# The Brothers Karamazov, III. The Second Marriage and the Second Family

Братья Карамазовы · Fyodor Dostoevsky · Book One: The History of a Family

Source: https://1732studios.com/books/karamazov/second-marriage. Data: https://1732studios.com/books/karamazov/second-marriage.json.


Федор Павлович, спровадив с рук четырехлетнего Митю, очень скоро после того женился во второй раз.  
Fyodor Pavlovitch, having gotten four-year-old Mitya off his hands, married for the second time very soon afterward.
> A perfective gerund opens the sentence: «спровадив» is a perfective past gerund («деепричастие») of «спровадить» (to get rid of), naming a completed action prior to the main verb: 'having gotten [Mitya] off his hands, he then married.' It shares the subject Fyodor Pavlovitch and compresses a whole clause into one word — a hallmark of literary narration.
> «спровадить с рук» — to palm off: Colloquial and faintly contemptuous: «спровадить» is to send someone packing, to be rid of them, and «с рук» (literally 'off the hands') frames a child as an inconvenience offloaded — the narrator's dry judgement of Fyodor Pavlovitch's fatherhood.
> Reflexive «-ся» and the perfective event: «женился» (married) carries the reflexive clitic «-ся»; «жениться» is used of a man taking a wife. It is perfective here — a single completed event that moves the narrative forward, against the imperfective background of the surrounding description.

Второй брак этот продолжался лет восемь.  
This second marriage lasted some eight years.
> Inverted numeral = 'about eight': Putting the noun before the numeral — «лет восемь» instead of «восемь лет» — signals approximation, 'some eight years, about eight.' «лет» is the genitive plural required after numerals of five and above.
> Imperfective for duration: «продолжался» (lasted, went on) is imperfective with reflexive «-ся», viewing the marriage as an extended process across the eight years rather than a single bounded event.

Взял он эту вторую супругу свою, тоже очень молоденькую особу, Софью Ивановну, из другой губернии, в которую заехал по одному мелкоподрядному делу, с каким-то жидком в компании.  
He took this second wife of his, also a very young woman, Sofya Ivanovna, from another province, into which he had traveled on some petty contracting business, in partnership with a little Jew.
> Verb-first word order for narrative drive: The sentence opens with the verb «взял» (took) before the subject «он», a marked inversion that throws weight onto the act and gives the storytelling a brisk, oral momentum. Russian's case endings free word order to serve emphasis rather than grammar.
> Reflexive possessive «свою»: «свою» (one's own) refers back to the clause's own subject — his own wife — where «его» would point to someone else's. The postposed order «супругу свою» (wife his-own) is a slightly bookish, rhythmic inversion.
> Relative «который» taking its own case: «в которую» (into which) agrees with its antecedent «губернии» (province) in feminine gender and number, but takes the accusative governed by «в» for motion-toward — its case is set by its role in the relative clause, not by the antecedent.
> «молоденькую» — the tender diminutive: Not just «молодую» (young) but «молоденькую», with the affectionate-diminutive «-еньк-» suffix: 'a very young little thing.' It colours the wife with a note of fragile youth — pointed, given the predator she is married to.
> «жидок» — a slur, diminished: «жид» is a pejorative word for a Jew (the neutral term is «еврей»); «жидок» adds a belittling diminutive «-ок», 'some little Jew.' The casual contempt is Fyodor Pavlovitch's milieu, reported by the narrator; our English keeps the period flavour as 'a little Jew.' «каким-то» ('some sort of') deepens the dismissive vagueness.
> «мелкоподрядное дело» — petty contracting: A compound of «мелкий» (petty, small) and «подряд» (a contract for work or supply): some small-time contracting venture. The word casts Fyodor Pavlovitch's money-making as grubby and minor, matching his character.

Федор Павлович хотя и кутил, и пил, и дебоширил, но никогда не переставал заниматься помещением своего капитала и устраивал делишки свои всегда удачно, хотя, конечно, почти всегда подловато.  
Though Fyodor Pavlovitch caroused, and drank, and lived riotously, he never once left off seeing to the placing of his capital, and he always managed his little affairs successfully, if, of course, almost always somewhat shabbily.
> «хотя… но» concession and a triple imperfective: «хотя… но» ('although… yet') frames the concession. The three imperfective past verbs «кутил, и пил, и дебоширил» (caroused, drank, brawled) name habitual, ongoing behaviour — repeated states, not single acts — piled up by repeated «и» for rhythmic emphasis.
> Negative concord with «никогда… не»: Russian requires double negation: «никогда» (never) and the verbal «не» both appear — 'never not-ceased' for English 'never ceased.' The two negatives make one negation.
> «делишки» — shady little affairs: «делишки» is the pejorative diminutive of «дела» (affairs), formed with «-ишк-»: not honest 'business' but petty, slightly disreputable dealings. It primes the closing word «подловато».
> «подловато» — a little on the low side: From «подлый» (base, vile), softened by the prefix «под-» and the hedging suffix «-овато»: 'somewhat shabbily / a bit underhandedly.' The diminished form is wry understatement — his dealings were not merely shabby but reliably, characteristically low.

Софья Ивановна была из «сироток», безродная с детства, дочь какого-то темного дьякона, взросшая в богатом доме своей благодетельницы, воспитательницы и мучительницы, знатной генеральши-старухи, вдовы генерала Ворохова.  
Sofya Ivanovna came of the "little orphans," without kin from childhood, the daughter of some obscure deacon, and had grown up in the wealthy house of her benefactress, governess, and tormentor — a distinguished old general's widow, the widow of General Vorohov.
> «сиротка» — the little orphan: «сиротка» is the affectionate-pitying diminutive of «сирота» (orphan). In quotation marks it names a recognised social category — charity-house orphan girls — and carries the narrator's tenderness toward Sofya.
> «безродная» — without kin: A bookish adjective from «без» (without) + «род» (family, lineage): having no family, no stock, nobody behind her. In a society organised by family standing, this is near-total social defencelessness.
> Past active participle «взросшая»: «взросшая» (having grown up) is a past active participle, an adjective formed from a verb that replaces a «который»-clause ('who had grown up') and agrees with «Софья Ивановна» in feminine singular. The form «взросший» is archaic/bookish for «выросший».
> Three feminine «-ница» nouns in a row: The agent-suffix «-ница» builds the feminine triad 'benefactress, governess (rearer), and tormentress' — «благодетельница / воспитательница / мучительница». Stacked, they make a bitter crescendo: the same woman is all three, kindness and cruelty fused.

Подробностей не знаю, но слышал лишь то, что будто воспитанницу, кроткую, незлобивую и безответную, раз сняли с петли, которую она привесила на гвозде в чулане, — до того тяжело было ей переносить своенравие и вечные попреки этой, по-видимому не злой, старухи, но бывшей лишь нестерпимейшею самодуркой от праздности.  
I do not know the particulars, but I have only heard that the ward — a meek, gentle, and uncomplaining girl — was once taken down from a noose she had hung on a nail in the storeroom, so unbearable had she found the willfulness and the everlasting reproaches of this old woman, who seemed not to be malicious but was simply the most insufferable petty tyrant out of sheer idleness.
> Genitive of negation: Under negation the object «подробности» (particulars) shifts from accusative to genitive «подробностей» — 'I do not know the particulars.' Fronting it before the negated verb also throws the topic forward.
> «будто» — reported, unverified: «будто» ('as if, supposedly') flags the report as hearsay the narrator cannot vouch for; paired with «слышал лишь то, что» it keeps the gruesome anecdote at one remove. «сняли» is an impersonal third-person plural ('they took her down') with no named subject.
> Three Christian virtues of meekness: «кроткая» (meek), «незлобивая» (free of malice, 'not-angry'), «безответная» (uncomplaining, who never answers back) form a triad of gospel gentleness. «незлобивый» and «безответный» are bookish negative compounds; the cluster paints Sofya as a Dostoevskian holy victim.
> Dative-subject impersonal: «ей тяжело было»: There is no nominative subject: the sufferer stands in the dative «ей» and the predicate is the impersonal «тяжело было» ('it was hard for her [to bear]'). This experiencer-first construction, so characteristic of Russian inner life, makes the burden something done to her.
> «самодурка» — a petty tyrant: The feminine of «самодур» (from «сам» 'self' + «дурь» 'folly'): one who rules others by sheer arbitrary whim. It is a deeply Russian social type — the capricious domestic despot — and «нестерпимейшею самодуркой от праздности» calls her the most insufferable such tyrant 'out of idleness.'
> Bookish superlative in «-ейш-» + instrumental: «нестерпимейшею» is the literary superlative suffix «-ейш-» on «нестерпимый» (unbearable) — 'most insufferable.' Its instrumental ending «-ею» (the archaic long form of «-ой») agrees with «самодуркой», the instrumental predicate after the participle «бывшей».

Федор Павлович предложил свою руку, о нем справились и его прогнали, и вот тут-то он опять, как и в первом браке, предложил сиротке увоз.  
Fyodor Pavlovitch offered his hand; inquiries were made about him and he was sent packing, and so once again, just as in his first marriage, he proposed to the little orphan that she elope with him.
> «предложить руку» — to offer one's hand: The set idiom for proposing marriage: «предложить руку (и сердце)», to offer one's hand. The bare, formal phrase here makes Fyodor Pavlovitch's overture sound like the business transaction it really is.
> Impersonal plural 'they': Both verbs lack a stated subject: «справились» (made inquiries) and «прогнали» (drove him off) are third-person plural used impersonally — 'inquiries were made… he was sent packing.' Russian often expresses an unspecified agent this way, where English reaches for the passive.
> Emphatic «тут-то»: The clitic «-то» fastens onto «тут» (here/then) to spotlight the moment — 'and it was just then that he…' Combined with «вот» it gives the storyteller's pointing gesture, marking a known, pivotal turn.
> «увоз» — elopement by carrying off: Literally 'a carrying-away,' the noun of «увезти». An «увоз» was a runaway marriage in which the suitor spirits the bride away — here «предложил сиротке увоз», 'proposed an elopement to the little orphan.' The word recurs as a sinister leitmotif of Fyodor Pavlovitch's two marriages.

Очень, очень может быть, что и она даже не пошла бы за него ни за что, если б узнала о нем своевременно побольше подробностей.  
It may very, very well be that she would not have gone with him for anything on earth, had she learned a little more about him in good time.
> Counterfactual conditional with «бы / если б»: The irrealis is built from past-tense verbs plus «бы»: «не пошла бы» ('would not have gone') in the main clause, «если б узнала» ('if she had learned') in the «если бы» clause, here clipped to «если б». It frames a past that never happened.
> «ни за что» — 'not for anything': An emphatic negative idiom built on intensifying «ни»: 'on no account, not for anything on earth.' It strengthens the already-negated «не пошла бы», a textbook case of Russian negative concord.
> «побольше» — a softened 'a bit more': The prefix «по-» on the comparative «больше» means 'somewhat more, a little more': «побольше подробностей» = 'a little more in the way of particulars.' «своевременно» ('in good time, timely') adds the bitter point — had she only known sooner.

Но дело было в другой губернии; да и что могла понимать шестнадцатилетняя девочка, кроме того, что лучше в реку, чем оставаться у благодетельницы.  
But the affair was in another province; and besides, what could a girl of sixteen understand, except that it was better to throw herself into the river than to stay on with her benefactress?
> Rhetorical question with imperfective «понимать»: A rhetorical question — 'what could she understand?' — expecting the answer 'nothing.' The imperfective infinitive «понимать» (to understand, as a faculty/process) after «могла» views comprehension as an ongoing capacity she lacked.
> Connective «да и»: Sentence-initial «да и» is a colloquial additive linker, 'and besides, and what's more.' It strings the narrator's reasoning onward conversationally, very much the storytelling voice of this chronicler-narrator.
> «лучше в реку» — better into the river: An elliptical phrase with the verb of motion suppressed: 'better [to throw oneself] into the river.' The bare «в реку» (accusative of direction) leaves the suicide unspoken yet unmistakable — drowning as the orphan's only imagined escape.

