом мошеннику» — "serves the rogue right!"

Сторож мне здешний вчера рассказал; он оттудова.  
A guard here told me yesterday; he's from over that way.
> Split, colloquial word order: Speech order scatters the phrase: «Сторож… здешний» (a local guard) is broken up by the dative «мне», and the modifier «здешний» trails its noun — the loose, spoken rhythm of Mitya talking fast.
> «оттудова» — dialectal «оттуда»: «оттудова» is a non-standard, peasant-flavoured form of «оттуда» (from there). Like «галдарея» it colours the report with vernacular texture: "he's from over that way."

— Слушай, — проговорил Алеша, — она придет, но не знаю когда, может сегодня, может на днях, этого не знаю, но придет, придет, это наверно.  
"Listen," Alyosha said, "she will come, only I don't know when — maybe today, maybe one of these days, that I can't say, but she'll come, she'll come, that's certain."
> Perfective future + insistent repetition: «придет» is the perfective simple future of «прийти» — a single completed "she will come." Its triple repetition ("she'll come, she'll come, that's certain") is Alyosha pressing reassurance on Mitya.
> «на днях» — one of these days: A set time-phrase meaning "in the next few days" (or, of the past, "the other day"). Here it points forward: "maybe one of these days."

Митя вздрогнул, хотел было что-то вымолвить, но промолчал.  
Mitya gave a start, was about to say something, but kept silent.
> The «было» of a checked action: The particle «было» after a past perfective marks an action begun or intended but cut short: «хотел было… вымолвить, но промолчал» — "was about to utter something, but kept silent." A favourite Dostoevskian device for suppressed impulse.
> «вымолвить» — to get a word out: A bookish perfective meaning to utter, manage to say (a single word or phrase), often with effort. "Was about to bring out a word" — weightier and rarer than «сказать».

Известие страшно на него подействовало.  
The news had a terrible effect on him.
> «подействовать на» + accusative: «подействовать на кого» (to have an effect on someone) governs «на» plus the accusative «него». «подействовало» is perfective — the news landed its single, decisive blow.

Видно было, что ему мучительно хотелось бы узнать подробности разговора, но что он опять боится сейчас спросить: что-нибудь жестокое и презрительное от Кати было бы ему как удар ножом в эту минуту.  
It was plain that he longed agonizingly to learn the particulars of the conversation, yet that he was afraid to ask just now: anything cruel or contemptuous from Katya would have been like a knife-thrust to him at that moment.
> Conditional «бы» — the unreal and the wished-for: Two irrealis verbs frame the sentence: «хотелось бы» (he would have longed) and «было бы» (would have been). Past-form verb plus «бы» builds Russia's single subjunctive, here voicing both a yearning and a feared hypothetical.
> Dative subject under «хотеться»: «хотеться» is impersonal and reflexive: the wanter goes in the dative «ему», not the nominative — "it would agonizingly want itself to him," i.e. he longed. The «-ся» frames desire as something that happens to one.
> Non-specific «-нибудь»: «что-нибудь» (anything at all) is the non-specific indefinite — any cruel word whatever — as opposed to «что-то» (some specific thing). The adjectives «жестокое, презрительное» agree with it in neuter.

— Вот что она, между прочим, сказала: чтоб я непременно успокоил твою совесть насчет побега.  
"Here is one of the things she said, among others: that I must without fail set your conscience at rest about the escape.
> «чтоб(ы)» + past form for an indirect command: Reported insistence uses «чтоб» (clipped «чтобы») with a past-form verb «успокоил»: "that I must set your conscience at rest." The «чтобы»-plus-past construction carries willed or required outcomes, not plain fact.

Если и не выздоровеет к тому времени Иван, то она сама возьмется за это.  
If Ivan is not well again by that time, she will see to the matter herself."
> Concessive «и» inside a condition: «Если и не выздоровеет» = "even if he does not recover": the particle «и» lends the condition a concessive "even" force. Both verbs are perfective futures, naming completed prospective events.
> Intensifier «сама» + «-ся» idiom: «сама» (she herself) stresses that Katya will act in person; «взяться за что» (to take a thing in hand) is a fixed «-ся» idiom governing «за» plus the accusative — "she'll see to it herself."

— Ты уж об этом мне говорил, — раздумчиво заметил Митя.  
"You've told me of that already," Mitya remarked thoughtfully.
> Imperfective «говорил» of a past report + particle «уж»: «говорил» (imperfective, "you have told / were telling me") states the fact that the topic was already raised, regardless of completion. «уж» (clipped «уже», "already") adds a faintly weary insistence.

— А ты уже Груше пересказал, — заметил Алеша.  
"And you've already passed it on to Grusha," Alyosha remarked.
> Contrastive «а» opening the riposte: «А ты…» launches a gentle counter-turn — "and you, for your part…" — the topic-shifting «а» that hinges so much Russian dialogue. «пересказал» is perfective: he has finished passing the news on.

— Да, — сознался Митя.  
"Yes," Mitya confessed.
> Reflexive-only «сознаться»: «сознаться» (to confess, own up) exists only in the «-ся» form — there is no «сознать» meaning this. Such inherently reflexive verbs must be learned whole; here it loads Mitya's bare "Yes" with the air of an admission.

— Она сегодня утром не придет, — робко посмотрел он на брата.  
"She won't come this morning," he looked timidly at his brother.
> Negated perfective future: «не придет» negates the perfective simple future — "she will not come [this morning]." Russian negates the completed future event directly with «не», no auxiliary needed.

— Она придет только вечером.  
"She'll only come in the evening.
> «вечером» — instrumental of time: «вечером» (in the evening) is the bare instrumental used adverbially for time of day, alongside «утром», «днём», «ночью» — no preposition required. Here narrowed by «только» (only).

Как только я ей вчера сказал, что Катя орудует, смолчала; а губы скривились.  
The moment I told her yesterday that Katya was taking the matter in hand, she said nothing; but her lips twisted.
> «как только» — the instant that: «как только» (as soon as, the moment that) links the perfective «сказал» to the perfective «смолчала» (fell silent), a tight cause-and-instant-effect: the moment he spoke, she went quiet.
> «орудовать» — to be busy at, work it: «орудовать» is to operate, handle, get busy with something — often with a faintly disapproving or wary tinge. "Katya was orudует" = taking the matter actively in hand, which is exactly what stings Grushenka.
> Contrastive «а» + middle «-ся»: «а» pivots from her silence to the contrary sign — "but her lips twisted." «скривились» is the «-ся» middle of «скривить», an involuntary change of state: the lips twisted of themselves.

Прошептала только: «Пусть ее!»  
She only whispered: 'Let her, then!'
> «Пусть ее!» — Let her, then!: An idiomatic dismissive: «пусть» (let, may) plus the curt accusative «ее» yields a resigned "let her do as she likes, never mind her" — Grushenka swallowing her jealousy in three syllables.
> Perfective «прошептала» of a single utterance: «прошептать» (perfective, to whisper out [a thing]) names one completed act of whispering, the «про-» giving it that bounded, "got it said" sense — fronted here for terse emphasis.

Поняла, что важное.  
She understood it was something important.
> Dropped subject and copula: Telegraphic spoken Russian: subject «она» is dropped (the «-а» of «поняла» shows feminine), and the embedded «что важное» omits both subject and the present "is" — "[she] understood [it was] something important."

Я не посмел пытать дальше.  
I didn't dare probe further.
> Negated «посметь» + infinitive: «не посмел пытать» (didn't dare to probe) negates the perfective «посметь»; the dependent verb stays in the infinitive «пытать». Note «пытать» here in its older sense "to question, sound out," not "to torture."

Понимает ведь уж, кажется, теперь, что та любит не меня, а Ивана?  
She does understand now, it seems, that the other one loves not me but Ivan?"
> Appeal particle «ведь»: «ведь» appeals to shared understanding — "she does understand, after all, doesn't she?" — turning a statement into a half-question Mitya half-pleads. The cluster «ведь уж… кажется» layers his anxious self-reassurance.
> «та» distancing + «не… а» contrast: «та» ("that [other] one") coolly designates Katya without naming her, while «не меня, а Ивана» is the corrective «а»: loves not me but Ivan. The accusatives «меня/Ивана» mark the loved objects.

— Так ли? — вырвалось у Алеши.  
"Is that so?" escaped Alyosha.
> Yes/no question with «ли»: «Так ли?» (Is that so?) is the interrogative enclitic «ли» appended to the focused word «так» — a more pointed, literary way to query than mere intonation, here voicing Alyosha's startled doubt.
> Impersonal «вырвалось» + «у» genitive: «вырвалось» (it burst out, escaped) is the «-ся» middle used impersonally; the speaker appears not as subject but as «у Алеши» (genitive) — the words "escaped from" him, beyond his will.

— Пожалуй, и не так.  
"Perhaps it isn't so, after all.
> «пожалуй» — perhaps, I'd say: «пожалуй» is a modal hedge "perhaps, maybe, I suppose," conceding a point tentatively. With «и не так» — "perhaps it isn't so after all" — Mitya half-retracts what he just insisted on.

Только она утром теперь не придет, — поспешил еще раз обозначить Митя, — я ей одно поручение дал…  
Only she won't come this morning now," Mitya hastened to make clear once more, "I gave her an errand to run…
> «обозначить» — to make plain, mark out: Here «обозначить» (lit. to designate, mark) is used in a slightly off-kilter way for "to state clearly, spell out" — "hastened once more to make clear." The faint awkwardness fits Mitya's agitated, fumbling speech.
> Dative recipient with «дать»: «дать» (to give) takes the thing given in the accusative «поручение» and the recipient in the dative «ей»: "I gave her an errand." Classic indirect-object dative.

Слушай, брат Иван всех превзойдет.  
Listen, brother Ivan will outdo us all.
> Perfective future + genitive after the comparative idea: «превзойти» (to surpass, outdo) is perfective; «превзойдет» is its simple future. Its object «всех» (everyone, accusative/genitive plural of «все») completes "will outdo us all."

Ему жить, а не нам.  
It's for him to live, not for us.
> Dative + bare infinitive of destiny: «Ему жить» (it is for him to live) is the dative-plus-infinitive of fate or obligation — no verb of "to be" needed. Contrasted by «а не нам» (and not for us, also dative): the construction quietly assigns who is meant to live on.

Он выздоровеет.  
He'll recover."
> Perfective future of recovery: «выздороветь» (to get well, recover) is perfective; «выздоровеет» is the simple future — a single completed return to health. Its insistent repetition across the next lines becomes the emotional refrain of the scene.

— Представь себе, Катя хоть и трепещет за него, но почти не сомневается, что он выздоровеет, — сказал Алеша.  
"Imagine, though Katya trembles for him, she scarcely doubts that he'll recover," said Alyosha.
> Imperative with reflexive «себе»: «Представь себе» (just imagine) is the imperative of «представить» plus the dative reflexive «себе» — "picture to yourself." A fixed conversational opener flagging something surprising to follow.
> Concessive «хоть и… но»: «хоть и… но» frames a concession — "though she trembles… yet she scarcely doubts." Both verbs are imperfective present, naming ongoing states of feeling.

— Значит, убеждена, что он умрет.  
"That means she's convinced he'll die.
> Short participle «убеждена» as predicate: «убеждена» is the short feminine past passive participle of «убедить» (convinced), used predicatively with a dropped «она» — "[she is] convinced." The short form names her settled inner state.

Это она от страху уверена, что выздоровеет.  
It's out of fear that she's sure he'll recover."
> Causal «от» + genitive of emotion: «от страху» (out of fear) is «от» plus the genitive, naming the cause of a feeling or act. Note the old partitive-flavoured ending «-у» for «-а» («страху» for «страха»), common with such nouns in expressive speech.

— Брат сложения сильного.  
"Our brother has a strong constitution.
> Genitive of quality, copula dropped: "Our brother [is] of strong constitution": «сложения сильного» is a genitive-of-quality phrase describing «брат», and the present-tense "is" is simply absent, as Russian requires.
> «сложение» — physical build: «сложение» here means bodily build or constitution (from «сложить», "to put together"). «крепкого/сильного сложения» — "of strong build" — is the idiom for a robust frame likely to survive illness.

