Κλείνω ραντεβού με τον σύμβουλο για να μου ξεκαθαρίσει ποιες σπουδές είναι πιο κατάλληλες.

I make an appointment with the advisor so that he clarifies which studies are more suitable for me.

Breakdown of Κλείνω ραντεβού με τον σύμβουλο για να μου ξεκαθαρίσει ποιες σπουδές είναι πιο κατάλληλες.

• είμαι: to be
• με: with
• μου: me
• πιο: more
• το ραντεβού: the appointment
• ποιος: which
• κλείνω: to book
• για να: so that
• κατάλληλος: suitable
• οι σπουδές: the studies
• ο σύμβουλος: the advisor
• ξεκαθαρίζω: to clarify

Questions & Answers about Κλείνω ραντεβού με τον σύμβουλο για να μου ξεκαθαρίσει ποιες σπουδές είναι πιο κατάλληλες.

What does Κλείνω ραντεβού literally mean, and why is κλείνω used for “make an appointment”?

Literally, κλείνω ραντεβού is “I close an appointment”, but in Greek this expression means “I make/book an appointment”.

• κλείνω = I close / I book / I reserve
• ραντεβού = appointment / date (indeclinable neuter noun, same form in all cases)

Greek uses κλείνω in many contexts where English uses book / reserve:

• Κλείνω τραπέζι = I book a table
• Κλείνω δωμάτιο = I book a room

So Κλείνω ραντεβού is the natural idiomatic way to say “I’m making an appointment.”

The meaning is future (“I’m going to make an appointment”). Why is the present tense κλείνω used instead of a future like θα κλείσω?

In Greek, the present tense is very often used to talk about near-future, planned actions, especially when they are arranged or scheduled:

• Αύριο πάω στον γιατρό. = Tomorrow I’m going to the doctor.
• Το βράδυ βγαίνω με φίλους. = Tonight I’m going out with friends.

Similarly, Κλείνω ραντεβού… here can mean:

• either something you are in the process of doing now, or
• a definite plan you are arranging in the near future.

You could say Θα κλείσω ραντεβού… (“I will make an appointment…”), but the simple present sounds very natural and speaks more about a concrete arranged action.

Why is it ραντεβού alone and not ένα ραντεβού (“a(n) appointment”)?

In many fixed expressions, Greek often drops the article and number where English would say “a” or “an”. Κλείνω ραντεβού is one of these set phrases.

Both are grammatically possible, but not equally natural here:

• Κλείνω ραντεβού με τον σύμβουλο.
  → This is the standard, idiomatic expression.

• Κλείνω ένα ραντεβού με τον σύμβουλο.
  → Understandable, but sounds marked or slightly less idiomatic in this context.

So, you generally learn κλείνω ραντεβού as a chunk meaning “make an appointment”.

Why is it με τον σύμβουλο and not something like στον σύμβουλο?

• με = with
• στον = to the / at the (σε + τον)

In this sentence, we’re saying “I make an appointment with the advisor,” i.e. that person is the one I’m meeting. So με is the natural preposition.

με τον σύμβουλο = with the advisor (he is the person in the appointment)
στον σύμβουλο would suggest direction or location (to/at the advisor), which would be wrong here.

Also note the article and case:

• τον is masculine accusative singular, required both by:
  • the preposition με, which always takes the accusative, and
  • the gender/number of σύμβουλος (masculine singular).

Why is there no explicit subject pronoun like αυτός (“he”) in για να μου ξεκαθαρίσει? How do we know who “clarifies” something?

Greek is a pro-drop language, meaning it normally omits subject pronouns when the subject is clear from context or the verb form.

Here:

• the verb ξεκαθαρίσει is 3rd person singular,
• the last 3rd-person noun we mentioned is ο σύμβουλος (“the advisor”).

So the understood subject of ξεκαθαρίσει is (ο σύμβουλος): > …με τον σύμβουλο για να (ο σύμβουλος) μου ξεκαθαρίσει…

Using αυτός here (…για να αυτός μου ξεκαθαρίσει…) would be ungrammatical in that position, and even …για να μου ξεκαθαρίσει αυτός… would sound marked or emphatic, as if stressing he (and not someone else) will clarify it. In the neutral sentence, you simply drop the pronoun.

What is the function of για να here? Is it like “so that” or “in order to”?

Yes. The combination για να introduces a purpose clause, very similar to:

• “in order to”
• “so that”

So:
…με τον σύμβουλο για να μου ξεκαθαρίσει…
= “…with the advisor in order for him to clarify (for me)….”

Structure:

• για να
  • subjunctive (a form built with να
    • special verb form) expresses purpose or intended result.

Why is it για να μου ξεκαθαρίσει and not για να ξεκαθαρίσει μου? Where does μου go?