Так и променяла бедняжка благодетельницу на благодетеля.  
And so the poor thing exchanged a benefactress for a benefactor.
> A bitter pun in matched accusatives: Dostoevsky pairs «благодетельница» (a female benefactor) with «благодетель» (a male benefactor) — the same root, but feminine versus masculine. The girl trades one 'benefactor' for another, which we render 'a benefactress for a benefactor.' The accusative endings «-ницу» and «-еля» mark both as direct objects of «променяла» (exchanged).
> Resigned «так и»: «так и» plus a perfective verb gives a tone of inevitable outcome — 'and so she just went and exchanged…' — closing the little tragic syllogism with a shrug. «променяла» is perfective, the single decisive act.
> «бедняжка» — poor little thing: The pitying diminutive of «бедняга/бедный» (poor one), with the soft «-жк-» suffix: 'the poor little thing.' The narrator's compassion is built right into the word.

Федор Павлович не взял в этот раз ни гроша, потому что генеральша рассердилась, ничего не дала и, сверх того, прокляла их обоих; но он и не рассчитывал на этот раз взять, а прельстился лишь замечательною красотой невинной девочки и, главное, ее невинным видом, поразившим его, сладострастника и доселе порочного любителя лишь грубой женской красоты.  
Fyodor Pavlovitch took not a kopeck this time, for the general's widow flew into a rage, gave nothing, and on top of that cursed them both; but he had not reckoned on getting anything this time, and was tempted only by the remarkable beauty of the innocent girl and, above all, by her innocent air, which struck him — a sensualist who, until then, had been a depraved connoisseur of nothing but coarse female beauty.
> Genitive of negation with «ни»: Under negation the object goes genitive: «ни гроша» (not a single farthing), with intensifying «ни». The whole phrase 'took not a kopeck' rests on negative concord plus the genitive of the negated object.
> «грош» — a farthing's worth: A «грош» was a tiny copper coin (two kopecks, later half a kopeck); «ни гроша» means 'not a penny, not a brass farthing.' The idiom survives today as the very image of nothing at all.
> «проклясть» — to curse / lay a curse: «проклясть» is weightier than mere swearing: to anathematise, to call down a curse. The widow's «прокляла их обоих» ('cursed them both') has an almost ritual, religious force, fitting a world where a curse was thought to take effect.
> Past active participle governing its object: «поразившим» (which had struck) is a past active participle agreeing with «видом» (air, look) in the instrumental — itself the object of «прельстился». The participle even keeps a verb's object, «его» (him): 'her innocent air, which struck him.' Such participial weight is pure 19th-century literary syntax.
> «сладострастник» — a voluptuary: From «сладкий» (sweet) + «страсть» (passion): one given over to sensual pleasure, a sensualist or voluptuary. The word is a keynote of the whole Karamazov theme — «сладострастие» (carnal lust) is the family vice, and here Fyodor Pavlovitch wears the label.

«Меня эти невинные глазки как бритвой тогда по душе полоснули», — говаривал он потом, гадко по-своему хихикая.  
"Those innocent little eyes slashed my soul that day like a razor," he used to say afterward, snickering nastily in his own fashion.
> «глазки» — little eyes: The diminutive of «глаза» (eyes): 'little eyes.' In Fyodor Pavlovitch's leering mouth the endearment is obscene — the tenderness of the suffix curdles into lechery, exactly the effect Dostoevsky wants.
> Instrumental of the instrument: «бритвой» (with a razor) is the instrumental case naming the means of the action — 'slashed… as with a razor.' The simile fuses violence and desire in a single instrumental noun.
> «говаривал» — used to say (iterative): Not «говорил» but «говаривал», a special iterative-imperfective formed with «-ива-»: an action done repeatedly, habitually, over and over in the past — 'he would say, he used to say.' This frequentative form is archaic-flavoured and beloved of 19th-century prose.
> Imperfective gerund of attendant manner: «хихикая» (snickering) is an imperfective present gerund in «-я», naming an action simultaneous with the main verb — he said it 'while snickering nastily.' It shares the subject «он» and adds the manner of the speech.

Впрочем, у развратного человека и это могло быть лишь сладострастным влечением.  
In a debauched man, however, even this could have been no more than a sensual attraction.
> «у» + genitive locating a trait: «у развратного человека» ('in / with a debauched man') uses «у» + genitive to situate the observation in a type of person — a frequent Russian way of saying 'in the case of…' The preposition «у» always governs the genitive.
> Emphatic «и» = 'even': Here «и» is not 'and' but the emphatic particle 'even, also': «и это» = 'even this.' Russian «и» does double duty as conjunction and intensifier, and reading which one is meant is a constant small decision.
> «впрочем» — the narrator's hinge: «впрочем» ('however, then again, by the way') is the chronicler-narrator's favourite swivel word, used to qualify or walk back what he has just said. It recurs all through this chapter, giving his voice its musing, self-correcting texture.

Не взяв же никакого вознаграждения, Федор Павлович с супругой не церемонился и, пользуясь тем, что она, так сказать, пред ним «виновата» и что он ее почти «с петли снял», пользуясь, кроме того, ее феноменальным смирением и безответностью, даже попрал ногами самые обыкновенные брачные приличия.  
Having taken no recompense, Fyodor Pavlovitch stood on no ceremony with his wife, and, taking advantage of the fact that she was, so to speak, "in the wrong" before him and that he had "all but taken her down from the noose," and taking advantage, besides, of her phenomenal meekness and submissiveness, he trampled underfoot even the most ordinary decencies of married life.
> Negated perfective gerund + genitive of negation: «не взяв» is a perfective past gerund ('having taken') under negation, and its object goes genitive: «никакого вознаграждения» ('no recompense whatsoever'), with intensifying «никакого». The gerund sets the prior circumstance for the main clause.
> Imperfective gerund «пользуясь» + correlative «тем, что»: «пользуясь» (taking advantage) is an imperfective gerund governing the correlative «тем, что» ('the fact that'), where «тем» is the instrumental demonstral demanded by «пользоваться». Repeated twice, the gerund stacks his cynical calculations into one long sentence.
> Scare quotes carrying his own phrase: The quotation marks lift Fyodor Pavlovitch's own self-serving phrase into the narration — 'all but taken her down from the noose.' «с петли» is genitive after «с» (from); the verb «снял» is perfective. Dostoevsky loves embedding a character's exact words, marked off, inside the narrator's report.
> «попрать» — to trample, Slavonic-solemn: «попрать» (to trample, tread underfoot) is an elevated, Church-Slavonic-flavoured verb — one hears it in 'death, where is thy sting.' Yoked to the base «брачные приличия» (marital decencies) the lofty verb makes his profanation sound almost sacrilegious.

В дом, тут же при жене, съезжались дурные женщины, и устраивались оргии.  
Disreputable women would gather in the house, right there in the wife's presence, and orgies were got up.
> Two imperfective «-ся» verbs for the habitual scene: «съезжались» (would gather, drive in from around) and «устраивались» (were got up, would be arranged) are both imperfective with reflexive «-ся», painting a recurring, habitual state of affairs rather than one event. The «-ся» on «устраивались» reads as a middle/passive: 'orgies were got up.'
> «дурные женщины» — women of bad sort: «дурной» means 'bad, ill, disreputable'; «дурные женщины» is a genteel euphemism for women of low morals — what English calls 'disreputable' or 'loose' women. The narrator declines the cruder word.
> «при» + prepositional = 'in the presence of': «при жене» uses «при» + prepositional to mean 'in the wife's presence, right there before her.' «при» governs only the prepositional case; reinforced by «тут же» ('right there') it sharpens the outrage — he did it before her very eyes.

Как характерную черту сообщу, что слуга Григорий, мрачный, глупый и упрямый резонер, ненавидевший прежнюю барыню Аделаиду Ивановну, на этот раз взял сторону новой барыни, защищал и бранился за нее с Федором Павловичем почти непозволительным для слуги образом, а однажды так даже разогнал оргию и всех наехавших безобразниц силой.  
As a characteristic touch, I will report that the servant Grigory — a gloomy, stupid, and obstinate moralizer who had detested the former mistress, Adelaida Ivanovna — this time took the side of the new mistress, defending her and quarreling on her behalf with Fyodor Pavlovitch in a manner all but impermissible in a servant, and on one occasion even broke up an orgy and drove out by force all the disorderly women who had come.
> Past active participle as character-sketch: «ненавидевший» (who had hated) is a past active participle from imperfective «ненавидеть», agreeing with «резонер» — 'a moralizer who had detested the former mistress.' Stacking participial and adjectival modifiers around the noun is how Dostoevsky paints Grigory in a single breath.
> «резонёр» — a sententious moralizer: From French raisonneur: one forever reasoning and moralising, laying down the law in heavy maxims. Applied to the dour servant Grigory it is half-affectionate, half-mocking — he is the household's solemn, stubborn voice of righteousness.
> «безобразницы» — the disorderly women: From «безобразие» (disgrace, ugly disorder, literally 'lack of form/image'): the «безобразницы» are the women who make a shameful scene, 'the disorderly women.' «наехавших безобразниц» — the riotous women who had descended on the house.
> Instrumental of means «силой»: «силой» (by force) is the instrumental case naming the means by which Grigory drove the women out. The bare instrumental noun does the work of English 'by force / forcibly.'

Впоследствии с несчастною, с самого детства запуганною молодою женщиной произошло вроде какой-то нервной женской болезни, встречаемой чаще всего в простонародье у деревенских баб, именуемых за эту болезнь кликушами.  
In time there developed in the unhappy young woman — terrified from her earliest childhood — a sort of nervous female ailment, met with most often among the common folk, among peasant women, who for this affliction are called klikushi.
> Subjectless 'there developed' construction: The grammatical subject is vague — «произошло вроде какой-то болезни», 'something like an ailment came about' — with the affected person in «с» + instrumental («с… женщиной»). Russian readily frames such onsets impersonally, with «вроде» ('something like') softening the diagnosis.
> Short/long past passive participle «запуганная»: «запуганною» (terrified, cowed) is a past passive participle from perfective «запугать», agreeing with «женщиной» in the instrumental — 'a young woman terrified from earliest childhood.' The «-ою» ending is the bookish long-form instrumental for «-ой».
> «простонародье» and «баба»: «простонародье» is the 'common people, the plain folk' (literally 'simple-people'); «баба» is a peasant woman, blunt and a touch rough (versus the polite «женщина»). The pair locates the affliction firmly among the lower, rural classes — the social distance the narrator marks.

От этой болезни, со страшными истерическими припадками, больная временами даже теряла рассудок.  
From this ailment, with its dreadful hysterical fits, the sick woman would at times even lose her reason.
> Imperfective «теряла» for recurrence: «теряла» (would lose) is imperfective past, and «временами» ('at times, from time to time') marks the recurrence: she lost her reason repeatedly, not once. The aspect carries the sense of an intermittent, habitual relapse.
> «припадок» — a fit, a seizure: A «припадок» is a fit, attack, or seizure — here «истерические припадки», hysterical fits. The word recurs throughout Dostoevsky for the convulsive episodes of his suffering, nervous characters, including the klikushi and later Smerdyakov's seizures.

