Learn Hardcore Greek: Τελικά δεν θα έρθω στο εστιατόριο, θα δουλεύω. - In the end I won’t come to the restaurant, I will be working.

At the start: Τελικά, δεν θα έρθω...
At the end: Δεν θα έρθω..., τελικά.
After the verb: Δεν θα έρθω τελικά... Position mainly affects emphasis, not meaning. Beginning or end is most natural in speech.

Why is there no subject pronoun like εγώ for “I”?

Modern Greek is a “pro‑drop” language: the verb ending shows the subject. Θα έρθω and θα δουλεύω both end in -ω, which marks 1st person singular. You add εγώ only for contrast or emphasis, e.g., Εγώ δεν θα έρθω...

Why is the negation δεν used with θα? Could it be μην?

With indicative statements (including futures with θα), you use δεν: δεν θα έρθω. Μην is used with the subjunctive/imperative or after να/ας, e.g., να μην έρθω; (should I not come?).

Is the comma between the two clauses okay without γιατί?

Yes. Greek often places two independent clauses side by side, and the causal link is understood: ..., θα δουλεύω implies “..., (because) I’ll be working.” For explicitness you can write ..., γιατί/επειδή θα δουλεύω.

Why is it δεν θα έρθω (simple future) but θα δουλεύω (future continuous)?

Δεν θα έρθω = a single, completed event (I won’t arrive/come at all).
Θα δουλεύω = an ongoing state at that time (I will be in the middle of working). This contrast neatly explains why you can’t come: you’ll be engaged in a continuing activity then.

Could I say θα δουλέψω instead of θα δουλεύω?

You could, but it changes the aspect:

Θα δουλεύω = I’ll be working (ongoing/over a period).
Θα δουλέψω = I will work (one bout/completed task). To justify not coming, the ongoing θα δουλεύω is more natural.

Can Greek use the present to talk about the future here, like δουλεύω?

Yes. With a time reference it’s common: Αύριο δεν θα έρθω..., δουλεύω. Without a time cue, θα δουλεύω makes the future time clear. So both are possible; θα δουλεύω is unambiguous.

What is στο exactly?

Στο is the contracted form of σε + το (“to/at/in + the” for neuter nouns). Greek regularly contracts:

σε + τον → στον (masc.), σε + τη(ν) → στη(ν) (fem.), σε + το → στο (neut.). Here, εστιατόριο is neuter, so στο εστιατόριο.

Why the definite article in στο εστιατόριο? Could it be indefinite?

Greek often uses the definite article for specific, known places. Στο εστιατόριο implies “the restaurant (we both have in mind).” For a nonspecific place, use σε ένα εστιατόριο (“to a restaurant”).

What is the form έρθω? Why not something like θα έρχω?

The verb έρχομαι (to come) has irregular principal parts:

Present: έρχομαι
Simple past (aorist): ήρθα
Simple future: θα έρθω
Future continuous: θα έρχομαι Greek forms the simple future with θα + aorist (subjunctive) stem, hence θα έρθω, not θα έρχω.

How do I pronounce the tricky sounds in these words?

θ in θα/έρθω = unvoiced th, like English “think.”
δ in δεν/δουλεύω = voiced th, like English “this.”
ου in δου- = [u], like “food.”
Stress marks (´) show the syllable you stress: Τελικά (final syllable), έρθω (first), εστιατόριο (το), δουλεύω (λε). Approximate IPA:
Τελικά [te.liˈka]
δεν θα [ðen θa] (colloquial δε θα [ðe θa])
έρθω [ˈerθo]
εστιατόριο [e.sti.aˈto.rio]
δουλεύω [ðuˈle.vo]

Could I say Δεν θα πάω στο εστιατόριο instead of Δεν θα έρθω?

Both are possible, but they reflect perspective:

έρχομαι = come (toward the listener’s or agreed location).
πάω/πηγαίνω = go (away from the speaker’s current location). If you’re speaking to someone at that restaurant or treating it as the shared destination, δεν θα έρθω is natural. Otherwise δεν θα πάω can be equally natural.

Is it okay to write δε θα instead of δεν θα?

Colloquially, yes: the final -ν of δεν is often dropped before many consonants, so δε θα is common. Many writers keep -ν always, and style guides recommend keeping it before vowels and certain consonants (e.g., κ, π, τ, ξ, ψ, γκ, μπ, ντ, τσ, τζ). With θ, both δεν θα and δε θα are seen; δεν θα is the safe choice.

Is the word order flexible? Can I move τελικά or the time clause around?

Yes. Typical options:

Τελικά δεν θα έρθω στο εστιατόριο, θα δουλεύω.
Δεν θα έρθω στο εστιατόριο τελικά, θα δουλεύω.
With explicit cause: Τελικά δεν θα έρθω..., γιατί θα δουλεύω. Moving τελικά changes emphasis slightly but not the core meaning.

Are both clauses referring to the same future time?

Yes. Δεν θα έρθω is a simple future event (non‑arrival), and θα δουλεύω is a simultaneous ongoing future action that explains it. If needed, a time adverb can make it explicit, e.g., Αύριο δεν θα έρθω..., θα δουλεύω.