I agree with Azra's explanation; however, if its of question of equivalence, the following must be considered:

I think that the word might have been intentionally written as "gonag" not "konak" which is also possible for English. The reason for the author's chosing "gonag" might be to imply that the one living in the "konak" is coming from a lower social stratus; may be he is a peasant and the "konak" is granted by the Khalifa.

And in that case, the "gonag" can be better traslated as "gonag", as it is.