Родила она, однако же, Федору Павловичу двух сыновей, Ивана и Алексея, первого в первый год брака, а второго три года спустя.  
She bore Fyodor Pavlovitch two sons, however — Ivan and Alexey — the first in the first year of the marriage, the second three years later.
> Dative of the beneficiary + verb-first inversion: «Федору Павловичу» is the dative — she bore the sons 'to / for' Fyodor Pavlovitch (indirect object). The sentence opens with the verb «Родила» before the subject «она», a marked inversion that lands the storyteller's weight on the act of bearing.
> Genitive after «два»: Here «двух сыновей» is genitive plural because the numeral phrase is itself the accusative object of «родила» and «сын» is animate, so the whole counted phrase declines. With the animate noun, «два» governs forms that surface as «двух… сыновей».
> Particle «же» reinforcing «однако»: «однако» means 'however'; the appended particle «же» intensifies and insists — 'and yet, for all that.' The modal «же» adds the spoken texture of a narrator pausing to mark the surprising fact that this broken woman did, after all, bear two sons.

Когда она померла, мальчик Алексей был по четвертому году, и хоть и странно это, но я знаю, что он мать запомнил потом на всю жизнь, — как сквозь сон разумеется.  
When she died, the boy Alexey was in his fourth year, and, strange as it is, I know that he remembered his mother afterward for the rest of his life — as though through a dream, of course.
> Perfective «померла» for the single event: «померла» (died) is perfective, the one completed event that anchors the «когда» (when) clause. «помереть» is a colloquial, slightly folksy variant of «умереть», matching the chronicler's homely register.
> «по четвёртому году» — in his fourth year: An idiomatic age expression: «по четвёртому году» means the child was in his fourth year (i.e. three-going-on-four), not literally four. «по» + dative for an ordinal age is an older, colloquial turn of phrase.
> Concessive «хоть и… но»: «хоть и… но» ('though… yet') concedes a point before the main clause — 'and strange as it is, yet I know that…' The inverted «странно это» (predicate before subject) gives a light conversational lilt.
> «как сквозь сон» — as though through a dream: An idiom of dim, half-remembered perception: 'as if through a dream, hazily.' It frames Alyosha's earliest memory of his mother as something glimpsed rather than known — a tender, blurred image that the novel will return to.

По смерти ее с обоими мальчиками случилось почти точь-в-точь то же самое, что и с первым, Митей: они были совершенно забыты и заброшены отцом и попали всё к тому же Григорию и также к нему в избу.  
After her death almost exactly the same thing befell both boys as had befallen the first, Mitya: they were utterly forgotten and abandoned by their father, and ended up with the same Grigory, and likewise in his cottage.
> Impersonal «случилось» with «с» + instrumental: «случилось» (happened, befell) is an impersonal neuter past; the ones it happens to stand in «с» + instrumental — «с обоими мальчиками», «с первым». Russian frames events as happening 'with/to' people rather than people doing them, foregrounding the boys as helpless objects of fate.
> Periphrastic passive with agent in the instrumental: «забыты и заброшены» are short past passive participles forming a быть-passive ('were forgotten and abandoned'), and the agent goes in the instrumental: «отцом» ('by their father'). This is the textbook passive construction — short participle + instrumental agent.
> «изба» — the peasant cottage: An «изба» is the traditional log cottage of a Russian peasant. That the master's sons «попали… в избу» — ended up in the servant Grigory's hut — quietly registers how far they have fallen out of the gentry world into which they were born.

В избе их и нашла старуха самодурка генеральша, благодетельница и воспитательница их матери.  
It was in the cottage that they were found by the old tyrant, the general's widow — the benefactress and governess of their mother.
> Fronted locative + emphatic «и»: The sentence leads with the place, «В избе» ('in the cottage'), and the particle «и» before the verb emphasises it — 'it was right there in the cottage that the old woman found them.' Topic-comment fronting puts the setting in focus.
> Three nouns in apposition: Dostoevsky strings three nouns together — «старуха самодурка генеральша», 'the old woman, the petty tyrant, the general's widow' — letting each repeat and re-characterise the figure. The accumulation is a deliberate, almost incantatory tic of this narrator's style.

Она еще была в живых и всё время, все восемь лет, не могла забыть обиды, ей нанесенной.  
She was still living, and all that time, the whole eight years, she had been unable to forget the injury done to her.
> «быть в живых» — to be among the living: A set phrase, «быть в живых» ('to be alive, among the living'), where «в живых» is a frozen prepositional-plural of the substantivised adjective «живой». Russian prefers this idiom to a plain «была жива» for the solemn fact of still being alive.
> Genitive of negation: «обиды»: Under the negated «не могла забыть», the object «обида» (injury, grievance) appears as genitive «обиды» — 'could not forget the injury.' Abstract objects especially favour the genitive of negation.
> Past passive participle with dative: «нанесённой» (inflicted, done) is a past passive participle agreeing with «обиды» in the genitive feminine, postposed for weight: 'the injury done to her.' Its dative «ей» ('to her') marks the one wronged — «нанести обиду кому-либо», to do someone an injury.

О житье-бытье ее «Софьи» все восемь лет она имела из-под руки самые точные сведения и, слыша, как она больна и какие безобразия ее окружают, раза два или три произнесла вслух своим приживалкам: «Так ей и надо, это ей бог за неблагодарность послал».  
Of her "Sofya's" manner of life she had, all those eight years, the most exact intelligence, gathered on the sly, and, hearing how ill she was and what abominations surrounded her, she remarked aloud to her hangers-on, two or three times: "It serves her right; God has sent it to her for her ingratitude."
> «житьё-бытьё» — manner of life: A rhyming, folk-flavoured doublet from «жить» (to live) and «быть» (to be): one's whole 'living and being,' way of life, how one gets on. The hyphenated reduplication gives it a homely, almost fairy-tale ring.
> «из-под руки» — on the sly: An idiom (literally 'from under the hand') meaning covertly, secretly, through quiet back-channels. The widow gathered her 'most exact intelligence' about Sofya «из-под руки» — surreptitiously, behind the scenes.
> «приживалка» — the female hanger-on: A «приживалка» (feminine of «приживальщик») is a poor dependent woman who lives in a wealthy household on sufferance, a hanger-on or 'lady companion' kept for company and errands. The dative plural «приживалкам» names the captive audience to whom the widow vents — a quintessential figure of the period's great houses.

Ровно три месяца по смерти Софьи Ивановны генеральша вдруг явилась в наш город лично и прямо на квартиру Федора Павловича и всего-то пробыла в городке с полчаса, но много сделала.  
Exactly three months after Sofya Ivanovna's death the general's widow suddenly appeared in our town in person, going straight to Fyodor Pavlovitch's lodging, and altogether spent no more than half an hour in the little town — but she accomplished a great deal.
> A chain of perfectives drives the action: «явилась» (appeared), «пробыла» (stayed), «сделала» (accomplished) are all perfective past, each a single completed step that pushes the story forward — the eventline against which earlier imperfectives gave standing background.
> Belittling diminutives «городок», «всего-то»: «городок» is the diminutive of «город» (town) — 'the little town' — and «всего-то» ('a mere, only') plus «с полчаса» ('about half an hour') heap up the smallness, all to set off the punch of «но много сделала» ('but she got a great deal done'). The contrast is the sentence's whole point.

Был тогда час вечерний.  
It was the evening hour then.
> Verb-first staging and postposed adjective: A short scene-setting sentence inverted for atmosphere: «Был тогда час вечерний» — verb first, and the adjective «вечерний» placed after its noun «час», a poetic word order that lends the moment a faintly solemn, stagey hush.

Федор Павлович, которого она все восемь лет не видала, вышел к ней пьяненький.  
Fyodor Pavlovitch, whom she had not set eyes on in all those eight years, came out to her tipsy.
> Relative «которого» in the genitive of negation: «которого» agrees with «Федор Павлович» (masc. sing.) but takes its case from its own clause: object of the negated «не видала», hence genitive — 'whom she had not set eyes on.' The relative pronoun's case always follows its role inside the relative clause.
> «пьяненький» — tipsily endearing: The diminutive of «пьяный» (drunk): «пьяненький» softens it to 'tipsy, a bit tight,' even faintly indulgent — almost cosy. The affectionate suffix on so squalid a state is pure Dostoevskian irony, making Fyodor Pavlovitch ridiculous rather than menacing in the moment.
> Prefixed verb of motion «выйти к»: «вышел» is the perfective of «выходить/выйти» (to come/go out), a prefixed verb of motion; «к ней» (к + dative) gives the direction 'out to her.' The prefix «вы-» supplies both the completion and the 'out' of the movement.

Повествуют, что она мигом, безо всяких объяснений, только что увидала его, задала ему две знатные и звонкие пощечины и три раза рванула его за вихор сверху вниз, затем, не прибавив ни слова, направилась прямо в избу к двум мальчикам.  
It is told that, the moment she laid eyes on him, without any explanation whatsoever, she dealt him two sound, ringing slaps on the face and yanked him three times by the forelock, top to bottom, and then, without adding a single word, made straight for the cottage to the two boys.
> Impersonal 'it is told': «Повествуют» is third-person plural with no subject — 'they tell, it is told' — the narrator distancing himself from a piece of town legend. «повествовать» is itself a bookish, elevated verb for 'to narrate,' lending the gossip a mock-epic dignity.
> Perfective chain after «только что увидала»: «только что увидала» ('the moment she saw') sets the trigger, then a salvo of perfectives — «задала» (dealt), «рванула» (yanked), «направилась» (made straight for) — fire off the rapid sequence of completed actions. The perfective is what gives the slapstick violence its staccato speed.
> «знатные и звонкие пощёчины»: «пощёчина» is a slap on the cheek. «знатные» here is colloquial for 'fine, hefty, first-rate' (not 'noble'), and «звонкие» means 'ringing, resounding' — 'two sound, ringing slaps.' The earthy, almost admiring adjectives relish the comeuppance.
> Negated gerund + genitive of negation: «не прибавив» is a negated perfective gerund ('without adding'), and its object goes genitive: «ни слова» ('a single word'), with intensive «ни». The gerund neatly subordinates the manner — she left 'without adding a word.'
> «вихор» — the forelock: A «вихор» is a tuft or lock of hair, a forelock or cowlick. To yank a man «за вихор» (за + accusative, 'by the forelock') is a humiliating, schoolboy-punishment grip — the widow treats the grown debauchee like a naughty child.

С первого взгляда заметив, что они не вымыты и в грязном белье, она тотчас же дала еще пощечину самому Григорию и объявила ему, что увозит обоих детей к себе, затем вывела их в чем были, завернула в плед, посадила в карету и увезла в свой город.  
Noticing at the first glance that they were unwashed and in dirty linen, she at once gave another slap to Grigory himself and announced to him that she was carrying off both children to her own home, then led them out just as they were, wrapped them in a plaid rug, set them in a carriage, and bore them away to her own town.
> Perfective gerund framing the action: «заметив» (having noticed) is a perfective past gerund setting the prior circumstance — 'noticing at first glance that…, she at once…' It shares the subject «она» and compresses a whole when-clause into a single adverbial.
> A breathless chain of six perfectives: The whole abduction is told in six consecutive perfective verbs — slap, announce, lead out, wrap, set in, carry off — each a single completed move. Strung by «и» and «затем», they give the old woman's decisive, unstoppable energy.
> «в чём были» — just as they were: An idiom: «вывела их в чём были» = 'led them out in whatever they had on, just as they were.' The elliptical «в чём (они) были» captures the haste — no time to dress them, she swept them up on the spot.
> Reflexive «к себе» — to her own place: «к себе» uses the reflexive pronoun «себя» (here dative «себе» after «к»), referring back to the subject: 'to her own home.' «себя» has no nominative and points to whoever is the clause's subject — here the widow.

