Learn Hardcore Greek: Υπάρχει πάντα πιθανότητα να έχει κίνηση όταν πηγαίνω στο κέντρο. - There is always a chance that there will be traffic when I go to the center.

Υπάρχει πιθανότητα… = There is (a) chance… in a general sense.
Υπάρχει μια πιθανότητα… is also correct, but it can sound a bit more like “there is one (specific) chance…” or give it a bit more weight.

In this sentence, we’re talking about a general possibility, so dropping μια is very natural.

Could I say υπάρχει πάντα η πιθανότητα instead? What’s the difference?

Yes, you can say:

Υπάρχει πάντα η πιθανότητα να έχει κίνηση…

Using η πιθανότητα (with the definite article) makes it sound more like:

“There is always the possibility…”, i.e. a known or expected possibility.

Nuance:

υπάρχει πάντα πιθανότητα → more generic, “there’s always a chance (in general)”
υπάρχει πάντα η πιθανότητα → slightly more specific, “there’s always this possibility we’re aware of”

Both are correct; the original is just a bit more neutral and general.

Why is it πιθανότητα να έχει κίνηση and not πιθανότητα ότι έχει κίνηση?

In Greek, after πιθανότητα, the usual pattern is:

πιθανότητα + να + [verb in the subjunctive]

So:

υπάρχει πιθανότητα να έχει κίνηση
= there is a chance (that) there will be traffic

Using ότι here (πιθανότητα ότι…) is not natural. Greek strongly prefers πιθανότητα να… plus the να-clause.

What does να do in να έχει κίνηση?

Να introduces a subjunctive clause.

να έχει κίνηση literally: “that it have traffic” → “that there is / will be traffic”

Key points:

After πιθανότητα, Greek uses να
- subjunctive to express possibility, uncertainty, or something that may happen.
English uses “that” + will/is”, but Greek uses να
- a present subjunctive form.

Why is it έχει κίνηση and not something like είναι κίνηση?

In Greek, the idiomatic way to say “there is traffic” is:

έχει κίνηση (literally: “it has traffic”)

So:

Υπάρχει πάντα πιθανότητα να έχει κίνηση
= There is always a chance (that) it has traffic → idiomatically: there will be traffic

Είναι κίνηση would be wrong here; κίνηση goes with έχει in this expression, not with είμαι.

Why is έχει in the present, even though we mean future traffic (when I go)?

In Greek, the present subjunctive after να often refers to future or possible events, not only to the present.

να έχει κίνηση = “that there is / will be traffic”

So even though in English we say “there will be traffic”, Greek keeps έχει in the present form because:

να + present describes a potential or future situation in general.

Why is it όταν πηγαίνω and not όταν θα πηγαίνω?

In Greek, όταν (when) introducing a time clause normally takes the present or past tense, not the future with θα, even if it’s about the future.

Όταν πηγαίνω στο κέντρο = when(ever) I go downtown (including future trips)
Όταν θα πηγαίνω… is usually avoided and sounds incorrect or unnatural in standard Greek.

So Greek uses the present to talk about repeated / general future events in όταν-clauses.

What is the difference between πηγαίνω and πάω here?

Both πηγαίνω and πάω can mean “I go.”

πηγαίνω: slightly more formal/neutral, the “full” verb.
πάω: more colloquial, very common in everyday speech.

In this sentence:

όταν πηγαίνω στο κέντρο and
όταν πάω στο κέντρο

are both natural. Πηγαίνω just sounds a bit more neutral or “complete”.

What exactly does στο κέντρο mean? Is it always “city center”?

Στο κέντρο literally means “in/to the center.” By default, in everyday speech it usually means:

the city center / downtown

If you want to be explicit, you can say:

στο κέντρο της πόλης = in the center of the city

But in most contexts, στο κέντρο alone is enough and is understood as “downtown / the city centre.”

Could we change the word order to Πάντα υπάρχει πιθανότητα…? Does it change the meaning?

Yes, you can say:

Πάντα υπάρχει πιθανότητα να έχει κίνηση όταν πηγαίνω στο κέντρο.

Word order in Greek is flexible. Both:

Υπάρχει πάντα πιθανότητα…
Πάντα υπάρχει πιθανότητα…

are correct and have almost the same meaning. The nuance:

Putting πάντα first (Πάντα υπάρχει…) can slightly emphasize “always” more.
Putting υπάρχει first (Υπάρχει πάντα…) sounds a bit more neutral.

The difference is minor; both are very natural.

Is κίνηση countable in Greek, like “a traffic / two traffics”?

In this meaning, κίνηση (traffic) is treated as uncountable, similar to English “traffic.”

Έχει πολλή κίνηση. = There is a lot of traffic.
You don’t say “μία κίνηση” to mean one traffic.

Κίνηση can be countable in other meanings (e.g. “a movement, a move” in chess or politics), but in the context of road traffic, it is used uncountably.

What does πάντα modify here — υπάρχει or πιθανότητα?

Semantically, πάντα (“always”) modifies the existence of the chance:

Υπάρχει πάντα πιθανότητα… = There is always (some) chance…

Grammatically, πάντα is placed close to υπάρχει, but the idea is:

Not “the chance is always,” but “there is always a chance.”

So the sentence means: Every time I go downtown, there is some chance that there will be traffic.