И я тоже очень надеюсь, что он выздоровеет, — тревожно заметил Алеша.  
And I too very much hope he'll recover," Alyosha remarked anxiously.
> Inverted attribution after speech: In dialogue tags Russian routinely inverts to verb-then-subject: «заметил Алеша» ("Alyosha remarked"), with the manner adverb «тревожно» fronted. This verb-first attribution is the narrative norm.

— Да, он выздоровеет.  
"Yes, he'll recover.

Но та уверена, что он умрет.  
But she's convinced he'll die.
> «та» for the absent third woman: «та» ("that one") again marks Katya at a cold distance, opposing her to Grushenka in Mitya's mind. The short «уверена» predicates her conviction; «умрет» is the perfective future "he will die."

Много у ней горя…  
She has a great deal of grief…"
> Quantifier «много» + genitive: «много горя» — "much grief" — uses the quantifier «много» governing the genitive «горя». Possession is framed with «у ней» (genitive of «она», archaic/colloquial «ней» for «неё»): "she has much grief."

Наступило молчание.  
A silence fell.
> Perfective onset + verb-first order: «Наступило молчание» (a silence fell) leads with the perfective verb, subject «молчание» last — the new event announced as it lands. «наступить» is the idiomatic verb for a silence, night, or moment "setting in."

Митю мучило что-то очень важное.  
Something very important was tormenting Mitya.
> Accusative experiencer of «мучить»: The torment is the grammatical subject («что-то важное», neuter, agreeing with «мучило»), while the sufferer Mitya stands as accusative object «Митю» — "something was tormenting Mitya." Russian often makes the feeling the actor and the person its target.

— Алеша, я Грушу люблю ужасно, — дрожащим, полным слез голосом вдруг проговорил он.  
"Alyosha, I love Grusha terribly," he suddenly brought out in a trembling voice, full of tears.
> Instrumental of manner + present participle: «голосом» (in a voice) is the instrumental of manner, and «дрожащим» is the present active participle of «дрожать» (trembling), agreeing in the instrumental. «полным слез» adds the long-form adjective «полный» in the instrumental, agreeing with «голосом», which governs the genitive «слез» ("full of tears"); it is not a short adjective.
> «ужасно» as intensifier: Like «страшно» earlier, «ужасно» (lit. "horribly") here just means "terribly, awfully" — an intensifier of love, not horror: "I love Grusha terribly." Emotional overstatement is Mitya's native register.

— Ее к тебе туда не пустят, — тотчас подхватил Алеша.  
"They won't let her in to you there," Alyosha put in at once.
> Impersonal «они»-less third-plural: «не пустят» (they won't let [her] in) is a subjectless third-person plural — the unnamed "they," the authorities. Russian uses this bare 3rd-plural for an indefinite agent, like English passive "she won't be let in."

— И вот что еще хотел тебе сказать, — продолжал каким-то зазвеневшим вдруг голосом Митя, — если бить станут дорогой аль там, то я не дамся, я убью, и меня расстреляют.  
"And here's another thing I wanted to tell you," Mitya went on, his voice suddenly ringing with something, "if they start beating me on the road or there, I won't submit, I'll kill, and they'll shoot me.
> Real future condition with chained perfectives: «если… станут… то…» sets a real future condition: «станут бить» (will start beating, «стать» + imperfective infinitive), then the perfectives «не дамся» (won't give in) and «убью» (I'll kill). No «бы» — Mitya means it as a real prospect.
> Reflexive «даться» — to let oneself be taken: «даться» is the «-ся» middle of «дать»: to yield, to let oneself be done to. «не дамся» = "I won't submit / won't let them." The reflexive turns "give" inward into "give oneself up."
> «аль» — folksy «или»: «аль» (or «али») is a colloquial, peasant-tinged «или» ("or"): «дорогой аль там» — "on the road or there." It pitches Mitya's outburst into a rougher, more popular register.
> Another indefinite third-plural: «расстреляют» (they'll shoot [me] dead) is again the subjectless 3rd-plural for the faceless authority, with «меня» the accusative victim. «расстрелять» specifically means execution by firing squad.

И это двадцать ведь лет!  
And this for twenty years!
> Particle «ведь» + numeral governing genitive plural: «ведь» appeals for the listener's appalled agreement — "and this for twenty years, you realize!" The numeral «двадцать» governs the genitive plural «лет» (the suppletive genitive plural of «год»), as all numbers from five up demand.

Здесь уж ты начинают говорить.  
Even here they're already calling me 'thou.'
> «ты» as a quoted object, not the subject: The subject of «начинают говорить» is an unstated 'they' (impersonal), and «ты» here is not the pronoun 'you' but the quoted familiar form itself — 'they're starting to say «thou» [to me].' The free word order lets the cited word «ты» sit up front for emphasis.

Сторожа мне ты говорят.  
The guards say 'thou' to me.
> The familiar «ты»: Russian distinguishes formal «вы» from intimate «ты». From a stranger to an adult, being addressed as «ты» is contemptuous and degrading. The noun «тыканье» (a few lines later) means literally "the act of calling someone «ты»." Mitya's wound at the guards' familiar «ты» is almost impossible to render in modern English, which has lost the formal/informal pronoun split; we reach for the archaic "thou" to mark it.
> Stressed plural «сторожа́»: «сторож» (guard, watchman) takes the distinctive stressed nominative plural in -а́ — «сторожа́» — like «города́, дома́», rather than the more usual -ы/-и. Such -а plurals are a recognizable subclass of masculine nouns.

Я лежал и сегодня всю ночь судил себя: не готов!  
All night today I lay here passing judgment on myself: I'm not ready!
> Reflexive object «себя»: «судил себя» — 'I was judging myself.' «себя» is the reflexive pronoun, an accusative object pointing back to the speaker; unlike the verbal clitic -ся it is a free-standing word and has no nominative form. The imperfective «судил» frames it as a drawn-out process across the night.
> Imperfective for the long vigil: Both «лежал» and «судил» are imperfective past, viewing the whole night as ongoing process rather than a finished event — exactly what «всю ночь» (all night long) calls for.

Не в силах принять!  
Not strong enough to accept it!
> «не в силах» — 'not strong enough to': «не в силах» (literally 'not in [my] powers') is a fixed predicate idiom meaning 'unable, lacking the strength,' followed by an infinitive — «принять» (to accept). The whole clause is subjectless and verbless, an elliptical exclamation: '[I am] not able to accept!' «силах» is the prepositional plural of «сила».

Хотел «гимн» запеть, а сторожевского тыканья не могу осилить!  
I wanted to sing my 'hymn,' but I can't get the better of the guards' 'thou'-ing!
> Genitive of negation: Under the negated «не могу осилить» (I can't get the better of), the object «тыканья» stands in the genitive rather than the accusative — the genitive of negation, especially natural with an abstract object. The genitive ending -я is what marks it.
> «тыканье» — the act of «ты»-ing: «тыканье» is a verbal noun coined from «ты»: the very act of addressing someone with the familiar «ты». The adjective «сторожевского» ('of the guards') is itself colloquial and slightly contemptuous. Together they name the precise indignity Mitya cannot stomach.
> The «гимн» — Mitya's hymn: «гимн» (hymn) recalls Mitya's earlier ecstatic vow to sing a hymn of suffering and redemption from prison. «запеть» is the perfective 'to strike up singing.' Naming it in quotation marks marks it as his own private, half-ironic catchword.

За Грушу бы всё перенес, всё… кроме, впрочем, побои…  
For Grusha's sake I'd bear anything, everything… except, by the way, a beating…
> Conditional «бы» without «если»: «перенёс бы» is the conditional/subjunctive: past-tense verb plus the particle «бы», 'I would bear.' Here it stands without any «если» clause — the condition ('for Grusha's sake') is folded into «за Грушу». Note how the mobile «бы» leans on «за Грушу», the first stressed phrase, rather than on the verb.
> «Груша» — Grushenka: «Груша» is the warm, familiar short form of Agrafena (Grushenka), Mitya's beloved. The name literally means 'pear'; the diminutive ladder Аграфена → Груша → Грушенька signals tenderness, the everyday name a lover uses.
> «впрочем» — 'though, on second thought': «впрочем» is a parenthetical hinge meaning 'however, then again,' marking a speaker's mid-sentence qualification or retreat. Mitya's swaggering 'I'd bear anything' immediately stumbles on it — 'except, mind you, a beating.' It is a hallmark of Dostoevsky's restless, self-correcting voice.

Но ее туда не пустят.  
But they won't let her in there."
> Impersonal 'they' + perfective future: «пустят» is a subjectless third-person-plural 'they won't let' — the impersonal 'they' for unnamed authorities. Being perfective, its present-shaped form «пустят» carries future meaning: 'they will not let her in.' «её» is the accusative object, fronted before the verb.

Алеша тихо улыбнулся.  
Alyosha smiled quietly.
> Perfective + reflexive «-ся»: «улыбнулся» (smiled) is perfective, marking the single completed gesture, and carries the bound clitic «-ся». Here «-ся» is lexical — «улыбаться/улыбнуться» simply exists only in the reflexive form, not a true 'self' meaning.

— Слушай, брат, раз навсегда, — сказал он, — вот тебе мои мысли на этот счет.  
"Listen, brother, once and for all," he said, "here are my thoughts on this score.
> Dative «тебе» of the recipient: «вот тебе мои мысли» — 'here are my thoughts for you.' «тебе» is the dative of the person to whom something is offered, paired with the presentative «вот» ('here is'). The construction has no verb; the dative alone carries the 'to you.'
> «на этот счёт» — 'on this score': «на этот счёт» is an idiom, 'on this account, regarding this matter,' using «счёт» (count, bill, account) figuratively. Our 'on this score' keeps the same accounting metaphor that English happens to share.

И ведь ты знаешь, что я не солгу тебе.  
And you know, after all, that I would not lie to you.
> The appealing particle «ведь»: «ведь» appeals to shared knowledge — 'after all, you know.' It does not translate as a word so much as a tone: Alyosha invokes a truth Mitya already grants. Combined with the opening «И» it warmly draws the listener in.
> Perfective future under negation: «солгу» is the simple (perfective) future of «солгать» (to tell a lie): 'I will not lie.' The aspect frames it as a single hypothetical act he refuses; «тебе» is the dative 'to you.'

Слушай же: ты не готов, и не для тебя такой крест.  
Listen, then: you are not ready, and such a cross is not for you.
> Imperative + insistent «же»: «Слушай» is the imperative of «слушать» (listen), and the enclitic «же» adds urgent insistence — 'now do listen.' «же» here is not contrastive but hortatory, pressing the command home.
> Verbless negative predicate: 'Such a cross is not for you' — a zero-copula present with no verb, the negation «не» falling on the prepositional phrase «для тебя». The nominative «такой крест» is the subject of an implied 'is.' Russian readily states 'X is not for Y' with пred phrase alone.

Мало того: и не нужен тебе, не готовому, такой великомученический крест.  
What is more: you do not need such a great-martyr's cross, you who are not ready for it.
> Dative subject + agreeing «не готовому»: An impersonal need-construction: «не нужен тебе... крест» — 'a cross is not needed to/by you,' with the experiencer «тебе» in the dative. The apposed adjective «не готовому» ('to you, the unready one') also stands in the dative, agreeing with «тебе» in case.
> «мало того» — 'what is more': «мало того» (literally 'little of that') is a connective meaning 'moreover, and not only that.' It escalates the argument, layering a second, stronger point onto the first.

Если б ты убил отца, я бы сожалел, что ты отвергаешь свой крест.  
Had you killed our father, I would be sorry that you reject your cross.
> Counterfactual «если бы… бы»: A full irrealis conditional: «Если б [бы] ты убил отца, я бы сожалел» — 'had you killed our father, I would be sorry.' Both clauses use past-tense verbs plus «бы», the standard pattern for an unreal/contrary-to-fact condition. The clipped «б» for «бы» is the spoken shortening.
> Reflexive possessive «свой»: «свой крест» means 'your own cross' — «свой» is the reflexive possessive, pointing to the subject of its clause (here «ты»). Using «твой» would be possible but flatter; «свой» binds the cross firmly to the one who must bear it.

