Learn Hardcore Greek: Δεν θέλω να κρατάω θυμό μετά τον καβγά. - I don’t want to hold on to anger after the argument.

In Modern Greek, verbs like θέλω (I want) are normally followed by να plus another verb in the subjunctive, not by an infinitive (because Greek no longer has a true infinitive form).

So you get:

Θέλω να φάω. – I want to eat.
Δεν θέλω να μιλήσω. – I don’t want to talk.
Δεν θέλω να κρατάω θυμό. – I don’t want to hold on to anger.

Leaving out να (Δεν θέλω κρατάω…) is ungrammatical in standard Modern Greek.

What’s the difference between «να κρατάω θυμό» and using a different verb form like «να κρατήσω θυμό»?

The choice here is about aspect (imperfective vs aorist), not tense in the English sense.

να κρατάω θυμό (imperfective aspect) focuses on the ongoing or repeated action:
“to keep holding / to be holding anger (over time).”
That’s exactly what “hold a grudge” implies.
να κρατήσω θυμό (aorist aspect) would sound like a single, bounded action:
“to (once) hold anger” – which is odd in this context, because grudges are by nature about continuing to feel anger.

So in your sentence, να κρατάω is natural because you’re talking about not continuing to feel anger after the argument.

What does the expression «κρατάω θυμό» literally mean, and is it the usual way to say “hold a grudge”?

Literally:

κρατάω = I hold, I keep
θυμό (accusative of θυμός) = anger

So κρατάω θυμό literally means “I keep anger” or “I hold on to anger.”

For “hold a grudge,” Greek also commonly uses:

κρατάω κακία (σε κάποιον) = to bear a grudge (against someone)

Your sentence is very natural. Depending on nuance, you might hear:

Δεν θέλω να κρατάω θυμό. – I don’t want to hold on to anger.
Δεν θέλω να σου κρατάω κακία. – I don’t want to hold a grudge against you.

So κρατάω θυμό is understandable and idiomatic; κρατάω κακία is a very close equivalent to “hold a grudge.”

Why is it «θυμό» and not «θυμός» here?

Greek nouns change form depending on their case. Θυμός is a masculine noun:

ο θυμός – anger (nominative, the “dictionary form”)
τον θυμό – anger (accusative, used for the direct object)

In your sentence:

κρατάω (τι;) θυμό – I hold what? anger.

Because θυμός is the direct object of κρατάω, it must be in the accusative: θυμό (and here the article is simply omitted: τον θυμό → θυμό).

So:

Ο θυμός είναι κακός σύμβουλος. – Anger is a bad advisor. (subject → nominative)
Δεν θέλω να κρατάω θυμό. – I don’t want to hold on to anger. (object → accusative)

Why is it «μετά τον καβγά» and not something like «μετά από τον καβγά» or using a different case?

In Modern Greek, μετά used as a preposition meaning “after” is normally followed by the accusative case:

μετά τον καβγά – after the argument
μετά τη δουλειά – after work
μετά το φαγητό – after the meal

You can also say:

μετά από τον καβγά

This is also correct and quite common; μετά τον καβγά is just a bit more compact. Both are natural; μετά + accusative is the standard pattern.

Using the genitive (as in Ancient Greek μετὰ τοῦ καβγά-style) would sound archaic or wrong in Modern Greek in everyday speech.

Why is it «τον καβγά» and not «το καβγά»? What gender is «καβγάς»?

Καβγάς (or καυγάς, see below) is a masculine noun:

ο καβγάς – the argument/fight (nominative)
του καβγά – of the argument (genitive)
τον καβγά – the argument (accusative)

So with μετά, which takes the accusative, you need:

μετά τον καβγά – after the argument

Using το καβγά would be incorrect, because το is the neuter article, and καβγάς is not neuter but masculine.

I’ve seen «καβγάς» and «καυγάς». Which one is correct?

Both spellings appear in Modern Greek:

καβγάς
καυγάς

Historically, you’ll see καβγάς very often, but καυγάς is also accepted. Pronunciation is the same: [kavˈɣas].

In your sentence, either:

μετά τον καβγά
or
μετά τον καυγά

is fine in everyday use. You’ll simply want to be consistent with one spelling in your own writing.

Could I move «μετά τον καβγά» to the beginning or middle of the sentence? Does the word order change the meaning?

Yes, Greek word order is relatively flexible. You could say:

Μετά τον καβγά, δεν θέλω να κρατάω θυμό.
Δεν θέλω, μετά τον καβγά, να κρατάω θυμό.
Δεν θέλω να κρατάω θυμό μετά τον καβγά. (your original)

All are grammatically correct; the meaning stays the same (“I don’t want to hold on to anger after the argument”), but the emphasis can shift slightly:

Starting with Μετά τον καβγά draws attention to the time frame (“As for after the argument…”).
Keeping it at the end is the most neutral and common in speech.

For a learner, your original word order is perfectly natural.

Is there any difference between «Δεν θέλω να κρατάω θυμό» and «Θέλω να μην κρατάω θυμό»?

Grammatically, both are possible, but there is a subtle difference in focus:

Δεν θέλω να κρατάω θυμό.
Literally: “I don’t want to hold on to anger.”
The negation is on wanting itself. It’s the most natural way to say this in Greek and directly corresponds to English “I don’t want to…”.
Θέλω να μην κρατάω θυμό.
Literally: “I want not to hold on to anger.”
Here you affirm the wanting (θέλω) and push the negation inside: να μην κρατάω. In context, it can sound a bit more reflective, like “What I want is not to hold on to anger,” but it’s stylistically less neutral.

In everyday speech, Δεν θέλω να κρατάω θυμό (μετά τον καβγά) is the standard, most natural phrasing.