Григорий снес эту пощечину как преданный раб, не сгрубил ни слова, и когда провожал старую барыню до кареты, то, поклонившись ей в пояс, внушительно произнес, что ей «за сирот бог заплатит».  
Grigory bore that slap like a devoted serf, did not utter a single rude word, and when he saw the old lady to her carriage he bowed to her from the waist and pronounced impressively that God would "repay her for the orphans."
> Negative concord + genitive of negation: «не сгрубил ни слова» — 'did not utter a single rude word' — combines the verbal «не», the intensifier «ни», and the genitive object «слова» under negation. Three strokes of negation cooperate to make one emphatic 'not a word.'
> «раб» — slave / bondservant: «раб» is literally 'slave'; «преданный раб» = 'a devoted bondman.' Of the serf Grigory it is half-literal (he is a serf), half a Christian self-understanding — «раб Божий», 'servant of God.' His meekness toward the slap is framed as religious humility.
> Perfective gerund + dative: «поклонившись» (having bowed) is a perfective past gerund; «ей» is the dative governed by «поклониться» (to bow to someone). 'Having bowed to her from the waist, he pronounced…' — the gerund stages the prior, deferential gesture.

«А все-таки ты балбес!» — крикнула ему генеральша, отъезжая.  
"You're a blockhead all the same!" the general's widow shouted at him as she drove off.
> «балбес» — blockhead, dolt: A colloquial term of abuse for a big, stupid, idle fellow: 'blockhead, dunce, lout.' The widow's parting «А все-таки ты балбес!» ('You're a blockhead all the same!') is gruff and almost fond — she scolds the very man who has just rebuked her.
> Imperfective gerund of simultaneous action: «отъезжая» (driving off) is an imperfective present gerund in «-я» from the prefixed motion verb «отъезжать», naming an action simultaneous with «крикнула» — she shouted it 'as she was driving away.' It shares the subject «генеральша».
> Contrastive «а» + concessive «всё-таки»: Sentence-initial «А» is the mild contrastive 'and/but' that pivots the topic, and «всё-таки» ('all the same, still') concedes against Grigory's dignified bow — 'and yet, for all that, you're a fool.' The pairing captures her grudging, contrary affection.

Федор Павлович, сообразив всё дело, нашел, что оно дело хорошее и в формальном согласии своем насчет воспитания детей у генеральши не отказал потом ни в одном пункте.  
Fyodor Pavlovitch, having weighed the whole matter, decided it was a good thing, and afterward did not refuse on a single point his formal consent regarding the children's upbringing with the general's widow.
> Perfective gerund 'having weighed': «сообразив» (having figured out, weighed up) is a perfective past gerund setting the prior step before «нашёл» ('found, decided'). It shares the subject Fyodor Pavlovitch — first he reckoned, then he concluded.
> Negative concord with «ни в одном»: «не отказал… ни в одном пункте» — 'did not refuse on a single point' — pairs verbal «не» with «ни в одном» ('not in one'), the locative «в… пункте» governed by «отказать в» (to refuse / deny something). Negative concord again yields a single emphatic negation.
> «у» + genitive for custody: «воспитания детей у генеральши» uses «у» + genitive to mean 'the children's upbringing at / in the keeping of the general's widow' — the «у» locating where and with whom they will be raised. «у» always governs the genitive.

О полученных же пощечинах сам ездил рассказывать по всему городу.  
As for the slaps he had received, he himself went around telling the whole town about them.
> Fronted topic + «о» + prepositional: The sentence fronts its topic — «О полученных… пощёчинах», 'as for the slaps received' — in «о» + prepositional, marking what the comment is about before the verb arrives. Topic-first ordering lets Russian signal 'as for X' purely by position.
> Multidirectional «ездил» + intensive «сам»: «ездил» is the multidirectional (round-trip, habitual) motion verb 'went about / drove around,' fitting his repeated tours of the town; «рассказывать» is the imperfective infinitive of purpose. «сам» ('himself') stresses that he, of all people, broadcast his own humiliation.

Случилось так, что и генеральша скоро после того умерла, но выговорив, однако, в завещании обоим малюткам по тысяче рублей каждому «на их обучение, и чтобы все эти деньги были на них истрачены непременно, но с тем, чтобы хватило вплоть до совершеннолетия, потому что слишком довольно и такой подачки для этаких детей, а если кому угодно, то пусть сам раскошеливается», и проч., и проч.  
It so happened that the general's widow too died soon afterward, having, however, stipulated in her will a thousand rubles for each of the two little ones, "for their education, and that all this money be spent on them without fail, but in such a way that it last clear up to their coming of age, since such a handout is more than enough for children of this sort — and if anyone wishes otherwise, let him loosen his own purse," and so on, and so forth.
> Perfective gerund 'having stipulated': «выговорив» (having stipulated, secured by agreement) is a perfective past gerund attached to the main clause about her death — she died, 'having however stipulated in her will…' The gerund hangs the legal proviso onto the bare fact of dying.
> Distributive «по» + dative: «по тысяче рублей каждому» uses distributive «по» — 'a thousand rubles apiece, to each one.' Distributive «по» governs the dative («каждому»), spreading the sum out one-per-head; «рублей» is genitive plural after the numeral.
> Purpose «чтобы» + past-form irrealis: Twice the willed condition is set by «чтобы» plus a past-tense form — «были истрачены» (be spent), «хватило» (would suffice) — the irrealis that «чтобы» requires for a stipulated, not-yet-real outcome. «истрачены» is also a short past passive participle in a быть-passive.
> «малютка» — the tiny mite: A tender diminutive from «малый» (small): a 'little one, tiny tot, mite.' The widow's will speaks of the boys as «малютки» even while sneering at them — the affectionate word jars against «для этаких детей» ('for children of this sort').
> «подачка» and «раскошелиться» — contemptuous money-talk: «подачка» is a contemptuous 'handout, dole, scrap thrown to a dog'; «раскошелиться» is colloquial 'to loosen one's purse-strings, fork out.' The will's coarse, grudging diction — 'such a handout is plenty… let him fork out himself' — paints the widow's flinty character even in death. «этаких» is dialectal for «таких» ('such').

Я завещания сам не читал, но слышал, что именно было что-то странное в этом роде и слишком своеобразно выраженное.  
I did not read the will myself, but I have heard that there really was something strange of this kind in it, expressed in too peculiar a manner.
> Genitive of negation: «завещания»: Under the negated «не читал», the object «завещание» (the will) takes the genitive «завещания» — 'I did not read the will myself.' Fronting it before the verb topicalises the document the chronicler is admitting he never saw.
> Short/long past passive participle «выраженное»: «выраженное» (expressed) is a past passive participle agreeing with «что-то» (something) in the neuter; «слишком своеобразно» ('too peculiarly') modifies it — 'something expressed in too peculiar a way.' The participle lets the narrator hedge: he only heard about the will's odd wording.

Главным наследником старухи оказался, однако же, честный человек, губернский предводитель дворянства той губернии Ефим Петрович Поленов.  
The chief heir of the old woman turned out, however, to be an honest man, the provincial Marshal of the Nobility of that province, Yefim Petrovitch Polenov.
> Nominative complement after «оказаться»: «оказался» ('turned out to be') here takes a nominative complement, «честный человек» ('an honest man'), rather than the instrumental — both are possible with this verb, and the nominative gives a flatter, more matter-of-fact 'turned out to be X.'

Списавшись с Федором Павловичем и мигом угадав, что от него денег на воспитание его же детей не вытащишь (хотя тот прямо никогда не отказывал, а только всегда в этаких случаях тянул, иногда даже изливаясь в чувствительностях), он принял в сиротах участие лично и особенно полюбил младшего из них, Алексея, так что тот долгое время даже и рос в его семействе.  
Having corresponded with Fyodor Pavlovitch and grasped at once that there was no getting money out of him for the upbringing of his own children (though the man never refused outright, but in such cases always temporized, sometimes even gushing with sentiment), he took a personal interest in the orphans and grew especially fond of the younger of the two, Alexey, so that the boy even grew up for a long while in his household.
> Two perfective gerunds open the clause: «Списавшись» (having corresponded) and «угадав» (having guessed) are perfective past gerunds, both prior to the main verb «принял» — 'having corresponded… and grasped…, he took an interest.' Doubling the gerund is a favourite way to stack the antecedents of one act.
> Generalising 2nd-person + genitive of negation: «не вытащишь» is a generalising second-person singular ('you won't drag [money] out of him' = 'there's no getting…'), with the negated object «денег» in the genitive. The 'you' has no specific referent — a common Russian way of stating a general truth.
> Imperfective gerund of manner: «изливаясь» (pouring himself out, gushing) is an imperfective present gerund describing how he temporised — 'always temporized, sometimes even gushing with sentiment.' «чувствительности» (sentimentalities) in the prepositional after «в» names what he overflowed with.
> «тянуть» — to drag one's feet: Literally 'to pull, drag,' but idiomatically «тянул» here means 'kept stalling, dragged it out, temporized.' It captures Fyodor Pavlovitch's evasive technique — never a flat refusal, just endless delay.

Это я прошу читателя заметить с самого начала.  
This I beg the reader to note from the very start.
> Fronted object «Это» for emphasis: The object «Это» ('this') is moved to the front, ahead of subject «я» and verb — 'this I beg the reader to note.' The inversion presses the point on the reader, a direct narratorial aside in marked word order.

И если кому обязаны были молодые люди своим воспитанием и образованием на всю свою жизнь, то именно этому Ефиму Петровичу, благороднейшему и гуманнейшему человеку, из таких, какие редко встречаются.  
And if to anyone the young men owed their upbringing and education for the whole of their lives, it was precisely to this Yefim Petrovitch — a most noble and humane man, of the kind one rarely meets.
> Conditional «если… то» + dative of obligation: The «если… то» frame ('if to anyone…, then precisely to…') is answered by the dative: one is 'indebted to' someone in the dative — «кому… этому Ефиму Петровичу». «именно» ('precisely') and «то» drive the emphasis onto him.
> Bookish superlatives in «-ейш-»: «благороднейшему» (most noble) and «гуманнейшему» (most humane) are the literary suffixal superlative «-ейш-», declined in the dative to agree with «человеку». This synthetic superlative is markedly bookish, lending the praise a formal, elevated ring.

Он сохранил малюткам по их тысяче, оставленной генеральшей, неприкосновенно, так что они к совершеннолетию их возросли процентами, каждая до двух, воспитал же их на свои деньги и уж, конечно, гораздо более, чем по тысяче, издержал на каждого.  
He kept intact for the little ones their thousand rubles apiece, left by the general's widow, so that by the time they came of age each sum had grown with interest to two thousand; and he educated them at his own expense, spending, of course, far more than a thousand on each.
> Perfective verbs summing up his stewardship: «сохранил» (kept intact), «воспитал» (raised/educated), «издержал» (spent) are perfectives, each a single completed achievement totting up Yefim Petrovitch's faithful stewardship — the eventline of a settled, finished account.
> Distributive «по» — a thousand each: «по их тысяче» and «по тысяче на каждого» use distributive «по» to mean 'their thousand apiece, a thousand on each' — «по» spreading the equal share head by head, as in the widow's will. The construction recurs as a quiet motif of the bequest.
> «проценты» — interest on capital: «проценты» here means 'interest' (on the principal); «возросли процентами… до двух» = 'grew with interest to two [thousand].' The instrumental «процентами» names the means of growth. The careful financial detail underlines Yefim Petrovitch's honesty against Fyodor Pavlovitch's grasping.

В подробный рассказ их детства и юности я опять пока не вступаю, а обозначу лишь самые главные обстоятельства.  
Into a detailed account of their childhood and youth I will again not enter for now, but will indicate only the most essential circumstances.
> Contrastive «а»: imperfective present vs perfective future: «не вступаю» (I do not enter — imperfective present) is set against «обозначу» (I will indicate — perfective, future in meaning) by the contrastive «а». The aspect switch itself carries the contrast: ongoing refusal here, single intended act there.
> Narratorial «пока» — 'for now': «пока» ('for the time being, for now') plus «опять» ('again') marks this as a recurring narratorial deferral — the chronicler keeps promising to tell the full story later. It is part of the self-aware, digressive voice that frames the whole novel.

