Here's a bunch of corrections I noted last night -- some of them correspond to Ramil's points:
Quote:
Ann nodded and the last thing he saw leaving was the same thing he had done to her an hour ago: she was slapping the girl in on the cheeks (or: "in the face").
Quote:
Peter came went over to the body and started to look through his the dead man's belongings, sorting them.
Okay, major word-usage point! In a "3rd-person omniscient narrative," the verb "to come" implies either (a) movement towards the central figure (Peter), or (b) the central figures's movement towards the narrator's "frame of reference" (which is also the reader's "frame of reference"), if the narrator has temporarily shifted focus from Peter to another character.
Anyway, you could only say "Peter came over to the body" if, for example, Ann had been examining the dead man and then beckoned Peter to approach and have a look. Or you could say "Dasha jumped in surprise as Peter came into the room" -- because we've shifted focus, just temporarily, to Dasha and her reaction.
All of this is reversed for "to go" -- it implies movement either away from Peter himself, or movement by Peter away from the narrator's frame of reference (when the narrator has switched the focus from Peter to another character, or from Peter to a location). So you could say "Peter went out of the room" (the "room" being the frame of reference), or "Ann went out of the room" (away from Peter, who stayed in the room), but it would be practically impossible to say "Ann went closer to Peter." (Because, by default, movement towards Peter is expressed with "to come".)
I hope this all makes sense... I know that the "come/go" usage is tricky, and doesn't really map well onto the прийти/уйти distinction in Russian.
Quote:
He briefly examined the tommy-gun and suddenly realized that he had no idea on how to use it. Well, he could SHOOT it, he was sure of that -- unless there was some complicated 'safety' lock -- but opening the thing up to put more bullets in was an entirely different can of worms.
Everyone knows how to "use" a gun -- you just point it and pull the trigger. It's all the other details that can be tricky...
Quote:
She is married to an officer and she has seen many times how to shoot and reload when they were living at the military camp. But she doesn’t know how to clean and disassemble it.’
No mistakes here at all. I just wanted to say молодец again to Medved's eye for detail -- the importance of "cleaning and disassembling" is something that Peter (who only knows guns from Hollywood movies) would never have thought about!
Quote:
‘Not really, she was shocked and umm … I guess if I asked her to eat a spider she would’ve only asked me for some salt.’
Again, no mistakes -- just честь автору for this wonderful turn-of-phrase. (Did you invent it? Even if it's a familiar saying in Russian, it'll sound new and delightful to most English readers.)
Quote:
Peter couldn't resist some fooling around being a smart-aleck:
"Fooling around" is not incorrect, but -- especially considering Peter's obvious attraction to Ann -- it could be taken by the reader as a double-entendre, suggesting sexual flirtation (or even foreplay!) that doesn't fit into the story at this particular moment. ("Some fooling around" is what Peter and Ann will be doing a little later...)))))
Quote:
I need help to return to my home-sweet-home in the States’.
"Home-sweet-home" is the poetic cliche (and being a cliche, it sounds quite natural for Peter to use when he's being deliberately silly!)
Quote:
They’ll book me a ticket to on the nearest next flight to the United States
Except for that small correction, Peter's long block of sarcastic dialogue here was perfectly colloquial -- impressive work, Medved.
Quote:
looking at Peter with this the kind of tenderness in her eyes that you have when you’re talking to a mentally challenged person your sweet younger cousin who was born with Down Syndrome (or: "your dearly loved aunt who happens to believe there's a CIA computer-chip implanted in her brain").
"Mentally challenged person" sounds excessively PC, and also very bland. I wasn't sure whether you intended the meaning "retarded" or "crazy," so I offered two suggestions that avoid using either of these un-PC words.
Quote:
‘Sorry, but it looks like a fantastic story, sort of like those about the Martians by Herbert Wells! How will the plane share its fuel?... etc.
Peter looked at her with a faint sad smile -- in his former "timeline", plane-to-plane refuels were a common procedure for military pilots, and the Concorde could go from London to New York in just over three hours without refueling -- but all that was science-fiction in 1941, and he couldn't explain it to Ann. So he stole a corny old joke from the Marx Brothers, instead: 'Well, Ann, that's true -- we'd probably run out of fuel halfway across the Atlantic, and then we'd have to turn the plane around and fly right back to Minsk for more gas!'
'Now let's try to be serious...'
I have no idea whether Soviet audiences in 1941 would have been familiar with the Marx Brothers films -- so possibly Ann wouldn't know that Peter had stolen the joke. Also, English speakers invariably say "H.G. Wells," but I'm guessing that Ann might know him better as Херберт Вельс, or something like that? (Of course, Ann would "name-drop" H.G. Wells, whatever she calls him, to show off her knowledge of popular English literature...)
Quote:
‘Tell her my thanks "thank you" and that I don’t need anything at the moment but if I do need anything later, I’ll recall her words,’
Quote:
they are glad Dasha hasn’t shared their destiny fate.’
Ramil was exactly right! Keep in mind that "fateful" (роковой) has an etymological link with "fatal" (смертельный) -- so to our ears, the word "fate" often (but not always) sounds more negative, while "destiny" sounds more positive.
Quote:
a gray-bearded aged man. ‘Who is it he (or: "that")?’ he asked.
As I said before, "agèd" when pronounced with two syllables implies that someone is, say, 75 or older. But Ramil mentioned that a typical "headman" would have been "middle-aged" (here "aged" has one syllable!), younger than Peter in his former life.
And "Who is it?" is the formula when you hear a knock at the door; here it should be "Who is he?" or "Who is that?" (Both are normal -- not much of a difference.)
Quote:
who came close and stopped, looking at Peter
With the comma, it means something like "который подошёл и, остановився, смотрел на Питера", which I think is what you meant. Without the comma, this means something like "который подошёл и прекратил смотреть на Питера"!
Quote:
they were striding towards the building virtually sensing -- without even looking, Peter could sense the heads turned in their direction
Quote:
‘And that’s why you speak so such good English (or: "that's why you speak English so well"), I assume?’
Quote:
‘Yes exactly, she has it on her fingertips.’
This is a very un-English-sounding phrase, yet Ann's usage is close enough to the proper expression that Peter (and the reader!) would probably know what she meant -- so I would leave this unchanged. (But if you want, you could have Peter respond with the correct idiom: "Ah, your mom knows English like the back of her hand, I get it.")
Quote:
The house resembled Nikolai’s and when they came in Peter felt like a sense of deja vu.
Usually, one "has/gets a feeling of deja vu" or "feels/gets a sense of deja vu." (However, when you experience this feeling/sense, you can simply say "Deja vu!")