μου is an unstressed (clitic) pronoun meaning “to me / for me” (indirect object).
Its standard position in a να + verb construction is:

να + clitic + verb

So:

• για να μου ξεκαθαρίσει ✔️ (correct, natural)
• για να ξεκαθαρίσει μου ✖️ (ungrammatical)

General rule for non‑imperative clauses:

• Weak pronouns like μου, σου, του, της, μας, σας, τους
  normally go before the verb, and after small particles like θα, να, να μην, δεν, μην:
  
  • Θα μου πει. = He will tell me.
  • Να σου δείξω; = Shall I show you?
  • Δεν της μίλησε. = He didn’t speak to her.

What tense and mood is ξεκαθαρίσει, and why not ξεκαθαρίζει?

• ξεκαθαρίσει is aorist subjunctive, 3rd person singular of ξεκαθαρίζω.
• ξεκαθαρίζει is present indicative OR present subjunctive (depending on context).

After να / για να, Greek normally uses the subjunctive, and in purpose clauses like this one, the aorist subjunctive is preferred to refer to the completed action as a whole (“for him to clarify it (once / as a complete act)”).

Compare:

• για να μου ξεκαθαρίσει = for him to clarify it (as a single, complete action)
• για να μου ξεκαθαρίζει would suggest something like a repeated or ongoing action and would sound odd here.

So ξεκαθαρίσει is the natural choice.

What exactly does μου mean in για να μου ξεκαθαρίσει?

μου is the unstressed genitive form of εγώ (I), used as:

• indirect object: to me / for me
• sometimes as possessive: my

In this sentence, it is an indirect object:

για να μου ξεκαθαρίσει…
= “so that he clarifies (something) to me / for me”

If you wanted to make it more emphatic, you could use the strong form:

• για να ξεκαθαρίσει σε μένα ποιες σπουδές…
  (grammatical but less natural than μου here; also more emphatic)

Why is it ποιες σπουδές and not τι σπουδές or ποια σπουδή?

Let’s break it down:

• σπουδές (plural only, feminine) = studies (as in university studies)
• ποιες = which (feminine plural nominative or accusative)
• τι = what
• σπουδή (singular) exists but is rare; σπουδές is normally used in the plural for “studies”.

Here, you’re distinguishing between options (which course/program of study), so “which studies” is the right idea. Greek uses ποιες (which) for choices among known or limited options, not τι (what):

• Ποιες σπουδές είναι πιο κατάλληλες; = Which studies are more suitable?
• Τι σπουδές; would mean “What (kind of) studies?” and sounds more vague or abrupt; it doesn’t fit the embedded question structure as neatly here.

So ποιες σπουδές = “which studies (programs / fields of study)”.

Why is ποιες in the feminine plural, and what case is it in?

ποιες has to agree in gender, number, and case with σπουδές:

• σπουδές = feminine plural nominative (subject of είναι)
• therefore ποιες = feminine plural nominative

In ποιες σπουδές είναι πιο κατάλληλες:

• the whole phrase ποιες σπουδές is the subject of είναι.
• So it must be in the nominative case.

That’s why we have ποιες (fem. pl. nom.) and not ποιους, ποια, etc.

Why is κατάλληλες feminine plural, and how does it agree in the sentence?

Adjectives in Greek must agree with the noun they describe in gender, number, and case.

• σπουδές = feminine, plural, nominative
• so any adjective describing them must also be feminine plural nominative.

Hence:

• πιο κατάλληλες (more suitable)
  
  • κατάλληλες: feminine plural nominative form of κατάλληλος
  • πιο: “more” (invariable)

So:
ποιες σπουδές είναι πιο κατάλληλες
= “which studies are more suitable”
with ποιες σπουδές (fem. pl. nom.) as subject, and πιο κατάλληλες (fem. pl. nom.) as the predicate adjective agreeing with it.

Could the sentence be phrased differently but mean almost the same thing?

Yes. Here are a few natural variants with very similar meaning:

• Κλείνω ραντεβού με τον σύμβουλο για να μου εξηγήσει ποιες σπουδές είναι πιο κατάλληλες.

  • εξηγήσει = explain; slightly different verb but similar idea.

• Κλείνω ραντεβού με τον σύμβουλο για να μου ξεκαθαρίσει ποιες σπουδές μου ταιριάζουν περισσότερο.

  • “which studies suit me better.”

• Θα κλείσω ραντεβού με τον σύμβουλο, για να μου ξεκαθαρίσει ποιες σπουδές είναι πιο κατάλληλες.

  • Using the future (θα κλείσω) instead of present.

All of these keep the key structure:

• (κλείνω) ραντεβού με + [person] + για να + [weak pronoun] + [subjunctive verb] + [indirect question].