Впрочем, о старшем, Иване, сообщу лишь то, что он рос каким-то угрюмым и закрывшимся сам в себе отроком, далеко не робким, но как бы еще с десяти лет проникнувшим в то, что растут они все-таки в чужой семье и на чужих милостях и что отец у них какой-то такой, о котором даже и говорить стыдно, и проч., и проч.  
Of the elder, Ivan, however, I will report only this: that he grew up a somewhat morose lad, closed within himself, far from timid, but seemingly already from the age of ten penetrating to the fact that they were, after all, growing up in another family's home, on another's charity, and that they had a father of some sort it was shameful even to speak of, and so on, and so forth.
> Past active participles as dense modifiers: «закрывшимся» (who had shut himself away) and «проникнувшим» (who had penetrated) are past active participles, both in the instrumental agreeing with «отроком». They pack two whole «который»-clauses into the description of the boy — the participial density typical of the literary register.
> «отрок» — a youth, bookish: «отрок» is an archaic, bookish (and Church-Slavonic-tinged) word for a boy between child and young man, a 'lad, stripling.' Its elevated tone lends the sketch of the young Ivan a slightly solemn, almost hagiographic colour. In the instrumental «отроком» it is the predicate of «рос».
> Reflexive «-ся» verb + reflexive «в себе»: «закрыться» carries the middle-voice «-ся» ('to close oneself off'), and the phrase doubles it with «в себе» ('within himself'), the reflexive pronoun «себя» in the prepositional. Together they render a boy turned wholly inward — 'closed within himself.'

Этот мальчик очень скоро, чуть не в младенчестве (как передавали по крайней мере), стал обнаруживать какие-то необыкновенные и блестящие способности к учению.  
This boy very soon, almost in infancy (so it was related, at least), began to display certain extraordinary and brilliant aptitudes for learning.
> «стать» + imperfective infinitive (inceptive): «стал обнаруживать» — perfective «стать» plus the imperfective infinitive «обнаруживать» (to display) — is the standard inceptive 'began to display.' «стать» here means 'to begin,' and the imperfective infinitive keeps the displaying as an unfolding process.
> «чуть не» — 'all but, almost': «чуть не» means 'all but, very nearly, almost' (literally 'barely not'): «чуть не в младенчестве» = 'almost in infancy.' It recurs in this chapter («чуть ли не тринадцати лет») as the narrator's hedge for an unverified detail. «младенчество» is bookish for babyhood.

В точности не знаю, но как-то так случилось, что с семьей Ефима Петровича он расстался чуть ли не тринадцати лет, перейдя в одну из московских гимназий и на пансион к какому-то опытному и знаменитому тогда педагогу, другу с детства Ефима Петровича.  
I do not know exactly, but somehow it came about that he parted from Yefim Petrovitch's family at scarcely thirteen, going over to one of the Moscow gymnasiums and boarding with some experienced and, at that time, celebrated pedagogue, a friend of Yefim Petrovitch's from childhood.
> Perfective gerund of prefixed motion «перейдя»: «перейдя» (having transferred / gone over) is a perfective past gerund from the prefixed motion verb «перейти», naming the move that accompanied his parting — 'going over to one of the Moscow gymnasiums.' The prefix «пере-» supplies the 'across/over' of the transfer.
> Genitive of age + hedging «чуть ли не»: «тринадцати лет» is the genitive used to state age ('at thirteen years'); «чуть ли не» ('all but, very nearly') hedges it — 'at scarcely thirteen.' The bare genitive of age, without a preposition, is the idiomatic Russian way to say 'aged X.'

Сам Иван рассказывал потом, что всё произошло, так сказать, от «пылкости к добрым делам» Ефима Петровича, увлекшегося идеей, что гениальных способностей мальчик должен и воспитываться у гениального воспитателя.  
Ivan himself related afterward that the whole thing came about, so to speak, out of Yefim Petrovitch's "ardor for good works," the man having been carried away by the idea that a boy of genius must also be brought up by a tutor of genius.
> Past active participle + correlative: «увлекшегося» (who had been carried away) is a past active participle with reflexive «-ся», agreeing with «Ефима Петровича» in the genitive — 'Yefim Petrovitch, having been carried away by the idea that…' The participle launches a «что»-clause stating the idea.
> Reflexive/passive «-ся» under «должен»: «воспитываться» (to be brought up) is the imperfective with reflexive «-ся» reading as a passive — 'must be educated [by]', with the educator framed by «у» + genitive. «должен» supplies the modal 'must.'
> «пылкость к добрым делам» — ardor for good works: «пылкость» (ardour, fervour, from «пылкий», ablaze) «к добрым делам» (toward good deeds). In scare quotes it is Ivan's own wry phrase for his benefactor's zeal. «добрые дела» ('good works') faintly echoes the religious idiom of charitable deeds.

Впрочем, ни Ефима Петровича, ни гениального воспитателя уже не было в живых, когда молодой человек, кончив гимназию, поступил в университет.  
However, neither Yefim Petrovitch nor the tutor of genius was any longer among the living when the young man, having finished the gymnasium, entered the university.
> «ни… ни» + genitive of the negated subject: The existential «не было» ('was not'), negated, forces its subject into the genitive — «ни Ефима Петровича, ни… воспитателя» — with paired «ни… ни» for 'neither… nor.' This is the obligatory genitive of an absent subject under «не было».
> Perfective gerund 'having finished': «кончив» (having finished) is a perfective past gerund preceding the main perfective «поступил» (entered) — 'having finished the gymnasium, he entered the university.' Two completed steps, the gerund marking the earlier one.

Так как Ефим Петрович плохо распорядился и получение завещанных самодуркой генеральшей собственных детских денег, возросших с тысячи уже на две процентами, замедлилось по разным совершенно неизбежимым у нас формальностям и проволочкам, то молодому человеку в первые его два года в университете пришлось очень солоно, так как он принужден был всё это время кормить и содержать себя сам и в то же время учиться.  
Since Yefim Petrovitch had managed things poorly, and the receipt of the children's own money bequeathed by the tyrannical general's widow — grown with interest from a thousand to two — was held up by various formalities and delays utterly unavoidable with us, the young man had a very hard time of it in his first two years at the university, since he was compelled all that while to feed and keep himself, and at the same time to study.
> Causal «так как… то» + dative-subject «пришлось»: «так как… то» ('since… then') frames the cause. The result is impersonal with a dative experiencer: «молодому человеку… пришлось» — 'the young man had it [hard],' literally 'to the young man it fell.' No nominative subject; the person stands in the dative.
> «солоно пришлось» — a hard time of it: An idiom built on «солоно» ('saltily,' from «соль», salt): «солоно пришлось кому-то» = 'someone had a rough time, a bitter time of it.' The taste-metaphor for hardship is vivid and colloquial — Ivan's first years were 'salty,' i.e. harsh.
> Past active participle + instrumental of means: «возросших» (which had grown) is a past active participle agreeing with «денег» (genitive) — 'the money, grown with interest.' «процентами» is the instrumental naming the means of growth, and «с тысячи… на две» ('from one thousand to two') the range. The financial motif of the doubled bequest returns.
> Passive participle + reflexive «себя»: «был принуждён» is a быть-passive (short past passive participle: 'was compelled'), and «кормить и содержать себя» uses the reflexive object pronoun «себя» ('to feed and keep himself'), reinforced by intensive «сам». «себя» has no nominative and points back to the subject.

Заметить надо, что он даже и попытки не захотел тогда сделать списаться с отцом, — может быть, из гордости, из презрения к нему, а может быть, вследствие холодного здравого рассуждения, подсказавшего ему, что от папеньки никакой чуть-чуть серьезной поддержки не получит.  
It should be noted that he did not even wish to attempt to write to his father then — perhaps out of pride, out of contempt for him, or perhaps in consequence of a cold, sober calculation that whispered to him that from his papa he would not get the slightest serious support.
> Impersonal «надо» + infinitive: «Заметить надо» is an impersonal necessity construction: invariable «надо» ('it is necessary') plus the perfective infinitive «заметить» ('to note'), with no nominative subject. Russian frames duties and necessities this subjectless way — 'it should be noted that…'
> Genitive of negation: «попытки»: Under the negated «не захотел… сделать», the object «попытка» (attempt) goes genitive — «попытки» — 'did not even wish to make an attempt.' «даже и» ('even') heightens the emphasis on his refusal to so much as try.
> «папенька» — the saccharine 'papa': «папенька» is an old-fashioned, over-sweet diminutive of «папа», once a child's affectionate 'papa, daddy.' Used here of the loathed Fyodor Pavlovitch it drips with irony — the tender word turned bitter, mocking the father who deserves no such address.
> Past active participle + dative object: «подсказавшего» (which had prompted/whispered) is a past active participle agreeing with «рассуждения» in the genitive, and it governs the dative «ему» ('to him') — 'a sober calculation that whispered to him.' The participle even carries the verb's indirect object.

Как бы там ни было, молодой человек не потерялся нисколько и добился-таки работы, сперва уроками в двугривенный, а потом бегая по редакциям газет и доставляя статейки в десять строчек об уличных происшествиях, за подписью «Очевидец».  
Be that as it may, the young man was not in the least at a loss, and did manage to find work — first by giving lessons at twenty kopecks an hour, and then by running about the newspaper offices and supplying ten-line little items on street incidents, signed "An Eyewitness."
> Concessive idiom with «бы… ни»: «Как бы там ни было» ('be that as it may, however that may be') is a frozen concessive built on the irrealis «бы» plus the universal-concessive «ни» — the construction 'however X may be.' It dismisses the foregoing speculation to push on.
> Reflexive «-ся» + emphatic «-таки»: «не потерялся» ('was not at a loss') and «добился» ('did achieve') both carry reflexive «-ся»; «нисколько» ('not at all') reinforces the negation, and the clitic «-таки» on «добился-таки» means 'after all, in spite of everything' — he did manage it. «-таки» adds the satisfied, against-the-odds note.
> Two imperfective gerunds of means: «бегая» (running about) and «доставляя» (supplying) are imperfective present gerunds in «-я», naming the ongoing activities by which he found work. «бегая» is from the multidirectional «бегать» (to run around, here and there), fitting his scrambling between newspaper offices.
> «двугривенный» and «статейки»: A «двугривенный» was a twenty-kopeck coin (from «гривна»), so «уроками в двугривенный» = giving lessons at twenty kopecks each — a pittance. «статейки» is the diminutive of «статья» (article): little squibs, ten-line filler items. Both diminutives stress how scrappy and underpaid Ivan's beginnings were.

Статейки эти, говорят, были так всегда любопытно и пикантно составлены, что быстро пошли в ход, и уж в этом одном молодой человек оказал всё свое практическое и умственное превосходство над тою многочисленною, вечно нуждающеюся и несчастною частью нашей учащейся молодежи обоего пола, которая в столицах, по обыкновению, с утра до ночи обивает пороги разных газет и журналов, не умея ничего лучше выдумать, кроме вечного повторения одной и той же просьбы о переводах с французского или о переписке.  
These little items, they say, were always so curiously and piquantly put together that they quickly caught on, and in this alone the young man showed all his practical and intellectual superiority over that numerous, perpetually needy and wretched part of our studying youth of both sexes who, in the capitals, as a rule, from morning till night wear out the thresholds of various newspapers and journals, unable to think of anything better than the eternal repetition of one and the same request — for translations from the French or for copying work.
> A long «который»-clause anchoring the digression: «которая» (which) opens a sweeping relative clause describing 'that part of our studying youth' — agreeing with «частью» (fem. sing.) but standing as nominative subject of «обивает» within its own clause. The relative pronoun's case is set by its role inside the clause, not by its antecedent's instrumental.
> «обивать пороги» — to wear out thresholds: A vivid idiom: «обивать пороги» (literally 'to knock the thresholds bare') means to haunt someone's door begging, to dance attendance fruitlessly. The needy students 'wear out the thresholds' of editors — endlessly importuning for hack-work.
> Present active participle + bookish long-form endings: «нуждающеюся» (perpetually needy) is a present active participle from «нуждаться», declined like an adjective and agreeing with «частью» in the instrumental. Its «-ею» ending (and «-ою» on «многочисленною», «несчастною») is the archaic, literary long-form instrumental for «-ей/-ой».

