Η όδευση διαφυγής δεν ήταν ελεύθερη, με αποτέλεσμα να κατεβούμε.

Όδευση διαφυγής is a fairly formal, technical expression. It means an escape route, egress route, or route used for evacuation.

• όδευση = routing, passage, path of movement
• διαφυγής = of escape

You are more likely to see όδευση διαφυγής in safety instructions, regulations, architecture, engineering, or official reports than in casual conversation.

In everyday Greek, people might more often say things like:

• έξοδος κινδύνου = emergency exit
• δρόμος διαφυγής = escape route
• οδος διαφυγής = escape route

So the sentence sounds correct, but somewhat formal or technical.

Διαφυγής is the genitive singular of η διαφυγή.

Greek often uses the genitive to express an of relationship:

• όδευση διαφυγής = route of escape
• in more natural English: escape route

So this is a standard Greek noun + genitive structure.

You can think of it like this:

• η διαφυγή = the escape
• της διαφυγής = of the escape
• όδευση διαφυγής = escape route / route of escape

The article is omitted here because this is a fixed, general classification, not a specific the route of the escape.

Because ελεύθερη has to agree with η όδευση, which is:

• feminine
• singular
• nominative

So the adjective also becomes:

• ελεύθερη = feminine singular nominative

Compare:

• ο δρόμος είναι ελεύθερος
• η όδευση είναι ελεύθερη
• το πέρασμα είναι ελεύθερο

Greek adjectives change form to match the noun they describe.

Not in the sense of free of charge.

Here ελεύθερη means something like:

• clear
• unobstructed
• open
• available for passage

So η όδευση διαφυγής δεν ήταν ελεύθερη means the escape route was not clear or not unobstructed.

This is a very common thing in Greek: a word that often means one thing in basic vocabulary can take a more specialized meaning in context.

Ήταν is the past form of είμαι meaning was / were.

Here it is used because the sentence is describing a state in the past:

• the escape route was not clear

That is why Greek uses δεν ήταν rather than a verb meaning a completed action. The sentence is first setting the scene or condition, and then giving the consequence.

So:

• δεν ήταν ελεύθερη = it was not clear / unobstructed

This is a description of a situation, not an action.

Με αποτέλεσμα να is a very useful structure meaning:

• with the result that
• resulting in
• so that
• and as a result

It introduces the consequence of what came before.

So the structure is:

• X, με αποτέλεσμα να Y
• X, with the result that Y
• X, resulting in Y

In this sentence:

• Η όδευση διαφυγής δεν ήταν ελεύθερη
• με αποτέλεσμα να κατεβούμε

The idea is: the escape route was blocked/not clear, and as a result we went down or had to go down.

Because με αποτέλεσμα να is followed by a subjunctive clause, and να is the marker that introduces that clause in Modern Greek.

This is very common in Greek. After many expressions, Greek does not use an infinitive the way English does. Instead, it uses:

• να
  • verb form

So rather than something like with the result to go down, Greek says:

• με αποτέλεσμα να κατεβούμε

That is simply the normal Greek pattern.

Κατεβούμε is the 1st person plural aorist subjunctive of κατεβαίνω.

So it means:

• that we go down
• in this context: that we went down or that we had to go down

Breaking it down:

• κατεβαίνω = I go down / I am going down
• να κατεβώ / να κατεβούμε = that I go down / that we go down

The aorist here shows the action as a single whole event, not as something ongoing.

This is one of the most important things for learners to understand.

After να, Greek does not have a separate past subjunctive form like English learners might expect. Instead, the verb mainly shows aspect, and the time reference usually comes from the context.

So in:

• δεν ήταν
• με αποτέλεσμα να κατεβούμε

the past time is already established by ήταν and the whole situation. Therefore να κατεβούμε is understood as the resulting action in that past situation.

So although the form itself is not a past indicative like κατεβήκαμε, it can still refer to a past event because of the structure and context.

Because after με αποτέλεσμα να, Greek requires a να-clause, not a normal past indicative clause.

Compare:

• Κατεβήκαμε = We went down
  This is a standalone past statement.

• με αποτέλεσμα να κατεβούμε = resulting in our going down / with the result that we went down
  This is a subordinate result clause.

So κατεβήκαμε would be correct in an independent sentence, but not after με αποτέλεσμα να.

Because Greek usually does not need subject pronouns when the verb ending already shows the person.

The ending -ουμε tells you the subject is we.

So:

• να κατεβούμε = for us to go down / that we go down

Greek often leaves out pronouns like εμείς unless there is special emphasis or contrast.

If you added εμείς, it would sound more emphatic:

• με αποτέλεσμα να κατεβούμε εμείς

But in a normal sentence, it is unnecessary.

It is natural Greek, but it sounds formal and somewhat technical.

A more everyday version might be:

• Η έξοδος διαφυγής δεν ήταν ελεύθερη, οπότε κατεβήκαμε.
• Ο δρόμος διαφυγής δεν ήταν ανοιχτός, οπότε κατεβήκαμε.
• Η όδευση διαφυγής δεν ήταν ελεύθερη, οπότε αναγκαστήκαμε να κατεβούμε.

The original sentence is perfectly good, especially in a report, safety description, or official context. The main thing that makes it sound formal is όδευση διαφυγής and the connector με αποτέλεσμα να.