Learn Hardcore Greek: Σε πολλούς κλειστούς χώρους, και ειδικά σε περιπτώσεις με παιδιά, απαγορεύεται να καπνίζεις, αλλά μερικοί αγνοούν τον κανόνα. - In many closed spaces, and especially in cases with children, it is forbidden to smoke, but some people ignore the rule.

πολλούς κλειστούς χώρους is masculine accusative plural:
- πολλούς = many (masc. acc. pl.)
- κλειστούς = closed/enclosed (masc. acc. pl.)
- χώρους = spaces/areas (masc. acc. pl.)

So σε + πολλούς κλειστούς χώρους must be accusative because σε requires it, not because it’s a “direct object.”

If you changed the prepositional phrase into a subject (for example, in some other sentence), it would become nominative:

Πολλοί κλειστοί χώροι είναι επικίνδυνοι. = Many enclosed spaces are dangerous.

Why is there no article in Σε πολλούς κλειστούς χώρους? Why not Σε τους πολλούς κλειστούς χώρους?

In Greek, when you have a word of quantity like πολλούς (many), it normally replaces the article instead of co‑occurring with it.

So you say:

πολλοί άνθρωποι = many people (not οι πολλοί άνθρωποι in a generic sense)
πολλά βιβλία = many books

Similarly:

Σε πολλούς κλειστούς χώρους = In many enclosed spaces

You would only use an article if you were talking about some specific, already known subgroup, and the meaning would slightly change:

Στους πολλούς κλειστούς χώρους που είδαμε…
= In the many enclosed spaces that we saw… (those particular ones)

What is the structure and meaning of απαγορεύεται? Why is there no subject?

απαγορεύεται is the 3rd person singular, middle/passive form of the verb απαγορεύω (to forbid, to prohibit).

απαγορεύω κάτι = I forbid something
απαγορεύεται κάτι = something is forbidden / it is forbidden (for something to happen)

In this sentence, it’s used impersonally, like English “it is forbidden” or “one is not allowed”:

Σε πολλούς κλειστούς χώρους … απαγορεύεται να καπνίζεις
= In many enclosed spaces … it is forbidden to smoke.

Greek often uses the passive 3rd singular with no explicit subject to form such impersonal expressions:

Απαγορεύεται η είσοδος. = Entry is forbidden.
Επιτρέπεται το κάπνισμα; = Is smoking allowed?

Why do we say να καπνίζεις instead of an infinitive like English “to smoke”?

Modern Greek does not have an infinitive.

What English expresses with to + verb (to smoke, to go, to eat), Greek typically expresses with:

να + finite verb (subjunctive-like form)

So να καπνίζεις functions here like “to smoke”:

απαγορεύεται να καπνίζεις ≈ “it is forbidden to smoke”

The verb after να is in the present form because we are talking about the general activity / ongoing act of smoking, not a single, completed action.

Why is να καπνίζεις in the second person singular? Are we talking to one specific person?

Grammatically it is second person singular (you smoke), but here it is used in a general, impersonal, generic sense, like English:

“You can’t smoke in many indoor places.” (meaning “people can’t smoke”)

Greek often uses 2nd person singular this way to talk about general rules or habits:

Στο σχολείο δεν πρέπει να μιλάς στην ώρα του μαθήματος.
= At school you shouldn’t talk during class. (general rule)

Alternative, more explicitly impersonal versions are possible:

… απαγορεύεται να καπνίζει κανείς.
… απαγορεύεται να καπνίζουν.

But να καπνίζεις is very natural and common in everyday Greek.

Could we also say Απαγορεύεται το κάπνισμα instead of απαγορεύεται να καπνίζεις? What’s the difference?

Yes, both are correct, but the focus is slightly different:

Απαγορεύεται το κάπνισμα.
- Literally: Smoking is forbidden.
- The noun το κάπνισμα (the act of smoking) is the grammatical subject.
- Sounds a bit more formal, typical on signs and regulations.
Απαγορεύεται να καπνίζεις.
- Literally: It is forbidden that you (should) smoke.
- Uses να + verb, more “verb-focused.”
- Very natural in spoken and semi-formal language.

In many contexts, they’re interchangeable; it’s mostly a stylistic difference.

Why is the present form καπνίζεις used and not καπνίσεις?

Greek makes a distinction between:

Present forms after να → ongoing, repeated, or general actions
- να καπνίζεις = to be smoking / to smoke (as a general activity)
Aorist forms after να → a single, completed event
- να καπνίσεις = to smoke once / to have one cigarette

Here we are talking about the general act of smoking in those spaces (not just one cigarette), so the present aspect is appropriate:

απαγορεύεται να καπνίζεις = you are not allowed to (be) smoke(ing) there at all / in general.