Познакомившись с редакциями, Иван Федорович всё время потом не разрывал связей с ними и в последние свои годы в университете стал печатать весьма талантливые разборы книг на разные специальные темы, так что даже стал в литературных кружках известен.  
Having made the acquaintance of the editorial offices, Ivan Fyodorovitch never afterward severed his ties with them, and in his last years at the university he began to publish highly talented reviews of books on various specialized subjects, so that he even became known in literary circles.
> Perfective gerund + instrumental after «с»: «Познакомившись» (having got acquainted) is a perfective past gerund; «с редакциями» (with the editorial offices) is «с» + instrumental, the case this verb demands for the party one becomes acquainted with. The gerund sets the prior step before the main verbs.
> Inceptive «стать» + short adjective predicate: «стал печатать» is inceptive 'began to publish' (with imperfective infinitive); «стал… известен» pairs «стать» with the short-form adjective «известен» ('became known'). The short adjective, used only predicatively, is the bookish predicate form after «стать».
> «разбор» — a critical review: A «разбор» (from «разобрать», to take apart, analyse) is a critical analysis or review — 'highly talented reviews of books.' The word frames Ivan as a serious critic, not a mere journalist, marking his ascent in «литературные кружки» (literary circles).

Впрочем, лишь в самое только последнее время ему удалось случайно обратить на себя вдруг особенное внимание в гораздо большем круге читателей, так что его весьма многие разом тогда отметили и запомнили.  
It was only quite recently, however, that he chanced to draw upon himself the particular attention of a far wider circle of readers, so that a great many people then at once took notice of him and remembered him.
> Dative-subject «удалось» + reflexive «на себя»: «удалось» ('it succeeded, he managed') is impersonal with a dative experiencer «ему» — 'he chanced to / managed to.' Its complement «обратить на себя внимание» ('to draw attention to oneself') uses the reflexive «себя», pointing back to Ivan.
> «в самое последнее время» — only very recently: An emphatic time-phrase: «самое» (the very) + «последнее время» (the latest time), with «только» ('only') — 'only quite recently.' The piling of intensifiers ('only very lately indeed') flags that the narrator is steering us toward the novel's present and the famous article to come.

Это был довольно любопытный случай.  
It was a rather curious case.
> Zero-copula past with «был» + nominative: «Это был… случай» — past tense of 'to be' with a nominative complement «случай» ('it was a rather curious case'). In the past Russian uses «был», agreeing in gender with the predicate noun; the complement here stays nominative (a definitional 'X was Y').

Уже выйдя из университета и приготовляясь на свои две тысячи съездить за границу, Иван Федорович вдруг напечатал в одной из больших газет одну странную статью, обратившую на себя внимание даже и неспециалистов, и, главное, по предмету, по-видимому, вовсе ему незнакомому, потому что кончил он курс естественником.  
Having already left the university and preparing to go abroad on his two thousand, Ivan Fyodorovitch suddenly published in one of the large newspapers a strange article that drew attention even from non-specialists, and, above all, on a subject seemingly quite alien to him, since he had completed his course as a natural scientist.
> Perfective + imperfective gerunds side by side: «выйдя» (having left — perfective, prior) and «приготовляясь» (preparing — imperfective, simultaneous) are two gerunds with contrasting aspect: one names a completed step behind him, the other an ongoing state he was in. The aspect choice tells you the time-relation of each to the main verb.
> Past active participle + reflexive «на себя»: «обратившую» (which drew) is a past active participle agreeing with «статью» (accusative), and it keeps the reflexive object «на себя» ('to itself') — 'an article that drew attention to itself.' The participle condenses a whole 'which drew…' clause.
> «естественник» + predicate instrumental: An «естественник» is a student of the natural sciences. The instrumental «естественником» is a predicate instrumental — 'finished his course as a natural scientist,' framing the capacity/role he ended in. The irony: a scientist publishing on the ecclesiastical courts.

Статья была написана на поднявшийся повсеместно тогда вопрос о церковном суде.  
The article was written on the question, then raised everywhere, of the ecclesiastical courts.
> Periphrastic passive: быть + short participle: «была написана» is the textbook past passive: the verb «быть» (была) plus the short past passive participle «написана», agreeing with «статья» in feminine singular — 'the article was written.' The short participle states the result, the быть supplies the past tense.
> Past active participle + reflexive «-ся»: «поднявшийся» (which had arisen) is a past active participle with reflexive «-ся» from «подняться», agreeing with «вопрос» (accusative after «на») — 'the question, then raised everywhere.' The middle/intransitive «-ся» gives 'arose' rather than 'was raised by someone.'

Разбирая некоторые уже поданные мнения об этом вопросе, он высказал и свой личный взгляд.  
Analyzing certain opinions already advanced on this question, he also set forth his own personal view.
> Imperfective gerund of accompanying action: «Разбирая» (analysing) is an imperfective present gerund in «-я», naming the activity going on as he set forth his view — 'analysing certain opinions…, he also set forth his own.' It shares the subject «он» and frames the main clause.
> Past passive participle as attribute: «поданные» (already advanced/submitted) is a past passive participle from perfective «подать», used attributively before «мнения» and agreeing in accusative plural — 'opinions already advanced.' The long-form passive participle modifies the noun like an adjective.

Главное было в тоне и в замечательной неожиданности заключения.  
The main thing lay in the tone and in the remarkable unexpectedness of the conclusion.
> Substantivised adjective «главное» as subject: «Главное» ('the main thing') is a neuter adjective used as a noun — the subject of «было» — with the predicate located by «в» + prepositional: «в тоне… в неожиданности» ('lay in the tone… in the unexpectedness'). Russian freely turns adjectives into abstract nouns this way.

А между тем многие из церковников решительно сочли автора за своего.  
And yet many among the churchmen decidedly counted the author as one of their own.
> Adversative «а между тем»: «А между тем» ('and yet, meanwhile, all the while') opens with the mild contrastive «а» plus «между тем» ('in the meantime'), pivoting to the surprising reaction. It is the narrator's hinge into the article's paradoxical reception.
> «счесть… за» + accusative: «сочли… за своего» ('counted the author as one of their own') uses «счесть кого-то за кого-то» — to reckon someone as something, with «за» + accusative for the 'as.' «своего» (their own) is the reflexive possessive «свой» in the animate accusative.
> «церковник» — a churchman: A «церковник» is a 'churchman,' a partisan of the Church and clergy (sometimes faintly disparaging, 'clerical'). The narrator sets the «церковники» against the «гражданственники» and «атеисты» of the next sentence — the rival camps Ivan's slippery article somehow pleased all at once.

И вдруг рядом с ними не только гражданственники, но даже сами атеисты принялись и с своей стороны аплодировать.  
And suddenly, alongside them, not only the civic-minded but even the atheists themselves set about applauding for their part as well.
> «не только… но даже» + inceptive «приняться»: The correlative «не только… но даже» ('not only… but even') stages the escalation; «принялись… аплодировать» is «приняться» + imperfective infinitive, an inceptive 'set about applauding.' «сами атеисты» ('the atheists themselves') uses intensive «сам» for the punchline.
> «гражданственники» — the civic-minded: A coinage from «гражданственность» (civic-mindedness, citizenship): roughly 'the civic party, the secular liberals' who championed civil authority over the Church's. The narrator lines up the era's ideological factions — clergy, liberals, atheists — to show how Ivan's article confounded them all.

В конце концов некоторые догадливые люди решили, что вся статья есть лишь дерзкий фарс и насмешка.  
In the end certain shrewd people decided that the whole article was nothing but an insolent farce and a mockery.
> The bookish copula «есть»: Russian normally drops the present-tense 'to be,' but here it keeps «есть» — «статья есть лишь… фарс» ('the article is nothing but a farce'). The overt «есть» is bookish and emphatic, lending the verdict a formal, almost logical finality. The complement «фарс» stays nominative.
> «догадливый» — quick to guess: «догадливый» (from «догадаться», to guess, twig) means shrewd, quick on the uptake, good at reading between the lines — 'certain shrewd people.' The word credits these readers with seeing through the article to the «дерзкий фарс» (insolent farce) beneath — Ivan's characteristic double game.

Упоминаю о сем случае особенно потому, что статья эта своевременно проникла и в подгородный знаменитый наш монастырь, где возникшим вопросом о церковном суде вообще интересовались, — проникла и произвела совершенное недоумение.  
I mention this case in particular because the article in due course also penetrated to our famous monastery near the town, where the question that had arisen about the ecclesiastical courts was of general interest — penetrated, and produced utter bewilderment.
> «сей» — the bookish 'this': «сем» is the prepositional of «сей» (this), an archaic literary demonstrative that 19th-century prose keeps where speech would use «этот». The narrator's «о сем случае» (about this case) lends the chronicle a faintly old-fashioned, deliberate dignity.
> «потому что» — explaining the cause: The subordinating conjunction «потому что» (because) opens a dependent clause giving the reason: he mentions the case because the article reached the monastery. Note the comma falling inside the pair, an older punctuation habit.
> Past active participle «возникшим»: «возникшим» is the past active participle of «возникнуть» (to arise), here in the instrumental to agree with «вопросом» after «интересовались». It compresses a whole relative clause — 'the question that had arisen' — into a single modifier, a hallmark of literary narration.
> «интересоваться» governs the instrumental: The reflexive verb «интересоваться» (to be interested in) takes its object in the instrumental, not the accusative: «интересовались возникшим вопросом» — they took an interest in the question that had arisen.
> Perfective verbs move the action forward: The repeated perfective past pair «проникла ... произвела» (penetrated ... produced) reports two single completed events; the rhetorical repetition of «проникла» frames the second clause as the punchline. Perfectives like these carry the narrative's forward steps against the imperfective background.

Узнав же имя автора, заинтересовались и тем, что он уроженец нашего города и сын «вот этого самого Федора Павловича».  
On learning the author's name, they grew interested too in the fact that he was a native of our town and the son of "that very same Fyodor Pavlovitch."
> Perfective gerund «узнав»: «узнав» is the perfective adverbial participle (деепричастие) of «узнать» (to learn, find out): 'having learned the author's name'. It names a completed prior action sharing the main subject of the clause (the townspeople).
> The particle «же» as a soft hinge: Here «же» is unstressed and lightly resumptive — 'and on learning...', 'now, on learning...' — nudging the narrative onward rather than insisting. It is one of the small modal particles that give Russian narration its conversational texture.
> Correlative «тем, что»: «заинтересоваться» again takes the instrumental, here the demonstrative «тем» pointing forward to the «что»-clause: literally 'grew interested in that [fact], that he was...'. The correlative «тем, что» is the standard way Russian hangs a content clause on a verb that wants a case.
> «уроженец» — a native of: «уроженец» means a native, someone born in a given place (here «нашего города», our town). It is a slightly formal, register-neutral word that fixes a person to a birthplace — exactly the rootedness the narrator likes to track.

