Learn Hardcore Greek: Η δασκάλα μου με στηρίζει και μου ξεκαθαρίζει ότι είναι πιθανό να τα καταφέρω. - My teacher supports me and makes it clear to me that it is possible for me to succeed.

με is the accusative weak pronoun – the direct object of the verb:
η δασκάλα μου με στηρίζει = my teacher supports me.
μου is the genitive weak pronoun – here it’s an indirect object:
μου ξεκαθαρίζει = she makes it clear to me.

So:

με στηρίζει → supports me (direct object)
μου ξεκαθαρίζει → makes it clear to me (indirect object)

Why is μου after δασκάλα in η δασκάλα μου, but before the verb in μου ξεκαθαρίζει?

Because it plays two different roles:

After a noun, μου acts like a possessive:
- η δασκάλα μου = my teacher (literally the teacher of me).
Before a verb, μου acts as a weak object pronoun (indirect object):
- μου ξεκαθαρίζει = she makes it clear to me.

Weak pronouns in Greek:

Go after a noun when they show possession: το βιβλίο μου (my book).
Go before the verb (in normal statements) when they function as objects: μου μιλάει (he/she talks to me), με βοηθάει (he/she helps me).

Could you say η δασκάλα μου στηρίζει με instead of η δασκάλα μου με στηρίζει?

No, that would be wrong in standard Greek.

With weak object pronouns like με, σε, τον, την, το, they usually come before the verb in normal statements:

✅ η δασκάλα μου με στηρίζει
❌ η δασκάλα μου στηρίζει με

If you put a stressed strong pronoun after the verb, then it works, but the meaning changes to add emphasis:

η δασκάλα μου στηρίζει εμένα = my teacher supports *me (as opposed to someone else)*.

So:

Normal, neutral: με στηρίζει
Emphatic: στηρίζει εμένα

Why is there no word for she in the sentence? How do we know it’s “she supports me”?

Greek is a pro‑drop language: subject pronouns (like εγώ, εσύ, αυτός/αυτή) are usually left out because the verb ending already shows the person and number.

στηρίζει is 3rd person singular: he/she/it supports.
From context (η δασκάλα μου right before), we understand the subject is she (the teacher).

You would add a subject pronoun only for emphasis or contrast:

Αυτή με στηρίζει = SHE supports me (not the others).

What exactly is δασκάλα? How is it different from καθηγήτρια?

Both mean female teacher, but there is a nuance:

δασκάλα
- Typically: teacher in primary/elementary school.
- Also: can be used more generally or affectionately for a teacher or tutor.
καθηγήτρια
- Used more for secondary school, university, or more “formal” teaching roles.

Masculine forms:

δάσκαλος (male primary-school teacher)
καθηγητής (male professor/secondary teacher)

Why is ότι used here? Could we also use πως? Are they the same?

In this sentence, ότι introduces a content clause, like English that:

μου ξεκαθαρίζει ότι είναι πιθανό…
= she makes it clear to me that it is likely…

In modern Greek, ότι and πως are often interchangeable in this use:

μου ξεκαθαρίζει ότι είναι πιθανό…
μου ξεκαθαρίζει πως είναι πιθανό…

Both are fine here. Some notes:

ότι is often felt as a bit more neutral/formal.
πως can sound a bit more colloquial in some contexts.
Don’t confuse ότι (conjunction that) with ό,τι (with a comma), which means whatever/anything that.

What is the role of να in να τα καταφέρω? Is it like English to or that?

να is the marker of the subjunctive in modern Greek. Greek no longer uses an infinitive; instead, it uses να + subjunctive where English might use:

to + verb
or that + clause.

Here:

είναι πιθανό να τα καταφέρω
literally: it is likely that I manage (it).

Depending on context, να can correspond to English to, in order to, so that, that etc., but grammatically it always marks a subjunctive clause.

Why is it να τα καταφέρω and not να τα καταφέρνω?

The difference is aspect, not tense:

καταφέρω = aorist (perfective) subjunctive
→ focuses on a single, complete success, the result.
καταφέρνω = present (imperfective) subjunctive
→ would suggest ongoing or repeated managing.

In this context, we are talking about succeeding once in some goal (e.g. passing an exam, achieving something). So Greek normally uses the aorist:

είναι πιθανό να τα καταφέρω = it’s likely that I will manage (succeed).

What does τα refer to in να τα καταφέρω? There’s no “them” in the English.

Here τα is part of a very common idiomatic expression:

τα καταφέρνω = to manage, to cope, to succeed.

Literally it’s like saying “I manage them”, but τα doesn’t point to a specific plural noun. It’s a kind of vague object, roughly “things / it all / the situation”.

Examples:

Θα τα καταφέρεις. = You’ll manage / You’ll do fine.
Δεν ξέρω αν θα τα καταφέρω. = I don’t know if I’ll manage.

So in this idiom you normally keep τα, even if no concrete “them” is mentioned in English.

Could we just say να καταφέρω without τα?

You can, but then it usually needs a clear, explicit object:

να καταφέρω αυτό το πράγμα = to manage this thing.

If you drop τα in the idiomatic expression να τα καταφέρω, it sounds incomplete or unusual in most everyday contexts. For the generic meaning “to manage / to succeed”, Greek strongly prefers:

να τα καταφέρω (with τα).

Why is πιθανό in the neuter singular? What is the subject of είναι in είναι πιθανό να τα καταφέρω?

This is an impersonal structure.

είναι πιθανό = it is likely.

The “real” content is in the να‑clause (να τα καταφέρω), but Greek uses a dummy/implicit subject, just like English “it” in it is likely that….

Because the subject is effectively the whole clause, Greek:

uses the adjective πιθανό in neuter singular, the default form for such impersonal uses:
- είναι δύσκολο να… = it is difficult to…
- είναι σημαντικό να… = it is important to…

So:

είναι πιθανό
- να τα καταφέρω
  = it is likely (that) I will manage.

Could we say ίσως τα καταφέρω instead of είναι πιθανό να τα καταφέρω? What’s the difference?

Yes, both are possible, but the structure and feel differ:

ίσως τα καταφέρω
- ίσως = maybe, perhaps (adverb).
- A bit more direct and informal: Maybe I’ll manage.
είναι πιθανό να τα καταφέρω
- More like an evaluation/judgment: It is likely that I’ll manage.
- Slightly more formal or careful in tone.

In many everyday situations, the difference is mainly style:

ίσως feels like a casual “maybe”.
είναι πιθανό sounds a bit more measured or objective.

Where is the word I in να τα καταφέρω? How do we know it means that I will manage?

The subject I is built into the verb ending:

καταφέρω ends in -ω, which is the 1st person singular ending in the subjunctive (and also in the present indicative).

So:

να τα καταφέρω = that I (should) manage them / that I will manage.
να τα καταφέρει would be that he/she will manage.
να τα καταφέρουμε would be that we will manage.

Greek normally does not add the pronoun εγώ unless for emphasis:

είναι πιθανό να τα καταφέρω = it’s likely that I will manage.
είναι πιθανό εγώ να τα καταφέρω = it’s likely that I will manage (as opposed to others).