If you said απαγορεύεται να καπνίσεις, it would sound more like “you’re not allowed to (even) have one smoke,” which is a bit more specific and less usual in this context.

What does και ειδικά do here? Why not just ειδικά σε περιπτώσεις με παιδιά?

ειδικά means especially, and και here is not the simple “and then another item” kind of and. It has an emphasizing role.

Σε πολλούς κλειστούς χώρους, και ειδικά σε περιπτώσεις με παιδιά…
= In many enclosed spaces, and especially in cases with children…

The και adds a slight rhetorical emphasis, like:

“In many enclosed spaces, and especially when children are involved…”

You could say ειδικά σε περιπτώσεις με παιδιά without και, and it would still be correct. The version with και ειδικά just sounds a bit more natural and emphatic in speech.

In σε περιπτώσεις με παιδιά, what does με mean exactly? “With”, “when there are”, “involving”?

Here με literally means with, but the idea is:

σε περιπτώσεις με παιδιά
= in situations with children present / involving children

It doesn’t mean “for children” (για παιδιά) or “about children,” but “situations where children are there too.”

Some similar patterns:

σε σπίτια με κήπο = in houses with a garden
σε οικογένειες με μικρά παιδιά = in families with small children

Why is there no article in σε περιπτώσεις με παιδιά and in μερικοί αγνοούν τον κανόνα before μερικοί?

Two slightly different points here:

σε περιπτώσεις με παιδιά
- περιπτώσεις here means “cases / situations” in a general, non‑specific sense.
- Often, when we talk about things in a general, generic way in the plural, we can drop the article:
  - Μου αρέσουν γάτες. (less common) / Μου αρέσουν οι γάτες. = I like cats.
  - Σε περιπτώσεις με παιδιά = in situations with children (not particular, identified situations).
μερικοί αγνοούν τον κανόνα
- μερικοί works almost like some (people) on its own.
- The noun άνθρωποι or άτομα is understood:
  - μερικοί (άνθρωποι) = some (people).
- When μερικοί stands alone like that, you don’t add an article.

So:

μερικοί αγνοούν τον κανόνα = Some (people) ignore the rule.

What is the nuance of μερικοί? Could we also say κάποιοι αγνοούν τον κανόνα?

Both μερικοί and κάποιοι can mean some, and in this sentence they are practically interchangeable:

Μερικοί αγνοούν τον κανόνα.
Κάποιοι αγνοούν τον κανόνα.

Nuance (very slight, and often context‑dependent):

μερικοί can feel a bit more neutral / quantitative (“a number of people”).
κάποιοι can sometimes carry a hint of vagueness or distance, like “certain people” (often implied: we know who, but we aren’t naming them).

But in everyday speech, many speakers use them almost synonymously.

Why is αγνοούν used instead of something like δεν ξέρουν? What does αγνοώ imply?

αγνοώ literally means to ignore (and also in some contexts “to be unaware of”).

In this sentence:

μερικοί αγνοούν τον κανόνα
the natural reading is:
- Some people ignore the rule → they know there is a rule but they don’t respect it / they choose not to follow it.

If we said:

μερικοί δεν ξέρουν τον κανόνα = some don’t know the rule
this would mean they are simply unaware of it, not necessarily willfully breaking it.

So αγνοούν τον κανόνα here suggests disregard, not innocent ignorance.

Why does κανόνα take the article τον? Could we omit it and say αγνοούν κανόνα?

Greek normally uses the definite article much more than English, especially when the thing is specific / already defined in the context.

Here, τον κανόνα refers to:

the specific rule that was just described (the prohibition on smoking in enclosed spaces with children).

So:

μερικοί αγνοούν τον κανόνα
= some people ignore the rule (that we’ve already been talking about).

Saying αγνοούν κανόνα would sound incomplete or ungrammatical in standard Greek; with countable nouns like κανόνας, you practically always need an article (or some determiner) unless it’s in a very particular construction.

Why do we use αλλά here? Could we replace it with όμως?

αλλά is the standard coordinating conjunction meaning but.

… απαγορεύεται να καπνίζεις, αλλά μερικοί αγνοούν τον κανόνα.
= … it is forbidden to smoke, but some ignore the rule.

όμως also means but / however, but it behaves more like an adverb and is placed differently:

… απαγορεύεται να καπνίζεις, όμως μερικοί αγνοούν τον κανόνα.
… απαγορεύεται να καπνίζεις. Όμως, μερικοί αγνοούν τον κανόνα.

Both are correct. With αλλά, the contrast is made directly with a conjunction; with όμως, it sounds a bit more like “however / nevertheless,” sometimes slightly more formal or written.