А тут вдруг к самому этому времени явился к нам и сам автор.  
And then suddenly, just about this very time, the author himself appeared among us.
> «А» as a narrative pivot: Sentence-initial «А» is the mild contrastive coordinator — not quite 'but', more a turning of the camera: 'and now, just then'. Paired with «тут вдруг» (suddenly, right then) it springs the surprise of the author's own arrival.
> Comment-last word order: The new, weighted information «сам автор» (the author himself) lands at the very end, after the verb and adverbials — the topic-comment rhythm Russian's free word order allows. English must front the subject; Russian saves it for the climax.
> «явиться» — to appear, turn up: «явился» is the perfective past of the reflexive «явиться» (to appear, present oneself). The -ся here is the lexicalized middle: the verb simply means 'show up', a touch more vivid and sudden than «приехать».

Зачем приехал тогда к нам Иван Федорович, — я, помню, даже и тогда еще задавал себе этот вопрос с каким-то почти беспокойством.  
Why Ivan Fyodorovitch had come to us then — I remember that even at the time I kept putting this question to myself with a sort of almost uneasy feeling.
> Fronted question word, inverted subject: The embedded question opens with «Зачем» (why, to what end) and pushes the subject «Иван Федорович» behind the verb — interrogative-first order. The whole clause is the narrator's remembered question, set off before the main 'I kept asking myself'.
> Reflexive pronoun «себе» + imperfective for repetition: «себе» is the dative of the reflexive «себя» (to oneself), referring back to the narrator. The imperfective «задавал» (was putting/kept putting) signals a repeated, habitual action — he asked himself again and again, not once.
> Indefinite «-то» — a vague unease: «каким-то» is «какой» plus the clitic «-то», marking a specific but unnameable quality: 'with a sort of, some kind of, uneasiness'. The «-то» captures the narrator's inability to pin the feeling down — a recurring Dostoevskian hedge.

Столь роковой приезд этот, послуживший началом ко стольким последствиям, для меня долго потом, почти всегда, оставался делом неясным.  
This so fateful arrival, which served as the beginning of so many consequences, remained for me long afterward, almost always, an obscure business.
> «роковой» — fateful, fatal: «роковой» (from «рок», fate/doom) means fateful in the heavy sense of decreed by destiny, often with a foreboding of disaster. The narrator flags this arrival as the seed of «стольких последствий» — so many consequences — to come.
> Past active participle + dative-governing «к»: «послуживший» (which served) is a past active participle agreeing with «приезд». The verb «послужить» pairs with «к» + dative, giving «началом ко стольким последствиям» — served as the beginning to so many consequences; «началом» itself is the instrumental of the predicate.
> Instrumental of the predicate after «оставаться»: «оставаться» (to remain), like «быть» and «стать», takes its predicate noun in the instrumental: «оставался делом неясным» — remained an obscure business. The instrumental frames the state as one that held over time rather than an inherent identity.
> «ко» — the lengthened «к»: The preposition «к» becomes «ко» before certain awkward consonant clusters («ко стольким», «ко мне»). It is purely euphonic — the same dative-governing 'to/toward' — and the bookish «столь/стольким» (so/so many) heightens the rhetorical weight.

Вообще судя, странно было, что молодой человек, столь ученый, столь гордый и осторожный на вид, вдруг явился в такой безобразный дом, к такому отцу, который всю жизнь его игнорировал, не знал его и не помнил, и хоть не дал бы, конечно, денег ни за что и ни в каком случае, если бы сын у него попросил, но всё же всю жизнь боялся, что и сыновья, Иван и Алексей, тоже когда-нибудь придут да и попросят денег.  
Judging in general, it was strange that a young man, so learned, so proud and outwardly so cautious, should suddenly turn up in such an unseemly house, to such a father — one who had ignored him his whole life, neither knew nor remembered him, and who, though he would of course never have given him money on any account whatsoever had his son asked for it, yet all his life feared that the sons too, Ivan and Alexey, would someday come and ask him for money.
> Gerund in the set phrase «судя»: «судя» is the imperfective gerund of «судить» (to judge); «вообще судя» means 'judging in general, all things considered'. The same gerund survives in the fixed «судя по» (judging by), one of the few деепричастия that has hardened into an everyday connective.
> Bookish «столь» and stacked adjectives: «столь» (so, to such a degree) is the literary equivalent of «такой/так», piling up qualities — so learned, so proud and cautious. The triple «столь» is rhetorical inversion building the portrait before the surprising main verb «явился».
> «который»-clause with negation: The relative «который» (nominative, the father as subject) heads a long clause; within it «не знал ... и не помнил» negates two verbs with «не». 'Did not know and did not remember' lays bare the father's total neglect through plain serial negation.
> Counterfactual conditional with «бы ... если бы»: This is a full irrealis: the past-form verbs plus «бы» in both halves — «не дал бы» (would not have given) and «если бы ... попросил» (had [his son] asked). Russian's single conditional mood handles both the unrealized condition and its result.
> «ни за что» — not on any account: A doubled emphatic negative: «ни за что» (not for anything) reinforced by «ни в каком случае» (in no case whatsoever). The «ни ... ни» piling drives the father's absolute refusal home — Russian negative concord at full rhetorical stretch.
> «да и» + object-of-request genitive «денег»: «да и» here is the folksy, expressive 'and then just' (придут да и попросят — would come and just ask). «денег» is the genitive that «попросить» demands (the object-of-request genitive, akin to the partitive: просить денег, помощи, совета); the clause is fully affirmative and contains no negation.

И вот молодой человек поселяется в доме такого отца, живет с ним месяц и другой, и оба уживаются как не надо лучше.  
And here the young man takes up lodging in the house of such a father, lives with him a month and another, and the two of them get on as well as could possibly be.
> Historic present in imperfective: The narrator switches to the vivid present — «поселяется» (takes up lodging), «живет» (lives), «уживаются» (get along) — though the events are past. Only imperfectives form a present, and this 'historic present' pulls the reader into the scene as if watching it unfold.
> «уживаться» — to get along under one roof: «уживаться/ужиться» (with the «-ся» middle) means to live together harmoniously, to rub along. The root «жить» (to live) plus the prefix «у-» gives 'manage to coexist' — pointedly used of two such incompatible men.
> «как не надо лучше» — couldn't be better: A colloquial idiom: literally 'as no better is needed', i.e. as well as could possibly be, splendidly. The casual phrasing winks at how absurdly the mismatched pair hit it off.

Последнее даже особенно удивило не только меня, но и многих других.  
This last point astonished not only me, but many others as well.
> Substantivized neuter adjective «последнее»: «Последнее» (the last [thing/point]) is an adjective used as a noun in the neuter, summing up the whole preceding clause — 'this last fact'. Russian readily nominalizes adjectives this way to refer back to a situation.
> Correlative «не только ..., но и ...»: The framework «не только X, но и Y» (not only X but also Y) coordinates the two objects «меня» and «многих других» (both accusative/genitive after «удивило»). It is the standard additive correlative, escalating from the narrator to the wider community.

Петр Александрович Миусов, о котором я говорил уже выше, дальний родственник Федора Павловича по его первой жене, случился тогда опять у нас, в своем подгородном имении, пожаловав из Парижа, в котором уже совсем поселился.  
Pyotr Alexandrovitch Miüsov, of whom I have already spoken above, a distant relative of Fyodor Pavlovitch's through his first wife, happened to be among us again at that time, on his estate near the town, having come over from Paris, in which he had by then settled altogether.
> Perfective gerund «пожаловав»: «пожаловав» is the perfective gerund of the archaic-genteel «пожаловать» (to deign to come, to arrive): 'having come over'. The word carries an ironic courtliness fitting Miüsov's grand manner, and as a gerund it bundles the prior action onto the main «случился».
> Relative «о котором» in the prepositional: «который» here takes the prepositional after «о» (about whom), while still agreeing in masculine singular with Miüsov. It shows the rule cleanly: «который» borrows gender/number from its antecedent but its case from its own job in the clause.
> «случиться» — to happen to be present: Beyond 'to happen', «случиться» can mean to chance to be somewhere: «случился тогда опять у нас» — happened to be among us again. The «-ся» verb conveys the accidental, unplanned quality of his being on his estate just then.

Помню, он-то именно и дивился всех более, познакомившись с заинтересовавшим его чрезвычайно молодым человеком, с которым он не без внутренней боли пикировался иногда познаниями.  
I remember that it was he, in fact, who marveled most of all, on becoming acquainted with the young man, who interested him exceedingly, and with whom he would now and then, not without an inward pang, fence in matters of learning.
> Emphatic clitic «-то» on the pronoun: «он-то» uses the stressing «-то» (distinct from the indefinite «-то»): 'it was he, of all people'. Reinforced by «именно» (precisely), it singles Miüsov out as the very one who marveled most — emphatic topic-marking.
> Perfective gerund + instrumental after «с»: «познакомившись» is the perfective gerund of «познакомиться» (to make acquaintance): 'on becoming acquainted'. The verb governs «с» + instrumental — «с молодым человеком» — so the gerund drags its whole instrumental phrase along.
> Past active participle modifying «человеком»: «заинтересовавшим» (which had greatly interested [him]) is a past active participle in the instrumental, agreeing with «человеком». Russian comfortably stacks a participial phrase before its noun where English needs a 'who'-clause: 'the young man who interested him exceedingly'.
> «пикироваться» — to spar verbally: «пикироваться» (from French piquer) means to exchange barbed remarks, to fence in words. «пикировался познаниями» — sparred with [his] learning, in the instrumental of means — and «не без внутренней боли» (not without inward pain) betrays Miüsov's wounded vanity at being outmatched.

«Он горд, — говорил он нам тогда про него, — всегда добудет себе копейку, у него и теперь есть деньги на заграницу — чего ж ему здесь надо?  
"He is proud," he used to say to us then about him; "he will always scrape together a kopeck for himself; even now he has money for going abroad — so what does he need here?
> Short-form adjective «горд»: «горд» is the short (predicative) form of «гордый» (proud), used here as the bald assertion of a trait: 'He is proud.' The short form is bookish and gives a crisp, almost verdict-like quality to Miüsov's pronouncement.
> Perfective future «добудет»: «добудет» is the perfective future of «добыть» (to get, procure) — conjugated like a present but meaning 'he will [manage to] get'. With «себе» (dative reflexive, for himself) it predicts a completed, successful acquisition: he'll always scrape a kopeck together.
> Dative subject + genitive object with «надо»: Impersonal «надо» (one needs) takes the experiencer in the dative — «ему» (he needs) — and no nominative subject. «чего» is the genitive of «что» governed by «надо» (to need something), and «ж» is reduced «же», sharpening the rhetorical 'so what on earth does he need here?'

Всем ясно, что он приехал к отцу не за деньгами, потому что во всяком случае отец их не даст.  
It is clear to everyone that he has not come to his father for money, for in any case his father will not give it.
> Dative experiencer with «ясно»: «Всем ясно» is the impersonal pattern: the neuter predicative «ясно» (it is clear) plus the dative «всем» (to everyone). There is no nominative subject — the clarity is felt by the people, framed as happening to them.
> «за» + instrumental = to fetch: «за» with the instrumental means 'after, to fetch': «за деньгами» — for [the purpose of getting] money. Negated here — he did not come for money — it pairs with the next clause's reason.
> Perfective future under negation: «не даст» is the negated perfective future of «дать» (to give): 'will not give'. Aspect makes it a flat, final refusal — not 'won't be giving' but 'won't give [it], full stop'. «их» (them, i.e. the money) is the object pronoun.