Но ты невинен, и такого креста слишком для тебя много.  
But you are innocent, and such a cross is too much for you.
> Genitive after «много»: «много» (too much) governs the genitive — «такого креста» is genitive singular, 'too much of such a cross.' The quantity word and the genitive together make the idiom 'such a cross is too much for you,' with «для тебя» the genitive-governing 'for you.'
> Short-form adjective «невинен»: «невинен» is the short (predicative) form of «невинный» (innocent): masculine short forms like this attach only to a predicate and carry a flavor of a definite, present state — 'you are innocent.' Bookish 19th-century prose favors such short forms.

Ты хотел мукой возродить в себе другого человека; по-моему, помни только всегда, во всю жизнь и куда бы ты ни убежал, об этом другом человеке — и вот с тебя и довольно.  
You wanted, through suffering, to bring a new man to life within yourself; to my mind, only remember always, all your life and wherever you may flee, this other man — and that alone will be enough for you.
> Concessive «куда бы ни» — 'wherever you may flee': The frame «куда бы… ни» builds a concessive: 'no matter where you flee.' It fuses the irrealis «бы» with the intensifying negative «ни» around a past-form verb «убежал», yielding 'wherever you may run to.' This «вопросительное слово + бы ни» pattern is the standard 'however/whatever/wherever' construction.
> Imperative «помни»: «помни» is the imperative of «помнить» (to remember) — a singular command to Mitya. The flanking «только» ('only, just') and «всегда» ('always') soften and broaden it: 'just always keep remembering.'
> «с тебя довольно» — 'that's enough for you': «с тебя довольно» is an idiom: «довольно» ('enough, sufficient') with «с» + genitive «тебя», literally 'from you it is enough.' The added «и» ('even, indeed') intensifies — 'and that alone is plenty for you.'

То, что ты не принял большой крестной муки, послужит только к тому, что ты ощутишь в себе еще больший долг и этим беспрерывным ощущением впредь, во всю жизнь, поможешь своему возрождению, может быть, более, чем если б пошел туда.  
The very fact that you did not take on the great suffering of the cross will serve only to make you feel within yourself a still greater debt, and through that ceaseless feeling, from now on, all your life, you will help your own regeneration, perhaps more than if you had gone there.
> Comparative «больший» + perfective future: «ощутишь» is the perfective future ('you will feel'), and «больший долг» uses the attributive comparative «больший» ('greater') — the declinable adjectival comparative, distinct from the predicative «больше». «в себе» ('within yourself') uses the reflexive «себя» in the prepositional.
> Comparison with an embedded conditional: «более, чем…» sets up 'more than…,' and the second term is itself a counterfactual: «если б [бы] пошёл туда» — 'than if you had gone there,' past-form verb plus «бы». Comparative «более» plus a «чем»-clause is the regular way to compare against a whole proposition.
> Correlative «то, что»: The sentence opens with the correlative «то, что…» — 'the (very) fact that…,' where neuter «то» is the head and «что» the subordinator introducing the noun clause. This nominalizing frame lets a whole event ('that you did not take on the cross') become the subject «послужит» governs.

Потому что там ты не перенесешь и возропщешь и, может быть, впрямь наконец скажешь: «Я сквитался».  
For there you would not endure, and you would murmur against it, and perhaps in the end you would say outright: 'I have squared my account.'
> Chain of perfective futures: «перенесёшь», «возропщешь», «скажешь» are all perfective futures lined up to project a sequence of completed acts: 'you would not endure, would murmur, would say.' English reads them as conditional, but Russian states them as future-perfective certainties.
> «возроптать» — to murmur against: «возроптать» (perfective of «роптать») is an elevated, biblical-flavored verb meaning to grumble or murmur in complaint, famously used of the Israelites murmuring against God in the wilderness. It carries a note of rebellion against one's lot, not mere irritation.
> «сквитаться» — to settle the score: «сквитаться» means to get even, square accounts, be quits — from «квит» ('quits, even'). Mitya imagines himself reaching the point of saying his suffering has 'paid off' the debt, the very self-justification Alyosha warns against.

Адвокат в этом случае правду сказал.  
The lawyer spoke the truth in this case.

Не всем бремена тяжкие, для иных они невозможны…  
Not for everyone are the heavy burdens; for some they are impossible…
> «бремена тяжкие» — heavy burdens (Slavonic): Both words are Church-Slavonic in coloring: «бремена» is the elevated plural of «бремя» (burden), and «тяжкие» the bookish form of 'heavy/grievous.' The phrase echoes the Gospel ('they bind heavy burdens' — Matthew 23:4), lending Alyosha's aside a scriptural weight.
> Dative «всем»/«иных» of the experiencer: «Не всем бремена тяжкие» — 'the heavy burdens are not for everyone,' with the dative «всем» marking the people they are (not) laid upon. The parallel «для иных они невозможны» shifts to «для» + genitive «иных» ('for some'), the predicate «невозможны» a short-form adjective.

Вот мои мысли, если они так тебе нужны.  
There are my thoughts, if you have such need of them.
> Dative of need: «тебе нужны»: «тебе нужны» — 'if they are needful to you.' The predicate adjective «нужны» (short plural, agreeing with «они», the thoughts) takes the person who needs in the dative, «тебе». This dative-of-the-needer is the standard Russian way to say 'you need.'

Если б за побег твой остались в ответе другие: офицеры, солдаты, то я бы тебе «не позволил» бежать, — улыбнулся Алеша.  
If others — officers, soldiers — were to answer for your escape, then I would 'not allow' you to flee," Alyosha smiled.
> Two-clause counterfactual with «то»: A full unreal conditional: protasis «если б… остались» and apodosis introduced by correlative «то» — «то я бы… не позволил». Both halves carry «бы» on a past-form verb. The «если бы…, то…» frame neatly brackets the hypothesis and its consequence.
> «остаться в ответе» — to be left answerable: «остались в ответе» is an idiom: «быть/остаться в ответе» means 'to be answerable, to bear responsibility.' Literally 'to remain in [the] answer.' Alyosha's whole moral test turns on whether others — «офицеры, солдаты» — would be left to answer for the escape.

— Но говорят и уверяют (сам этот этапный Ивану говорил), что большого взыску, при умении, может и не быть и что отделаться можно пустяками.  
"But they say, and assure me (this very transit officer himself told Ivan), that with the right know-how there may be no great reckoning, and that one can get off with a trifle.
> Impersonal «говорят» — 'they say': «говорят и уверяют» is the subjectless third-person plural, the standard 'they say / it is said.' No 'they' is named; the verb ending alone supplies the indefinite source of rumor that frames the whole report.
> «отделаться пустяками» — to get off lightly: «отделаться» (perfective) means to get off, be rid of a difficulty with minimal cost; «пустяками» is the instrumental of «пустяки» (trifles), 'by means of trifles.' The whole means 'one can get off with a mere trifle.' «при умении» — 'with skill / know-how' — sharpens the cynical practicality.

Конечно, подкупать нечестно даже и в этом случае, но тут уже я судить ни за что не возьмусь, потому, собственно, что если б мне, например, Иван и Катя поручили в этом деле для тебя орудовать, то я, знаю это, пошел бы и подкупил; это я должен тебе всю правду сказать.  
Of course, bribery is dishonest even in this case, but here I won't undertake to judge at all, because, strictly speaking, if Ivan and Katya, for instance, charged me with managing this affair for you, then I — I know it — would go and bribe; this is the whole truth I must tell you.
> Counterfactual + dative «мне»: Another «если бы…, то…» unreal conditional. In the protasis «мне» is the dative recipient of the charge ('if they entrusted me with…'), and «поручили» is the impersonal 'they.' The apodosis «пошёл бы и подкупил» chains two perfective past-form verbs under one «бы» — 'I would go and bribe.'
> «орудовать» — to handle, work a deal: «орудовать» means to operate, manage, ply something — often with a shade of energetic or shady dealing (from «орудие», instrument/tool). Here 'to manage this affair for you,' with the faint sense of working the levers, fitting the talk of bribery.
> Emphatic «ни за что»: «ни за что не возьмусь» — 'I will on no account undertake to judge.' «ни за что» is a fixed intensifier of refusal ('not for anything, on no account'), and Russian's negative concord keeps «не» on the verb «возьмусь» as well. «возьмусь» is the reflexive «взяться» (to take something on).

А потому я тебе не судья в том, как ты сам поступишь.  
And so I am no judge to you in how you yourself will act.
> Zero-copula 'I am not your judge': «я тебе не судья» — present-tense identity with no verb 'to be': nominative subject «я», predicate nominative «судья», negated by «не». «тебе» is the dative 'to you,' giving 'I am no judge to you.' The bare nominative predicate is the rule in the copula-less present.
> Intensive «сам» + perfective future: «сам» ('yourself, of your own accord') intensifies the subject «ты»: 'how you yourself will act.' «поступишь» is the perfective future of «поступить» (to act, behave), naming the single future choice still open to Mitya.

Но знай, что и тебя не осужу никогда.  
But know that I shall never condemn you either.
> Negative concord with «никогда»: 'I shall never condemn you' uses negative concord: the negative adverb «никогда» ('never') still requires «не» on the verb «осужу». Two negatives, one meaning. «осужу» is perfective future, and «тебя» the fronted accusative object.

Да и странно, как бы мог я быть в этом деле твоим судьей?  
And besides, it would be strange — how could I be your judge in this affair?
> «как бы мог я» — softened rhetorical question: «как бы мог я быть…» fuses the irrealis «бы» into a rhetorical question — 'how could I (possibly) be…' The conditional softens it from a real question into wondering self-doubt. «твоим судьёй» is the predicate instrumental after «быть».

Ну, теперь я, кажется, всё рассмотрел.  
Well, now I've covered everything, it seems."
> Perfective «рассмотрел» — the survey completed: «рассмотрел» (perfective of «рассматривать») views the act as finished and total — 'I've gone over / covered everything.' The neuter «всё» ('everything') is its object. The aspect signals that Alyosha has now closed the whole survey of points.

— Но зато я себя осужу! — воскликнул Митя.  
"But on the other hand, I shall condemn myself!" cried Mitya.
> Contrastive «зато» + reflexive «себя»: «зато» means 'but in return / on the other hand,' offsetting a concession with a compensating point — Mitya answers Alyosha's 'I won't condemn you' with 'but I'll condemn myself.' «себя осужу» pairs the reflexive object «себя» with the perfective future «осужу».

— Я убегу, это и без тебя решено было: Митька Карамазов разве может не убежать?  
"I'll escape — that was decided even without you: how could Mitka Karamazov not escape?
> Short passive participle «решено»: «решено было» is a periphrastic passive: the neuter short-form past passive participle «решено» ('decided') plus the past «было» — 'it had been decided.' The short passive in -но/-ено joined to «быть» is the standard way to state a result without naming an agent.
> «Митька» — the rough diminutive: «Митька» is the blunt, even self-deprecating diminutive of Дмитрий (Дмитрий → Митя → Митька), the -ка suffix lending a coarse, devil-may-care swagger. Mitya speaks of himself in the third person by this nickname — 'can Mitka Karamazov really not escape?' — half boast, half self-mockery.
> Rhetorical «разве»: The particle «разве» turns the clause into an incredulous rhetorical question — 'can he really (not)…?', expecting the answer 'of course he can / will.' Here «разве может не убежать» = 'how could he possibly fail to escape?'

Но зато себя осужу и там буду замаливать грех вовеки!  
But to make up for it I'll condemn myself, and there I'll pray away my sin forever!
> «замаливать грех» — to pray away one's sin: «замаливать» (imperfective; perfective «замолить») means to atone for, expiate by prayer — to 'pray off' a sin. «вовеки» is an elevated, Slavonic-flavored 'forever, unto the ages.' The pairing gives Mitya's vow a churchly, penitential ring.