Пить вино и развратничать он не любит, а между тем старик и обойтись без него не может, до того ужились!»  
He is not fond of drinking wine or of debauchery, and yet the old man cannot do without him — so well have the two of them hit it off!"
> «развратничать» — to lead a dissolute life: «развратничать» (from «разврат», debauchery) is an imperfective verb meaning to live loosely, to indulge in vice. The «-ничать» suffix forms verbs of habitual behavior; here it sums up exactly the life old Karamazov leads and Ivan does not.
> Contrastive «а» + «между тем»: «а» is the gentle adversative 'and yet / whereas', and «между тем» (meanwhile, all the same) reinforces the turn: the son shuns vice, yet the old man can't do without him. This «а»-hinge is the constant pivot of Russian argument.
> «без» + genitive; negated modal: «без» governs the genitive — «без него» (without him) — and «не может обойтись» means 'cannot do without'. The reflexive «обойтись» (to manage, make do) plus genitive complement is the idiomatic way to say one cannot dispense with someone.
> «до того ... !» — to such a degree: «до того» (to such an extent) caps the exclamation: 'so well have they hit it off!' The perfective «ужились» (have grown to live together) with the exclamatory «до того» conveys astonished emphasis — the very point Miüsov keeps marveling at.

Это была правда; молодой человек имел даже видимое влияние на старика; тот почти начал его иногда как будто слушаться, хотя был чрезвычайно и даже злобно подчас своенравен; даже вести себя начал иногда приличнее...  
This was the truth; the young man even had a visible influence over the old man, who almost began at times as though to obey him, though he was exceedingly, and at times even spitefully, willful; he even began on occasion to behave more decently...
> «тот» distinguishing the referents: «тот» (that one) is used to pin reference on the father — the more remote of the two just mentioned — keeping 'the young man' and 'the old man' apart without repeating names. This is the demonstrative doing the topic-tracking that free word order requires.
> «слушаться» + genitive — to obey: «слушаться» (to obey, heed) is a «-ся» verb that governs the genitive of the person obeyed (here «его» understood). Distinct from plain «слушать» (to listen to + accusative), the reflexive form specifically means submitting to someone's will.
> «своенравный» — willful, headstrong: «своенравен» is the short form of «своенравный» (literally 'of one's own temper' — «свой» + «нрав»), meaning self-willed, capricious. The short form makes it a predicate: 'he was willful'; «злобно подчас» (at times spitefully) sharpens it into the old man's malice.
> Comparative «приличнее»: «приличнее» is the invariable predicative comparative of «приличный» (decent, proper): 'more decently'. Built with -ее, it stands as an adverb after «вести себя» (to behave) — the old man began conducting himself more properly.

Только впоследствии объяснилось, что Иван Федорович приезжал отчасти по просьбе и по делам своего старшего брата, Дмитрия Федоровича, которого в первый раз отроду узнал и увидал тоже почти в это же самое время, в этот самый приезд, но с которым, однако же, по одному важному случаю, касавшемуся более Дмитрия Федоровича, вступил еще до приезда своего из Москвы в переписку.  
Only afterward did it come to light that Ivan Fyodorovitch had come partly at the request and on the affairs of his elder brother, Dmitri Fyodorovitch, whom he came to know and saw for the first time in his life at almost this very same period, on this very visit, but with whom, however, on a certain important matter that concerned Dmitri Fyodorovitch more nearly, he had entered into correspondence even before his arrival from Moscow.
> Reflexive «объясниться» as impersonal 'it came to light': «объяснилось» (it became clear, came to light) is the «-ся» form used impersonally, with the «что»-clause as its real content. The middle voice removes any agent — the truth simply emerged — a favourite Dostoevskian way of letting facts surface on their own.
> Two «который»-clauses, two cases: The same antecedent (the brother Dmitri) heads two relatives: «которого ... узнал» (accusative/genitive object, 'whom he came to know') and «с которым ... вступил в переписку» (instrumental after «с», 'with whom he entered correspondence'). Each takes the case its own clause demands.
> Past active participle «касавшийся»: «касавшемуся» is the past active participle of «касаться» (to concern, touch upon), in the dative agreeing with «случаю». «касаться» governs the genitive — «касавшемуся ... Дмитрия Федоровича» (concerning Dmitri) — so the participle carries its genitive object with it.
> «отроду» — in one's life, ever: «отроду» (from «от роду», from birth) is an adverbial meaning 'in [his] whole life', usually with a negative or 'first time' sense: «в первый раз отроду узнал» — came to know for the first time in his life. A compact, slightly folksy fossil phrase.

Какое это было дело, читатель вполне узнает в свое время в подробности.  
What that matter was, the reader will learn fully in due time and in detail.
> Fronted clause as topic: The whole indirect question «Какое это было дело» (what that matter was) is hauled to the front as topic, before the main clause names «читатель» (the reader) and the verb «узнает». Russian's information-structure lets the unanswered question hang first, the resolution promised after.
> Perfective future «узнает»: «узнает» is the perfective future of «узнать» (to find out): 'will learn'. The perfective promises a complete, eventual revelation — the narrator's recurring direct address to «читатель» (reader), deferring the full story to its proper time.

Тем не менее даже тогда, когда я уже знал и про это особенное обстоятельство, мне Иван Федорович всё казался загадочным, а приезд его к нам все-таки необъяснимым.  
Nevertheless, even then, when I already knew about this particular circumstance too, Ivan Fyodorovitch still seemed enigmatic to me, and his arrival among us inexplicable all the same.
> Correlative «тогда, когда»: «тогда, когда» (then, when) is the temporal correlative: the main-clause «тогда» anchors the time that the «когда»-clause specifies — 'even then, when I already knew'. The imperfective «знал» marks a state of knowledge holding over that period.
> Instrumental predicate after «казаться»: «казаться» (to seem) takes its predicate in the instrumental: «казался загадочным» — seemed enigmatic. Likewise the parallel «приезд ... необъяснимым» (the arrival inexplicable) leaves «казался» understood, both predicates in the instrumental of a seeming state.
> Contrastive «а» and concessive «все-таки»: «а» pivots from the man to his arrival, while «все-таки» (all the same, nonetheless) concedes the prior knowledge yet insists the mystery remained. Together they stage the narrator's lingering puzzlement against the facts he has just supplied.

Прибавлю еще, что Иван Федорович имел тогда вид посредника и примирителя между отцом и затеявшим тогда большую ссору и даже формальный иск на отца старшим братом своим, Дмитрием Федоровичем.  
I will add further that Ivan Fyodorovitch had at that time the air of a mediator and peacemaker between his father and his elder brother, Dmitri Fyodorovitch, who had then started up a great quarrel and even a formal lawsuit against their father.
> Perfective future «прибавлю»: «Прибавлю» is the perfective future of «прибавить» (to add): 'I will add'. The narrator uses it performatively, announcing the very act of adding — a self-conscious chronicler gesture — followed by the reporting «что»-clause.
> Past active participle bundling a long object: «затеявшим» (who had started up) is a past active participle in the instrumental agreeing with «братом», and it gathers both objects «большую ссору ... и ... иск» (a great quarrel and a lawsuit). Russian packs the entire relative idea ahead of the noun where English unrolls a 'who had...' clause.
> Reflexive possessive «свой»: «своим» (his own) is the reflexive possessive, pointing back to the clause's subject Ivan — his own brother. Using «его» instead would risk meaning someone else's brother; «свой» keeps the relation bound to the subject.

Семейка эта, повторяю, сошлась тогда вся вместе в первый раз в жизни, и некоторые члены ее в первый раз в жизни увидали друг друга.  
This little family, I repeat, came together then all in one place for the first time in their lives, and some of its members saw one another for the first time in their lives.
> «семейка» — the pejorative diminutive: «семейка» is «семья» (family) with the suffix «-ка», here not affectionate but faintly contemptuous and ironic — 'this precious little family', 'this fine clan'. Such expressive diminutives let the narrator color his report with a wry distaste for the Karamazovs.
> Reflexive «сойтись» — to come together: «сошлась» is the perfective past of «сойтись» (to gather, come together), with the «-ся» giving a reciprocal/collective sense: the family converged. The feminine «-сь/-лась» agrees with «семейка».
> Reciprocal «друг друга»: «друг друга» (one another) is the fixed reciprocal pronoun; only its second element declines for case (друг друга, друг другу, друг с другом). Here it is the accusative object of «увидали» — some members saw each other for the first time.

Лишь один только младший сын, Алексей Федорович, уже с год пред тем как проживал у нас и попал к нам, таким образом, раньше всех братьев.  
Only the youngest son, Alexey Fyodorovitch, had already been living among us for a year before that, and had thus come to us earlier than all his brothers.
> Triple emphasis «лишь один только»: «лишь», «один», and «только» all mean 'only/alone', stacked for emphasis: 'one single ... only'. The redundancy is rhetorical, isolating Alyosha as the sole exception — he alone had come earlier.
> Archaic «пред тем как» + durative imperfective: «пред» is the bookish, shortened «перед» (before), and «пред тем как» means 'before [the time] that'. The imperfective «проживал» (had been living) marks the ongoing year-long residence, and «с год» means 'for about a year'.
> «попасть» — to end up, land somewhere: «попал» (perfective of «попасть») means to get to, land in, end up at a place, often by chance or circumstance: «попал к нам ... раньше всех» — came to be among us before everyone. It quietly suggests Alyosha's arrival was less deliberate than fated.

Вот про этого-то Алексея мне всего труднее говорить теперешним моим предисловным рассказом прежде чем вывести его на сцену в романе.  
It is precisely about this Alexey that I find it hardest of all to speak in this present prefatory account of mine, before bringing him onto the stage of the novel.
> Emphatic «-то» + colloquial «про»: The clitic «-то» on «этого» singles Alyosha out — 'it is precisely about this Alexey'. «про» (+ accusative) is the colloquial 'about', warmer and more conversational than «о», fitting the narrator's intimate confiding tone.
> Dative subject with superlative «всего труднее»: Impersonal again: the experiencer «мне» (to me) in the dative, with «труднее» (harder) the predicative comparative and «всего» (of all) turning it into a superlative — 'hardest of all for me to speak'. No nominative subject; the difficulty is something felt.
> «предисловный» — prefatory: «предисловный» (adjective from «предисловие», preface) means prefatory, introductory — «предисловным рассказом» in the instrumental, 'by means of this prefatory account'. The narrator keeps flagging that we are still in the threshold material before the novel proper.

Но придется и про него написать предисловие, по крайней мере чтобы разъяснить предварительно один очень странный пункт, именно: будущего героя моего я принужден представить читателям с первой сцены его романа в ряске послушника.  
But a preface will have to be written about him as well, if only to explain beforehand one very strange point — namely: I am compelled to present my future hero to the reader, from the very first scene of his novel, in the cassock of a novice.
> Impersonal «придётся» + infinitive: «придётся» (it will fall to one, one will have to) is an impersonal future from «прийтись», taking a dative experiencer (here implied 'to me') and an infinitive «написать». It expresses an obligation imposed by circumstance rather than chosen.
> Purpose clause with «чтобы»: «чтобы» + infinitive marks purpose: 'in order to explain'. When the subject is the same as the main clause, «чтобы» takes a bare infinitive («разъяснить»); with a different subject it would take a past-form irrealis. Here it states why the preface is needed.
> Short passive participle «принуждён»: «принужден» is the short-form past passive participle of «принудить» (to compel): 'I am compelled'. The short passive participle plus an infinitive is the standard way to say one is forced/obliged to do something — formal and weighty here.

Да, уже с год как проживал он тогда в нашем монастыре и, казалось, на всю жизнь готовился в нем затвориться.  
Yes, he had by then been living for a year in our monastery and seemed to be preparing to shut himself up in it for the whole of his life.
> Durative imperfective for a year's residence: «проживал» (imperfective past of «проживать», to reside) with «уже с год как» (already for about a year) describes an ongoing state stretching back — he had been living there a year. The imperfective is the natural choice for such continuous background.
> Imperfective «готовился» + perfective infinitive «затвориться»: The aspect pair tells the story: imperfective «готовился» (was preparing — an ongoing process) governs the perfective infinitive «затвориться» (to shut oneself away — the single intended outcome). Process aiming at a completed result, the two aspects working in tandem.
---

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.