Ведь этак иезуиты говорят, этак?  
That's how the Jesuits talk, isn't it, like that?
> «этак» and tag-question «ведь»: «этак» is a colloquial variant of «так» ('this way, like that'). The framing «ведь… этак?» turns the line into an appeal for agreement — 'that's how the Jesuits talk, isn't it?' — with «ведь» seeking confirmation and the repeated «этак?» as a tag.

Вот как мы теперь с тобой, а?  
Just as we two are doing now, eh?"
> Elliptical «вот как… а?»: A verbless, elliptical exclamation: 'just the way we [are] now, you and I, eh?' The colloquial tag «а?» invites assent. «с тобой» ('with you') and the dropped verb make it the loose, breathless speech of excited dialogue.

— Этак, — тихо улыбнулся Алеша.  
"Like that," Alyosha smiled quietly.
> Inverted word order in the dialogue tag: The verb «улыбнулся» precedes its subject «Алёша» — verb-then-subject inversion typical of attributive 'said'-tags after quoted speech. Russian's free word order makes this reordering purely stylistic, the case endings keeping subject and meaning clear.

— Люблю я тебя за то, что ты всегда всю цельную правду скажешь и ничего не утаишь! — радостно смеясь, воскликнул Митя.  
"I love you for always speaking the whole, entire truth and never hiding anything!" cried Mitya, laughing joyfully.
> Imperfective gerund «смеясь»: «смеясь» is the imperfective present gerund (деепричастие) of «смеяться» — 'laughing,' an adverbial of attendant circumstance simultaneous with the main verb «воскликнул». It shares the subject «Митя» and compresses 'as he laughed, he exclaimed' into one clause, a hallmark of literary narration.
> Negative concord + perfective future: «ничего не утаишь» — 'you hide nothing': the negative pronoun «ничего» still demands «не» on the verb (negative concord). «утаишь» is perfective future of «утаить» (to conceal), and «ничего» is its genitive-shaped object under negation.

— Значит, я Алешку моего иезуитом поймал!  
"So I've caught my Alyoshka being a Jesuit!
> Predicate instrumental «иезуитом»: «поймал… иезуитом» — 'caught [him] being a Jesuit / as a Jesuit.' The predicate noun «иезуитом» stands in the instrumental, naming the role or state in which the object is caught — the same instrumental that follows «быть, стать, считать» and verbs of catching/finding someone in a capacity.
> «Алёшка» — affectionate-rough diminutive: «Алёшка» is the -ка diminutive of Алексей/Алёша, here warm and possessive rather than dismissive — reinforced by «моего» ('my'). The brusque suffix in a loving mouth becomes a caress; Mitya is delighting in his little brother.

Расцеловать тебя всего надо за это, вот что!  
I ought to smother you all over with kisses for this, that's what!
> Impersonal «надо» + infinitive: «надо» ('one must / it is necessary') is an impersonal predicate taking an infinitive — «расцеловать» — with no nominative subject: 'one ought to kiss you all over.' «тебя всего» is the accusative object, «всего» ('all of you') agreeing with «тебя».
> «расцеловать» — to smother with kisses: The prefix «рас-» on «целовать» (to kiss) adds intensity and thoroughness — to kiss all over, cover with kisses. It conveys an overflowing, demonstrative affection, exactly Mitya's expansive warmth here.

Ну, слушай же теперь и остальное, разверну тебе и остальную половину души моей.  
Well, listen now to the rest as well, I'll unfold for you the other half of my soul too.
> Imperative + insistent «же»: «слушай же» repeats the imperative-plus-«же» of insistence — 'now do listen.' «остальное» is a substantivized neuter adjective ('the rest'), the object of the listening, with «и» here meaning 'also, as well.'
> «развернуть душу» — to unfold one's soul: «разверну» (perfective future of «развернуть», to unroll/unfold) here is figurative — 'I'll unfold for you the other half of my soul.' The image of opening out a furled-up inner self is vivid and characteristically Dostoevskian. «тебе» is the dative recipient.

Вот что я выдумал и решил: если я и убегу, даже с деньгами и паспортом и даже в Америку, то меня еще ободряет та мысль, что не на радость убегу, не на счастье, а воистину на другую каторгу, не хуже, может быть, этой!  
Here is what I've devised and decided: if I do escape, even with money and a passport and even to America, I'm still buoyed up by this thought — that I'll flee not toward joy, not toward happiness, but truly toward another penal servitude, no better, perhaps, than this one!
> Headless relative «вот что»: «вот что…» — 'here is what…' — uses «что» as a free relative (the thing which), introducing what Mitya has «выдумал и решил» (devised and decided). Both verbs are perfective, marking the plan as fully formed and settled.
> Concessive «и» in the «если»-clause: «если я и убегу» — 'even if I do escape': the «и» before the verb is concessive, conceding the case ('granted that I escape'). «убегу» is perfective future. The main clause «меня ободряет та мысль» fronts the accusative «меня» before the verb for emphasis.
> «каторга» and «воистину»: «каторга» is penal servitude — hard forced labor in exile, the very sentence hanging over Mitya. «воистину» ('verily, in truth') is a solemn, churchly word (famous from the Paschal greeting «Воистину воскресе»), lending his vow a near-liturgical earnestness: even escape will be 'truly another katorga.'

Не хуже, Алексей, воистину говорю, что не хуже!  
No better, Alexei, in truth I tell you, no better!
> «воистину говорю» — 'verily I say': The repeated «воистину говорю» deliberately echoes the Gospel formula 'verily I say unto you' (Slavonic «истинно/воистину глаголю вам»). Mitya, swearing his sincerity, slips into scriptural cadence — typical of how the novel's characters reach for sacred language at heightened moments.

Я эту Америку, черт ее дери, уже теперь ненавижу.  
This America — devil take it — I already hate it now.
> «чёрт её дери» — 'devil take it': «чёрт её дери» (literally 'may the devil tear it') is a coarse curse-interjection of exasperation, «дери» the imperative of «драть» (to tear). The feminine «её» refers to «Америку». Such devil-oaths pepper Mitya's speech, marking his volcanic, unbuttoned temperament.
> Imperfective present «ненавижу»: «ненавижу» (I hate) is imperfective present — «ненавидеть» has no perfective, naming an ongoing state. The pairing «уже теперь» ('already now') stresses that the hatred is present and active before the plan is even begun.

Пусть Груша будет со мной, но посмотри на нее: ну американка ль она?  
Let Grusha be with me, but look at her: is she an American woman, then?
> Interrogative particle «ль» (= «ли»): «ль» is the clipped, poetic form of the yes/no particle «ли», here following the focused word «американка» — 'is she an American woman, then?' Fronting the predicate noun and tagging «ль» makes a pointed rhetorical question expecting 'no.'

Она русская, вся до косточки русская, она по матери родной земле затоскует, и я буду видеть каждый час, что это она для меня тоскует, для меня такой крест взяла, а чем она виновата?  
She's Russian, Russian to the very marrow, she'll pine for her native mother-soil, and I'll see at every hour that it's for my sake she's pining, for my sake she's taken on such a cross — and how is she to blame?
> «до косточки» — 'to the very bone': «до косточки» (literally 'down to the little bone,' the diminutive of «кость») is an idiom for 'through and through, to the marrow.' The diminutive «косточка» softens and intensifies at once — she is Russian to her very core. We render it 'Russian to the very marrow.'
> «родная земля» — the native soil: «родная земля» / «родная мать-земля» ('native mother-earth') is a charged Russian patriotic-spiritual image of the homeland as a mother. «затоскует» (perfective future of «затосковать») = 'will start to pine, ache with longing,' from «тоска», that untranslatable Russian yearning melancholy.
> «взять крест» + genitive «для меня»: «такой крест взяла» — 'took on such a cross,' reprising the cross-bearing motif, now of Grushenka's sacrifice. «для меня» ('for my sake') is «для» + the genitive «меня» (the preposition «для» always governs the genitive; the dative would be «мне»), and the perfective «взяла» frames her choice as a single redemptive act undertaken on Mitya's behalf.

А я-то разве вынесу тамошних смердов, хоть они, может быть, все до одного лучше меня?  
And shall I, for my part, ever endure those local boors, even though every last one of them may be better than I am?
> Emphatic clitic «-то» on «я»: «я-то» uses the topic-emphasizing clitic «-то» — 'as for me / I, for one.' Combined with rhetorical «разве» ('shall I really…?'), it sets Mitya pointedly against the locals: 'and I, for my part, will I ever endure them?' This «-то» highlights a known topic, distinct from the indefinite -то of «кто-то».
> «смерд» — boor, churl: «смерд» originally meant a peasant/serf of the lowest order in old Rus'; by the 19th century it survives as a contemptuous term for a coarse, base person — 'boor, churl.' «тамошних» ('those over there, local') is an adjective from «там». Mitya's scorn for the Americans speaks in deliberately archaic, lordly disdain.

Ненавижу я эту Америку уж теперь!  
I hate this America already now!
> Fronted verb + intensifying «уж»: By moving «ненавижу» to the front (verb before subject «я»), Mitya throws the hatred into relief — emphatic word order. «уж» (a clipped, emphatic «уже») reinforces 'even now, already.' The repetition of s100 with this reordering builds the rhetorical drumbeat.

И хоть будь они там все до единого машинисты необъятные какие али что — черт с ними, не мои они люди, не моей души!  
And though every last one of them out there be some prodigious machinist or what-not — to the devil with them, they're not my people, not of my soul!
> Concessive imperative «хоть будь»: «хоть будь они… машинисты» uses the imperative «будь» in a concessive sense — 'even were they / let them be…' This 'imperative-as-concession' ('be it ever so') is an idiomatic way to grant a hypothetical: 'though they be the greatest mechanics.' «машинисты» is the predicate nominative after «будь».
> «али» — folk 'or': «али» is a folk/dialectal and archaic variant of «или» ('or'). Mitya peppers his speech with such peasant-flavored words — «али что» ('or what-not') — coloring his Russianness against the despised foreign 'machinists.'
> Possessive «мой» / genitive «моей души»: Two parallel negated predicates: «не мои они люди» ('they are not my people,' possessive «мои» agreeing with «люди') and «не моей души» ('not of my soul,' a genitive of belonging — 'not [people] of my soul'). The bare genitive «моей души» conveys 'of my kind/spirit.'

Россию люблю, Алексей, русского бога люблю, хоть я сам и подлец!  
I love Russia, Alexei, I love the Russian God, even though I myself am a scoundrel!
> Object-first emphasis: Both clauses front the accusative object («Россию», «русского бога») before the verb «люблю», throwing the weight onto what is loved. «русского бога» shows animate accusative (= genitive form) for «бог». «хоть… подлец» is a concessive 'even though I am a scoundrel.'

Да я там издохну! — воскликнул он вдруг, засверкав глазами.  
Why, I'll perish there like a dog!" he cried suddenly, his eyes flashing.
> издохну — to die like a beast: «издохнуть» is a coarse verb for dying, normally used of animals; the neutral human verb is «умереть». By using it of himself, Mitya speaks with violent self-contempt — which is why we render it "perish there like a dog" rather than a neutral "die," to keep the brutal, self-degrading flavor of the Russian.
> Perfective gerund «засверкав»: «засверкав» is the perfective past gerund (деепричастие) of «засверкать» ('to begin to flash/sparkle') — strictly a prior/inceptive circumstance attending «воскликнул». «глазами» is the instrumental ('with his eyes'). Compressed into one phrase, it paints the eyes flashing as he cried out.

Голос его задрожал от слез.  
His voice quivered with tears.
> «от» + genitive of cause: «от слёз» — 'from tears' — is the genitive of cause governed by «от»: the trembling arises out of the tears. «задрожал» (perfective, inceptive «за-») marks the voice 'beginning to quiver.' Russian regularly expresses the cause of an involuntary reaction with «от» + genitive.

— Ну так вот как я решил, Алексей, слушай! — начал он опять, подавив волнение, — с Грушей туда приедем — и там тотчас пахать, работать, с дикими медведями, в уединении, где-нибудь подальше.  
"Well, here's how I've decided it, Alexei, listen!" he began again, mastering his agitation, "we'll go there with Grusha — and there at once to plow, to work, among wild bears, in seclusion, somewhere far off.
> Perfective gerund «подавив»: «подавив волнение» — 'having mastered his agitation' — is the perfective past gerund of «подавить» (to suppress), an action completed just before the main verb «начал». It shares the subject 'he,' the typical way Russian stacks a prior circumstance onto a narrative verb.
> Bare infinitives of intention: «тотчас пахать, работать» — 'at once to plow, to work' — strings bare imperfective infinitives to sketch a program of action without a finite verb, a vivid, breathless shorthand for 'we'll set straight to plowing and working.' The imperfectives stress the ongoing labor itself.

Ведь и там же найдется какое-нибудь место подальше!  
Surely even out there some place far enough off will turn up!
> Indefinite «-нибудь» — 'some place or other': «какое-нибудь место» uses the clitic «-нибудь» for a non-specific 'any / some… or other' — a place that surely exists but is not identified. Contrast «-то», which would mark a definite-but-unknown place. «найдётся» is the reflexive perfective future 'will turn up.'
> Stacked particles «ведь… же»: Mitya stacks particles for insistence: «ведь» ('after all') appeals to shared sense, «и» means 'even,' and «же» reinforces — 'surely even out there [some place] will turn up!' This pile-up of modal particles is exactly the conversational texture they exist to carry.

Там, говорят, есть еще краснокожие, где-то там у них на краю горизонта, ну так вот в тот край, к последним могиканам.  
There, they say, there are still redskins, somewhere out there at the edge of the horizon, well, so off to that region, to the last of the Mohicans.
> «краснокожие» — 'redskins': «краснокожие» (literally 'red-skinned ones') is the period Russian rendering of the dime-novel 'redskins,' a substantivized adjective. The whole sentence — vague «где-то там у них на краю горизонта» ('somewhere out there at the edge of the horizon') — captures Mitya's storybook geography of America.

Ну и тотчас за грамматику, я и Груша.  
And then straight to the grammar, Grusha and I.
> «за» + accusative — 'set to': «за грамматику» — literally 'for the grammar' — with «за» + accusative idiomatically means 'to set about, get down to' a task ('взяться за работу'). The verb is elided: 'and then straight [down] to the grammar.' The terseness mimics Mitya's eager planning.

Работа и грамматика, и так чтобы года три.  
Work and grammar, and like that for some three years.
> «чтобы» of intended duration + numeral: «так чтобы года три» — 'and so [arranged] that [it last] about three years.' «года три» inverts numeral and noun («три года» → «года три») to mean 'roughly three years,' a common approximation device. «года» is genitive singular as required after «три».

В эти три года аглицкому языку научимся как самые что ни на есть англичане.  
In those three years we'll learn the English tongue like the most genuine Englishmen there ever were.
> «в» + accusative for span; perfective future: «в эти три года» uses «в» + accusative to frame a span within which something is completed — 'in (the course of) these three years.' «научимся» is the perfective future of the reflexive «научиться» (to learn, master), taking its object «языку» in the dative.
> «аглицкий» — folk 'English': «аглицкий» is a dialectal/old-fashioned form of «английский» (English), the kind of homespun, slightly comic word a Russian provincial would use. «как самые что ни на есть англичане» ('like the most genuine Englishmen there ever were') doubles down on the folksy hyperbole.
> «что ни на есть» — emphatic superlative: «самые что ни на есть» is a fixed colloquial intensifier meaning 'the very most genuine, the absolute,' an emphatic superlative grafted onto «самые». Built on the archaic «что ни на есть» ('whatever there may be'), it gives 'the most real Englishmen imaginable.'

И только что выучимся — конец Америке!  
And the moment we've learned it — an end to America!
> «только что» + perfective future: «только что выучимся» — 'the very moment we've learned it.' Here «только что» means 'as soon as, the instant,' and «выучимся» is the perfective future of «выучиться» (to learn thoroughly), the «вы-» prefix stressing completion. The structure paints the instant of mastery as a single finished point.
> Dative «Америке» — 'an end to America': «конец Америке» — 'an end to America' — uses the dative «Америке» to mark what the end befalls. Verbless and abrupt, the exclamation lets the dative alone carry 'for America it's finished.'

Бежим сюда, в Россию, американскими гражданами.  
We'll flee back here, to Russia, as American citizens.
> Instrumental «американскими гражданами» — 'as citizens': «американскими гражданами» is the instrumental, naming the capacity in which they return — 'as American citizens.' This instrumental-of-role ('come back as X') is the same construction as the predicate instrumental, here attached to a verb of motion. «Бежим» is the imperfective present (1st pl. of «бежать»), used with future/intentional force ('we'll flee'); it is not a perfective future (that would be «сбежим/побежим»).

Не беспокойся, сюда в городишко не явимся.  
Don't worry, we won't turn up here in this little town.
> «городишко» — the pejorative diminutive: «городишко» adds the contemptuous suffix «-ишк-» to «город»: not just a small town but a wretched, dismissible little town. The pejorative diminutive drips with Mitya's scorn for the provincial backwater that tried him. We render it 'this little town.'
> Negated imperative «не беспокойся»: «не беспокойся» — 'don't worry' — is the negated imperative of the reflexive «беспокоиться». Negated commands strongly favor the imperfective (here «беспокойся»), the aspect for prohibiting an ongoing state rather than a single act.

Спрячемся куда-нибудь подальше, на север али на юг.  
We'll hide ourselves somewhere far away, to the north or to the south.
> Reflexive future + «-нибудь»: «спрячемся» is perfective future of the reflexive «спрятаться» (to hide oneself) — the «-ся» making it intransitive 'we'll hide.' «куда-нибудь подальше» pairs the non-specific «-нибудь» ('somewhere or other') with the comparative «подальше' ('a bit farther off').
> «али» again — 'or': Mitya keeps reaching for the folk «али» (= «или», 'or'): «на север али на юг» — 'to the north or to the south.' The recurrence stamps his speech as earthy and Russian even as he plots a foreign escape.

Я к тому времени изменюсь, она тоже, там, в Америке, мне доктор какую-нибудь бородавку подделает, недаром же они механики.  
By that time I'll have changed, and so will she, out there in America a doctor will fake some wart or other for me — they're not mechanics for nothing.
> Dative of interest «мне» + «-нибудь»: «мне… подделает» — 'will fake [for] me' — uses «мне» as a dative of interest, the person to whose benefit the action is done. «какую-нибудь бородавку» ('some wart or other') again uses non-specific «-нибудь». «подделает» is perfective future.
> «недаром» + zero-copula predicate: «недаром же они механики» — 'they're not mechanics for nothing.' «недаром» means 'not without reason, not for nothing'; «же» adds insistence; and «они механики» is a verbless present 'they [are] mechanics,' nominative predicate with no copula. The whole is Mitya's wry trust in American ingenuity.

А нет, так я себе один глаз проколю, бороду отпущу в аршин, седую (по России-то поседею) — авось не узнают.  
And if not, then I'll put out one of my own eyes, grow a beard a yard long, gray (I'll go gray over Russia anyway) — and maybe they won't recognize us.
> Elliptical «а нет, так» + dative «себе»: «а нет, так…» is colloquial 'and if not, then…,' an elliptical conditional (the verb of the protasis dropped). «себе… проколю» pairs the perfective future «проколю» (I'll pierce) with the reflexive-interest dative «себе» — 'I'll put out one of my own eyes.'
> Topic «-то» and the particle «авось»: «по России-то» tags the known topic with emphatic «-то» ('over Russia, you know'). «авось» is the famously untranslatable particle of reckless Russian hope — 'maybe, with luck, who knows' — staking everything on chance: «авось не узнают» ('and maybe they won't recognize us'). «не узнают» is the impersonal 'they' in perfective future.

А узнают, пусть ссылают, всё равно, значит, не судьба!  
And if they find us out, let them send us back — it makes no difference, it simply means it wasn't to be!
> «пусть» + present = third-person imperative: «пусть ссылают» ('let them exile us') forms a command aimed at a third party by pairing the particle «пусть» with an ordinary present-tense verb — the standard Russian way to say 'let them…'.

Здесь тоже будем где-нибудь в глуши землю пахать, а я всю жизнь американца из себя представлять буду.  
There too we'll plough the earth somewhere off in the wilds, and I'll play the American my whole life long.
> Compound (imperfective) future: Both verbs use the analytic future «быть» + imperfective infinitive — «будем пахать», «представлять буду» — describing ongoing, habitual future action rather than a single completed event.
> Indefinite «-нибудь»: The clitic «-нибудь» marks a vague, unspecified referent — «где-нибудь» = 'somewhere or other', any place at all, in contrast to the more concrete «-то».

Зато помрем на родной земле.  
But at least we'll die on our native soil.
> Colloquial «помереть»: «помрём» (from «помереть») is a folksy, lower-register equivalent of «умереть» ('to die'); it colours Mitya's speech as earthy and unguarded.

Вот мой план, и сие непреложно.  
There is my plan, and it is not to be altered.
> Archaic demonstrative «сие»: «сие» ('this') is the bookish/Church-Slavonic neuter demonstrative, long replaced by «это» in speech. Mitya uses it half-mockingly to give his 'plan' a solemn, official ring.

Одобряешь?  
Do you approve?

— Одобряю, — сказал Алеша, не желая ему противоречить.  
"I approve," said Alyosha, not wishing to contradict him.
> Imperfective gerund «не желая»: «не желая ему противоречить» ('not wishing to contradict him') is an imperfective gerund («деепричастие») expressing an attendant circumstance simultaneous with «сказал».
> Dative governed by «противоречить»: «противоречить» takes a dative object — «ему» ('him') — one of a family of verbs (помогать, верить, мешать) that govern the dative rather than the accusative.

Митя на минуту смолк и вдруг проговорил:  
Mitya fell silent for a moment, then suddenly spoke out:
> Perfective chain: «смолк» ('fell silent') and «проговорил» ('uttered') are both perfective pasts, presenting two bounded, sequential events — the momentary hush and the sudden words that break it.

— А как они в суде-то подвели?  
"But how they rigged it against me at the trial!
> «подвести» — to set up / let down: Here «подвели» means 'they framed / fixed it against me' (lit. 'led me up to it'); the verb's range runs from 'let someone down' to 'engineer someone's downfall'.

Ведь как подвели!  
How they rigged it!"
> Particle «ведь»: «Ведь» ('after all', 'you see') appeals to shared knowledge and adds emotional insistence — Mitya isn't asking, he's invoking what they both already feel about the trial.

— Если б и не подвели, всё равно тебя б осудили, — проговорил, вздохнув, Алеша.  
"Even if they hadn't rigged it, you would have been convicted all the same," said Alyosha with a sigh.
> Counterfactual conditional with «бы/б»: «Если б и не подвели… осудили» is an irrealis conditional: the particle «бы» (clipped to «б») plus past-tense verbs in both clauses yields 'even if they hadn't… you would have been'.

— Да, надоел здешней публике!  
"Yes, the public here has had its fill of me!
> Dative experiencer of «надоесть»: «надоесть» constructs its experiencer in the dative: «надоел здешней публике» = 'the local public has had its fill of me' (lit. 'I have become tiresome to the public').

Бог с ними, а тяжело! — со страданием простонал Митя.  
God be with them, but it's hard!" Mitya groaned in his suffering.

Опять на минуту смолкли.  
Again they were silent for a moment.

— Алеша, зарежь меня сейчас! — воскликнул он вдруг, — придет она сейчас или нет, говори!  
"Alyosha, cut my throat this instant!" he cried out all at once. "Is she coming now or not — tell me!
> Perfective imperative «зарежь»: «зарежь меня» ('cut my throat') is a perfective imperative demanding a single decisive act — the perfective fits the violent, all-at-once image of Mitya's outburst.

Что сказала?  
What did she say?

Как сказала?  
How did she say it?"

— Сказала, что придет, но не знаю, сегодня ли.  
"She said she would come, but I don't know whether today.
> Interrogative particle «ли»: «не знаю, сегодня ли» embeds a yes/no question ('whether today'). The particle «ли» follows the focused word «сегодня» and turns it into the point in doubt.

Трудно ведь ей! — робко посмотрел на брата Алеша.  
It's hard for her, after all!" Alyosha looked timidly at his brother.
> Dative-subject impersonal: «Трудно ведь ей» ('it's hard for her, after all') is an impersonal construction: the predicative adverb «трудно» plus a dative experiencer «ей», with no grammatical subject.

— Ну еще бы же нет, еще бы не трудно!  
"Well, of course it is, of course it's hard!
> «ещё бы» — of course!: «Ещё бы (же) нет» is an emphatic idiom of agreement — 'and how!', 'you bet it is' — built on «бы» but frozen as a fixed exclamation.

Алеша, я на этом с ума сойду.  
Alyosha, I shall go out of my mind over this.
> «сойти с ума» — to go mad: «я на этом с ума сойду» ('I'll go out of my mind over this'); «сойти с ума» (lit. 'to come down off one's mind') is the standard idiom for losing one's reason.

Груша на меня всё смотрит.  
Grusha keeps watching me.
> Diminutive «Груша»: «Груша» is the intimate diminutive of «Грушенька / Аграфена». Russian builds a whole ladder of hypocoristic forms; the bare «Груша» is warm and familiar.

Понимает.  
She understands.

Боже, господи, смири меня: чего требую?  
God, O Lord, humble me — what is it I'm demanding?
> Vocative «Боже»: «Боже» preserves the old vocative case (distinct from nominative «Бог»), surviving mainly in fixed religious exclamations like «Боже мой», «Господи».
> Genitive governed by «требовать»: «требовать» governs the genitive of the thing demanded — «чего требую» ('what I am demanding'), with «чего» the genitive of «что».

Катю требую!  
It's Katya I'm demanding!
> Accusative with «требовать» for a person: Against the usual genitive, «требовать» takes the accusative «Катю» when the object is a specific, individual person being demanded — concreteness pulls it to the accusative.

Смыслю ли, чего требую?  
Do I even understand what I'm demanding?
> «ли» in a self-question: «Смыслю ли, чего требую?» — the particle «ли» again frames a yes/no question, here turned inward: 'Do I even understand what I'm demanding?'.

Безудерж карамазовский, нечестивый!  
Karamazov unrestraint, godless!
> «безудерж» — unrestraint: «Безудерж» is an expressive, almost coined noun ('unbridledness'); paired with the adjective «карамазовский» it names the family's signature reckless intensity.

Нет, к страданию я не способен!  
No, I'm not made for suffering!
> Short adjective + «к» + dative: «к страданию я не способен» ('I'm not capable of suffering'): the short-form adjective «способен» governs «к» + dative, a typical short-adjective complement pattern.

Подлец, и всё сказано!  
A scoundrel, and that says it all!"
> Short passive participle «сказано»: «и всё сказано» ('and everything's been said') uses the short neuter passive past participle «сказано», the normal way Russian forms an agentless resultative passive.

— Вот она! — воскликнул Алеша.  
"There she is!" cried Alyosha.

В этот миг на пороге вдруг появилась Катя.  
At that very instant Katya suddenly appeared in the doorway.
> Reflexive «-ся» verb «появиться»: «появилась» ('appeared') carries the reflexive ending «-ся» (here «-сь» after a vowel); «появиться» exists only as a «-ся» verb — the suffix is lexical, not a true reflexive.

На мгновение она приостановилась, каким-то потерянным взглядом озирая Митю.  
For a moment she halted, gazing at Mitya with a kind of lost, bewildered look.
> Imperfective gerund «озирая»: «озирая Митю» ('gazing over Mitya') is an imperfective gerund of attendant manner, running simultaneously with «приостановилась».
> Instrumental of manner + «-то»: «потерянным взглядом» stands in the instrumental of manner ('with a lost look'), and «каким-то» adds the vague indefinite «-то» ('some kind of').

Тот стремительно вскочил на ноги, лицо его выразило испуг, он побледнел, но тотчас же робкая, просящая улыбка замелькала на его губах, и он вдруг, неудержимо, протянул к Кате обе руки.  
He sprang impetuously to his feet, his face showed fright, he turned pale, but at once a timid, pleading smile flickered across his lips, and suddenly, helplessly, he stretched out both hands toward Katya.
> Perfective verbs of sudden action: A string of perfective pasts — «вскочил», «выразило», «побледнел», «протянул» — packs Mitya's reaction into a rapid sequence of discrete, completed jolts.

Завидев это, та стремительно к нему бросилась.  
Seeing this, she rushed headlong toward him.
> Perfective gerund «завидев»: «Завидев это» ('having caught sight of this') is a past perfective gerund marking the completed action that immediately precedes «бросилась».
> Demonstrative «та» as pronoun: «та» ('that one') stands in for Katya — Russian often uses a bare demonstrative «тот/та» as a third-person pronoun to track a referent across clauses.

Она схватила его за руки и почти силой усадила на постель, сама села подле и, всё не выпуская рук его, крепко, судорожно сжимала их.  
She seized him by the hands and almost by force sat him down on the bed, sat down herself beside him, and, still not letting go of his hands, pressed them hard, convulsively.
> Perfective vs imperfective contrast: «схватила» and «усадила» (perfective: single completed acts) give way to «сжимала» (imperfective: drawn-out, repeated pressing), and «не выпуская» is a negated imperfective gerund of continuous state.

Несколько раз оба порывались что-то сказать, но останавливались и опять молча, пристально, как бы приковавшись, с странною улыбкой смотрели друг на друга; так прошло минуты две.  
Several times both of them made as if to say something, but they checked themselves and again, in silence, fixedly, as though riveted in place, gazed at one another with a strange smile; so passed some two minutes.
> Numeral inversion for approximation: Reversing noun and numeral — «минуты две» instead of «две минуты» — signals approximation: 'a couple of minutes or so'. The genitive singular «минуты» follows «две».

— Простила или нет? — пролепетал наконец Митя и в тот же миг, повернувшись к Алеше, с искаженным от радости лицом прокричал ему:  
"Have you forgiven me or not?" Mitya stammered at last, and in the same instant, turning to Alyosha, his face distorted with joy, he shouted to him:
> Perfective gerund «повернувшись»: «повернувшись к Алеше» ('having turned to Alyosha') is a reflexive past perfective gerund; «к» + dative «Алеше» marks the direction.

— Слышишь, что спрашиваю, слышишь!  
"Do you hear what I'm asking, do you hear!"

— За то и любила тебя, что ты сердцем великодушен! — вырвалось вдруг у Кати.  
"That is the very thing I loved you for — that you are great-hearted!" the words burst suddenly from Katya.
> Instrumental of respect + short adjective: «ты сердцем великодушен» ('you are great-hearted'): the short adjective «великодушен» predicates a quality, and «сердцем» is an instrumental of respect specifying in what way.

— Да и не надо тебе мое прощение, а мне твое; всё равно, простишь аль нет, на всю жизнь в моей душе язвой останешься, а я в твоей — так и надо… — она остановилась перевести дух.  
"And besides, you don't need my forgiveness, nor I yours; it's all the same whether you forgive or not — for all my life you'll remain a wound in my soul, and I in yours — and so it must be..." She paused to catch her breath.
> Dative subject with «надо»: «не надо тебе мое прощение» ('you have no need of my forgiveness'): the modal predicative «надо» takes a dative experiencer «тебе» and no nominative subject.
> Dialectal «аль» = «или»: «простишь аль нет» ('whether you forgive or not'): «аль» is a folk/archaic variant of «или» ('or'), giving Katya's speech a heightened, almost balladic register.

— Я для чего пришла? — исступленно и торопливо начала она опять, — ноги твои обнять, руки сжать, вот так до боли, помнишь, как в Москве тебе сжимала, опять сказать тебе, что ты бог мой, радость моя, сказать тебе, что безумно люблю тебя, — как бы простонала она в муке и вдруг жадно приникла устами к руке его.  
"Why did I come?" she began again, frantically and in haste. "To embrace your feet, to clasp your hands, like this, until it hurts — remember how I used to clasp them in Moscow — to tell you once more that you are my god, my joy, to tell you that I love you madly," she said as though groaning in her torment, and suddenly, hungrily, she pressed her lips to his hand.
> Church-Slavonic «уста» (instrumental): «приникла устами к руке» ('pressed her lips to his hand'): «уста» ('lips/mouth') is the elevated Church-Slavonic word for «губы», here in the instrumental — markedly poetic.
> Infinitives of purpose: The bare infinitives «обнять… сжать… сказать» answer «для чего пришла?» ('why did I come?') — strings of purpose infinitives conveying Katya's rush of motive.

Слезы хлынули из ее глаз.  
Tears gushed from her eyes.

Алеша стоял безмолвный и смущенный; он никак не ожидал того, что увидел.  
Alyosha stood speechless and abashed; he had in no way expected what he was seeing.
> Emphatic double negation «никак не»: «он никак не ожидал» ('he in no way expected'): the negative adverb «никак» obligatorily co-occurs with the verbal negation «не» — Russian piles up negatives for emphasis.

— Любовь прошла, Митя! — начала опять Катя, — но дорого до боли мне то, что прошло.  
"Love is gone, Mitya!" Katya began again, "but what is gone is achingly dear to me.
> Dative experiencer + «то, что»: «дорого… мне то, что прошло» ('what is past is dear to me'): a dative experiencer «мне» with predicative «дорого», and the correlative «то, что» heading a noun-clause subject.

Это узнай навек.  
Know that forever.

Но теперь, на одну минутку, пусть будет то, что могло бы быть, — с искривленною улыбкой пролепетала она, опять радостно смотря ему в глаза.  
But now, for one little minute, let there be what might have been," she stammered with a twisted smile, again looking joyfully into his eyes.
> «пусть» imperative + «бы» conditional: Two irrealis devices meet: «пусть будет» ('let there be') is a third-person imperative, and «могло бы быть» ('what might have been') is a past + «бы» counterfactual.

— И ты теперь любишь другую, и я другого люблю, а все-таки тебя вечно буду любить, а ты меня, знал ли ты это?  
"And now you love another, and I love another, and yet I shall love you forever, and you me — did you know that?
> Compound future + «ли»: «вечно буду любить» is the imperfective compound future ('I shall go on loving'); the tag «знал ли ты это?» closes with the interrogative particle «ли».

Слышишь, люби меня, всю твою жизнь люби! — воскликнула она с каким-то почти угрожающим дрожанием в голосе.  
Do you hear, love me, love me your whole life long!" she cried with a kind of almost menacing tremor in her voice.
> Imperfective imperative «люби»: «люби меня, всю жизнь люби!» — the imperfective imperative commands an ongoing, lifelong state rather than a single act; perfective «полюби» would mean 'come to love'.

— Буду любить и… знаешь, Катя, — переводя дух на каждом слове, заговорил и Митя, — знаешь, я тебя, пять дней тому, в тот вечер любил…  
"I shall love you, and... you know, Katya," Mitya too began to speak, drawing breath at every word, "you know, five days ago, that evening, I loved you...
> Imperfective gerund «переводя»: «переводя дух на каждом слове» ('catching his breath at every word') is an imperfective gerund of manner accompanying «заговорил».

Когда ты упала, и тебя понесли…  
When you collapsed and they carried you out...

Всю жизнь!  
All my life!

Так и будет, так вечно будет…  
And so it will be, so it will be forever..."

Так оба они лепетали друг другу речи почти бессмысленные и исступленные, может быть даже и неправдивые, но в эту-то минуту всё было правдой, и сами они верили себе беззаветно.  
So the two of them babbled to each other speeches that were almost senseless and frantic, perhaps not even truthful, but in that very minute it was all true, and they themselves believed in what they said without reserve.
> Dative governed by «верить»: «сами они верили себе» ('they believed themselves'): «верить» governs the dative, here the reflexive «себе», not the accusative.

— Катя, — воскликнул вдруг Митя, — веришь, что я убил?  
"Katya," Mitya cried out suddenly, "do you believe that I killed him?

Знаю, что теперь не веришь, но тогда… когда показывала… Неужто, неужто верила!  
I know you don't believe it now, but then... when you were testifying... Surely, surely you didn't believe it!"
> Imperfective «показывать» = to testify: «когда показывала» ('when you were testifying'): the imperfective «показывать» (a legal sense, 'give testimony') stresses the drawn-out act on the stand, against perfective «показать».
> «неужто» — surely not?: «Неужто… верила!» is an archaic-colloquial variant of «неужели», an incredulous particle: 'you can't possibly have believed it!'.

— И тогда не верила!  
"Not even then did I believe it!
> Negation across tenses: «И тогда не верила! Никогда не верила!» — verbal «не» plus the negative adverb «никогда» build the categorical double negative Russian requires.

Никогда не верила!  
I never believed it!

Ненавидела тебя и вдруг себя уверила, вот на тот миг… Когда показывала… уверила и верила… а когда кончила показывать, тотчас опять перестала верить.  
I hated you, and suddenly I convinced myself, just for that one moment... When I was testifying... I convinced myself and believed it... but the moment I was done testifying, at once I stopped believing it again.
> Perfective/imperfective pair «уверить/верить»: «уверила себя… верила… перестала верить»: perfective «уверила» ('convinced', one act) sits against imperfective «верила» ('went on believing'), tracing the rise and collapse of her conviction.

Знай это всё.  
Know all of this.

Я забыла, что я себя казнить пришла! — с каким-то вдруг совсем новым выражением проговорила она, совсем непохожим на недавний, сейчашний любовный лепет.  
I had forgotten that I came to punish myself!" she said with some altogether new expression, quite unlike the loving babble of a moment before.
> Reflexive pronoun «себя»: «я себя казнить пришла» ('I came to punish myself'): the reflexive pronoun «себя» is the object, declining for case but never for person — it always points back to the subject.

— Тяжело тебе, женщина! — как-то совсем безудержно вырвалось вдруг у Мити.  
"It's hard for you, woman!" broke suddenly and quite uncontrollably from Mitya.
> Dative-subject + nominative of address: «Тяжело тебе» ('it is hard for you') is again the impersonal dative-experiencer pattern; «женщина» is a bare nominative used as a vocative form of address.

— Пусти меня, — прошептала она, — я еще приду, теперь тяжело!..  
"Let me go," she whispered, "I'll come again, it's hard for me now!.."
> Imperative «пусти»: «Пусти» is the singular imperative of perfective «пустить» (to let go, release), with «меня» as its accusative object. The single perfective command frames the release as one decisive act she begs for.
> Impersonal «тяжело»: «Тяжело» is an invariable neuter predicative — here a subjectless state, 'it is hard / oppressive'. With an implied dative («мне»), it is the experiencer-first construction Russian uses for inner weight where English needs a subject.
> Perfective future «приду»: «Приду» — the conjugated form of perfective «прийти» (to arrive) — carries future meaning with no auxiliary: 'I will come (and arrive).' It is a prefixed verb of motion, the perfective partner of imperfective «приходить».

Она поднялась было с места, но вдруг громко вскрикнула и отшатнулась назад.  
She had begun to rise from her place, but suddenly she gave a loud cry and recoiled backward.
> The particle «было»: «Было» after a perfective past marks an action that was begun or set in motion but then interrupted or undone — 'she had started to rise (but…)'. The very next clause cancels it. This is a distinctly literary, untranslatable nuance.
> Chain of perfectives: «Вскрикнула» (gave a cry) and «отшатнулась» (recoiled) are perfective pasts that move the action forward as two sudden, completed events — against the imperfective background of the scene.
> Reflexive «-ся» of bodily recoil: «Отшатнуться» carries the reflexive clitic «-ся» («-сь» here after a vowel), marking a self-directed, intransitive movement of the body — she flings herself back. Such «-ся» verbs of involuntary motion fill scenes of shock.

В комнату внезапно, хотя и совсем тихо, вошла Грушенька.  
Grushenka had come into the room abruptly, though quite quietly.
> Subject held to the end: The clause front-loads the setting and manner («В комнату… внезапно… тихо») and saves the subject «Грушенька» for last — the new, dramatic information. Free case-marked word order lets Russian land the name as the punch.
> Accusative of motion-toward: «В комнату» (into the room) uses «в» + accusative because there is movement into a space; the same phrase with the prepositional, «в комнате», would mean static location. «Вошла» is a prefixed perfective of motion.

Никто ее не ожидал.  
No one had expected her.
> Negative concord: Russian requires double negation: the «ни»-pronoun «никто» (nobody) still needs «не» on the verb. Three-word stretches like «никто… не…» express a single English negative — 'no one expected her.'

Катя стремительно шагнула к дверям, но, поравнявшись с Грушенькой, вдруг остановилась, вся побелела как мел, и тихо, почти шепотом, простонала ей:  
Katya strode swiftly toward the door, but on coming level with Grushenka she suddenly stopped, went white as chalk all over, and softly, almost in a whisper, moaned to her:
> Perfective gerund «поравнявшись»: «Поравнявшись» is a perfective adverbial participle (деепричастие) in «-вшись»: 'having come level (with)'. It sets a prior, completed circumstance sharing Katya's subject, before the main verbs «остановилась… простонала». The «-сь» is the reflexive clitic.
> «вся» — agreement and idiom: «Вся» (the whole of her, all over) is the feminine form of «весь», agreeing with Katya; «побелела как мел» = 'went white as chalk', a fixed simile. The perfective «побелела» marks the completed change of color.
> Dative of the addressee: «Ей» (to her) is the dative — the person spoken to. Russian routinely marks the recipient of speech in the dative even with vivid verbs like «простонать» (to moan out).
> «стремительно» — headlong: A bookish adverb meaning 'impetuously, headlong, with a rush'. Dostoevsky uses it (and «стремительно обратился» below) to render sudden, almost violent movement of body or will.

— Простите меня!  
"Forgive me!"
> Polite imperative «простите»: «Простите» is the «-те» (plural/polite) imperative of perfective «простить» (to forgive), with accusative «меня». The polite form marks the formal «вы» distance between Katya and Grushenka even in pleading.

Та посмотрела на нее в упор и, переждав мгновение, ядовитым, отравленным злобой голосом ответила:  
The other stared point-blank at her and, after a moment's pause, answered in a venomous voice poisoned with malice:
> «Та» as 'the other one': The demonstrative «та» (that one, fem.) is used pronominally to track the second of two women — Grushenka — without naming her. Russian often uses «тот/та» this way to mark a shift of reference between two parties.
> Perfective gerund «переждав»: «Переждав» is a perfective past gerund in «-в»: 'having waited out (a moment)'. The prefix «пере-» gives 'wait through / let pass'. It packs a prior completed action into one word before «ответила».
> Instrumental of manner: «Голосом» and its modifiers stand in the instrumental — the case of means/manner: she answered 'with a venomous voice'. «Отравленным злобой» is a past passive participle ('poisoned by malice'), its agent «злобой» also instrumental.
> «в упор» — point-blank: A fixed adverbial phrase, 'point-blank, straight in the face'. «Посмотреть в упор» is to fix someone with an unflinching, confrontational stare.

— Злы мы, мать, с тобой!  
"We're wicked, you and I, my dear!
> Short adjective «злы», fronted: «Злы» is the short (predicative) form of «злой» (wicked, plural). Short adjectives can only predicate, and here it is fronted for force: 'Wicked, we are.' The bare short form sounds blunt and absolute — fitting Grushenka's verdict.
> «мать» as folksy address: Literally 'mother', but here a coarse, intimate term of address between women — roughly 'my dear, my girl'. It is condescending and familiar at once, marking Grushenka's earthy, lower-class register against the aristocratic Katya.

Обе злы!  
Both of us wicked!
> «обе» + short adjective: «Обе» is the feminine form of the numeral 'both'; «злы» repeats the short predicative adjective. The clipped verbless line — 'Both wicked!' — relies on the zero copula of the Russian present.

Где уж нам простить, тебе да мне?  
How are the likes of us to forgive, you and me?
> Dative + infinitive of (im)possibility: «Нам… простить» is the dative-subject pattern: the dative «нам / тебе да мне» plus a bare infinitive expresses what is (not) possible for someone — 'how are we to forgive?'. With «где уж» it becomes a rhetorical 'as if we could!'
> The particle «уж»: Here «уж» is not 'already' but the emphatic modal particle that sharpens the rhetorical despair: «где уж нам» ≈ 'how on earth could the likes of us…'. It colours the line with bitter self-deprecation.
> Folksy «да» for «и»: «Да» here is the colloquial, folk-flavored coordinator 'and' (= «и»): 'you and me'. It belongs to Grushenka's plain-spoken peasant register, as does the whole rhythm of the line.

Вот спаси его, и всю жизнь молиться на тебя буду.  
Save him, and I'll pray for you all my life."
> Imperative as condition: «Спаси» is the perfective imperative of «спасти» (save). Coupled with «Вот» and the following clause, the command works as a hypothesis — 'just save him, and (then)…' — a common Russian use of the imperative to mean 'if you save him'.
> Compound imperfective future: «Буду молиться» (here split by word order, «молиться… буду») is the compound future: «буду» + imperfective infinitive, naming an ongoing future action — 'I will (keep) praying'. The imperfective fits 'all my life'.
> «молиться на» — to worship: «Молиться» normally takes the dative ('to pray to'), but «молиться на кого-то» with «на» + accusative means to all but worship a person, to revere them like an icon. Grushenka offers Katya near-religious devotion if she saves Mitya.

— А простить не хочешь! — прокричал Митя Грушеньке, с безумным упреком.  
"But you won't forgive!" Mitya cried out to Grushenka, with mad reproach.
> Contrastive «а» + negated «не хочешь» + infinitive: The line opens on contrastive «а» ('and yet, but'). «Простить не хочешь» is a negated modal «не хочешь» governing the bare infinitive «простить» ('you won't forgive') — there is no nominal object and no genitive here, just plain verbal negation.
> Dative addressee «Грушеньке»: «Грушеньке» is dative — the one shouted to. The name shows the diminutive «-еньк-» suffix («Груша → Грушенька»), an affectionate-familiar form; declined here, it ends in dative «-е».

— Будь покойна, спасу его тебе! — быстро прошептала Катя и выбежала из комнаты.  
"Rest easy, I'll save him for you!" Katya whispered rapidly and ran out of the room.
> Imperative «будь» + short adjective: «Будь» is the imperative of «быть» (to be); «покойна» is the short feminine adjective 'calm, at peace'. Together «будь покойна» is a set phrase, 'rest easy, don't worry'. The short adjective is required as a predicate after «будь».
> Perfective future + dative of interest: «Спасу» is the perfective future ('I will save him'). «Тебе» is a dative of interest — 'for you, for your sake'. Russian uses the bare dative to mark the person on whose behalf an act is done.
> Prefixed motion «вы-» + «из» + genitive: «Выбежала» (ran out) is a perfective of motion with «вы-» (out). It pairs naturally with «из комнаты», where «из» governs the genitive to mean 'out of'.

— И ты могла не простить ей, после того как она сама же сказала тебе: «Прости»? — горько воскликнул опять Митя.  
"And you could refuse to forgive her, after she herself said 'Forgive me' to you?" Mitya exclaimed again, bitterly.
> Modal «могла» + negated infinitive: «Могла» (could, fem. past of «мочь») governs the negated perfective infinitive «не простить» — 'could refuse to forgive'. «Ей» is the dative object of «простить». The whole is an incredulous rhetorical reproach.
> «после того как» + emphatic «сама же»: «После того как» is the subordinating phrase 'after (the moment) that…'. «Сама же» stacks the intensifier «сама» ('she herself') with the particle «же» for insistence — 'when she herself, of all people, said…'.

— Митя, не смей ее упрекать, права не имеешь! — горячо крикнул на брата Алеша.  
"Mitya, don't you dare reproach her, you've no right to!" Alyosha shouted hotly at his brother.
> Negative imperative «не смей»: «Не смей» is the imperative of «сметь» (to dare) — 'don't you dare'. With an imperfective infinitive («упрекать») the negated command forbids the very attempt. Imperfective is the norm for prohibitions.
> Genitive of negation «права»: «Не имеешь права» — the object of the negated «иметь» shifts to genitive «права» (of «право», right). 'You have no right' is built on this genitive-of-negation pattern. Word order fronts «права» for emphasis.

— Уста ее говорили гордые, а не сердце, — с каким-то омерзением произнесла Грушенька.  
"It was her proud lips that spoke, not her heart," Grushenka brought out with a kind of loathing.
> Splayed word order for antithesis: The adjective «гордые» (proud) is split off from its noun «уста» and held back to balance against «а не сердце» ('and not the heart'). This inverted, almost biblical arrangement heightens the antithesis of lips versus heart.
> «уста» — lips (elevated): «Уста» is the high, Church-Slavonic / poetic word for 'lips, mouth' (everyday Russian is «губы», «рот»). It carries a solemn, scriptural weight — Grushenka's plain feeling rises into near-liturgical diction.
> «омерзение» — loathing: A strong bookish noun for revulsion, disgust, loathing — stronger than «отвращение». In the instrumental «с… омерзением» it colours how Grushenka brings the words out.

— Избавит тебя — всё прощу…  
"If she delivers you, I'll forgive everything..."
> Two perfective futures, conditional: Both verbs are perfective futures: «избавит» ('she will deliver') and «прощу» ('I'll forgive'). Set side by side with no «если», the first reads as a condition — 'if she delivers you, I'll forgive everything.'

Она замолкла, как бы что задавив в душе.  
She fell silent, as though stifling something in her soul.
> Gerund «задавив» + «как бы»: «Задавив» is a perfective gerund ('having crushed / stifled'). «Как бы» ('as if, as it were') softens it into a simile of attendant action — 'as though stifling something'. «Что» here is the indefinite 'something'.

Она еще не могла опомниться.  
She still could not come to herself.
> «-ся» verb «опомниться»: «Опомниться» (to come to oneself, recover one's wits) exists only in the reflexive «-ся» form — a change-of-state intransitive. With «не могла» it states she could not yet collect herself.

Вошла она, как оказалось потом, совсем нечаянно, вовсе ничего не подозревая и не ожидая встретить, что встретила.  
She had come in, as it turned out afterward, quite by chance, suspecting nothing at all and not expecting to meet what she met.
> Verb-first + parenthetical: The sentence opens with the verb «вошла» before its subject «она», throwing weight onto the action, then folds in the parenthetical «как оказалось потом» ('as it turned out afterward') — typical of Dostoevsky's retrospective narration.
> Imperfective gerunds + negative concord: «Подозревая» and «ожидая» are imperfective present gerunds in «-я», naming simultaneous states ('suspecting… expecting…'). «Ничего… не» is negative concord: the «ни»-word plus «не» on each gerund.
> «нечаянно» — by chance: 'Accidentally, inadvertently, by chance'. The word stresses that Grushenka's entrance was wholly unintended — she stumbled into the scene.

— Алеша, беги за ней! — стремительно обратился к брату Митя, — скажи ей… не знаю что… не дай ей так уйти!  
"Alyosha, run after her!" Mitya turned impetuously to his brother. "Tell her... I don't know what... don't let her go off like this!"
> Imperative «беги» + «за» + instrumental: «Беги» is the imperative of «бежать» (run). «За ней» uses «за» + instrumental to mean 'after / in pursuit of her' — the same «за + instr.» recurs in «побежал за Катей», «нагнал».
> Negative imperative + dative: «Не дай» (don't let, imperative of «дать») governs the dative «ей» plus the infinitive «уйти» — 'don't let her leave (like this)'. «Уйти» is a prefixed perfective of motion, 'go away'.

— Приду к тебе перед вечером! — крикнул Алеша и побежал за Катей.  
"I'll come to you before evening!" Alyosha cried, and ran off after Katya.
> Perfective future + «к» + dative: «Приду» is the perfective future of «прийти» ('I'll come'). «К тебе» uses «к» + dative for motion 'to (a person)'. «Перед вечером» = 'toward / before evening', «перед» + instrumental.
> Prefixed motion «по-»: «Побежал» — perfective «по-» on «бежать» — marks the onset of running, 'set off running'. «За Катей» (instrumental) gives the goal of pursuit, 'after Katya'.

Он нагнал ее уже вне больничной ограды.  
He overtook her already beyond the hospital fence.
> «вне» + genitive: «Вне» (outside, beyond) governs the genitive: «больничной ограды» (of the hospital fence). «Больничной» is an adjective agreeing in feminine genitive with «ограды».

Она шла скоро, спешила, но как только нагнал ее Алеша, быстро проговорила ему:  
She was walking fast, hurrying, but the moment Alyosha caught up with her she said to him rapidly:
> Imperfective past for ongoing motion: «Шла» (was walking) and «спешила» (was hurrying) are imperfective pasts giving the continuous background; «шла» is the unidirectional motion verb «идти», fitting a single onward course.
> «как только» + perfective: «Как только» ('as soon as, the moment') introduces a temporal clause; the perfective «нагнал» (caught up, completed) marks the instant that triggers the main verb «проговорила». Verb-before-subject order keeps the focus on the act.

— Нет, перед этой не могу казнить себя!  
"No, before that woman I cannot punish myself!
> «перед этой» + reflexive «себя»: «Перед этой» (before this woman) is «перед» + instrumental of the demonstrative «эта», used scornfully for Grushenka. «Казнить себя» pairs the verb with the reflexive pronoun «себя» ('punish myself'), object distinct from the verbal «-ся».
> «казнить» — to punish / torment: «Казнить» literally means to execute or put to death; «казнить себя» is an intense idiom, 'to punish/torture oneself, to mortify oneself'. Katya frames her plea for forgiveness as an act of self-mortification.

Я сказала ей «прости меня», потому что хотела казнить себя до конца.  
I said 'forgive me' to her because I wanted to punish myself to the very end.
> «потому что» causal clause: «Потому что» ('because') opens the reason clause. «Хотела казнить» = imperfective past 'wanted' + infinitive; «до конца» ('to the end') with «до» + genitive marks the limit she drove herself to.

Она не простила…  
She did not forgive me...
> Perfective negated past: «Не простила» is the negated perfective past of «простить» — 'she did not forgive (and so the act never happened)'. Perfective under negation reports a completed event's non-occurrence.

Люблю ее за это! — искаженным голосом прибавила Катя, и глаза ее сверкнули дикою злобой.  
I love her for that!" Katya added in a distorted voice, and her eyes flashed with a wild malice.
> «за» + accusative of cause: «За это» (for this) uses «за» + accusative to give the ground of an emotion — 'I love her for that'. The dropped subject «я» is recoverable from «люблю».
> Archaic instrumental «-ою»: «Дикою злобой» = 'with wild malice', instrumental of manner. The feminine adjective ending «-ою» (for modern «-ой») is the older, bookish-poetic variant common in 19th-century prose.
> «искажённый» — distorted: «Искажённый» (distorted, contorted) is a past passive participle from «исказить». 'In a distorted voice' conveys that emotion has warped Katya's very speech, instrumental of manner «голосом».

— Брат совсем не ожидал, — пробормотал было Алеша, — он был уверен, что она не придет…  
"My brother hadn't expected it at all," Alyosha started to murmur, "he was sure she wouldn't come..."
> «было» — an interrupted start: Again «было» after the perfective «пробормотал» marks an action begun but cut short — Alyosha 'started to murmur' before being interrupted. The particle is invariable and signals a thwarted attempt.
> Short adjective «уверен» + «что»-clause: «Уверен» is the short masculine adjective 'sure, certain', predicating with the dropped «был». It heads a «что»-clause of reported fact; «не придёт» is the negated perfective future, 'she would not come'.

— Без сомнения.  
"No doubt of it.
> «без сомнения» — no doubt: A fixed phrase, 'without doubt, no doubt of it', «без» + genitive «сомнения». Katya's curt agreement closes the topic before she abruptly changes it.

Оставим это, — отрезала она.  
Let's leave that," she cut him off.
> First-person plural imperative «оставим»: «Оставим» is the conjugated perfective form used hortatively — 'let's leave that'. Russian forms the 'let's …' exhortation simply with the perfective first-plural, no «давайте» needed.
> «отрезать» — to cut off (a remark): Literally 'to cut off, slice off'; figuratively «отрезать» of speech means to say something curtly and finally, snapping off further talk. The verb itself enacts Katya cutting Alyosha short.

— Слушайте: я с вами туда на похороны идти теперь не могу.  
"Listen: I can't go there with you to the funeral now.
> Polite imperative «слушайте»: «Слушайте» — imperfective imperative of «слушать» with the polite «-те» — is the conversational 'listen here, look'. The «вы»-form keeps the formal distance between Katya and Alyosha.
> Imperfective infinitive of inability: «Не могу… идти» — negated «мочь» plus the imperfective infinitive «идти» (a unidirectional motion verb) — states 'I can't go (there) now', a single intended journey she refuses.

Я послала им на гробик цветов.  
I sent them flowers for the little coffin.
> Partitive genitive «цветов»: «Цветов» is genitive plural after «послала» in a partitive sense — 'sent some flowers'. «Им» is the dative recipient, «на гробик» the purpose ('for the coffin'), «на» + accusative.
> Diminutive «гробик»: «Гробик» is the diminutive of «гроб» (coffin): 'little coffin'. The suffix «-ик» is not playful here but tender and grievous — it marks the coffin as a child's, heavy with pity.

Деньги еще есть у них, кажется.  
They still have money, I think.
> «у них есть» possession: Russian renders 'they have' as «у них есть» — «у» + genitive «них» of the possessor, with «есть» ('there is'). «Деньги» (money, a plural-only noun) is the grammatical subject. «Кажется» softens it to 'I think'.

Если надо будет, скажите, что в будущем я никогда их не оставлю…  
If need be, tell them that in the future I shall never abandon them...
> Impersonal «надо будет»: «Надо будет» is the future of the impersonal necessity word «надо» ('it will be necessary'), a subjectless construction. With «если» it sets the condition — 'if (it) need be'.
> Negative concord + perfective future: «Никогда… не оставлю» chains the «ни»-adverb «никогда» (never) with «не» on the verb — obligatory negative concord. «Оставлю» is the perfective future, a firm 'I shall never abandon them'.

Ну, теперь оставьте меня, оставьте, пожалуйста.  
Now, leave me, leave me, please.
> Repeated polite imperative: «Оставьте» — perfective polite imperative of «оставить» (to leave) — is doubled for urgency: 'leave me, leave me'. The repetition with «пожалуйста» conveys Katya's frayed, pleading exhaustion.

Вы уж туда опоздали, к поздней обедне звонят…  
You're already late for there — they're ringing for the late mass...
> Particle «уж» + perfective «опоздали»: «Опоздали» is the perfective past 'you've (already) been late / missed it'. «Уж» is the emphatic particle reinforcing the accomplished fact — 'you're already too late as it is'.
> Impersonal «звонят» + «к» + dative: «Звонят» is a third-plural verb used impersonally — 'they're ringing / the bells are ringing', no named subject. «К поздней обедне» ('for the late mass') is «к» + dative, here marking the service the ringing summons to.

Оставьте меня, пожалуйста!  
Leave me, please!"
> Closing imperative: The chapter shuts on the same polite imperative «оставьте меня» ('leave me'), now standing alone — its bare insistence ends the exchange. The perfective frames her dismissal as final.
---

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.