Πλήρωσα με ένα μεγάλο χαρτονόμισμα και ο ταμίας δεν είχε αρκετά ρέστα.

Πλήρωσα is the 1st person singular aorist of πληρώνω (to pay).

• πληρώνω = I pay / I am paying
• πλήρωσα = I paid

So the ending -σα here is a strong clue that this is the simple past form.

Because Greek verbs already show the subject, you do not need to say εγώ (I) unless you want emphasis.

Here με means with, in the sense of using something as payment.

So:

• με = with
• ένα μεγάλο χαρτονόμισμα = a large banknote

The whole phrase means with a large banknote or using a large banknote.

This is very natural Greek for talking about the means or instrument used:

• Έγραψα με στυλό = I wrote with a pen
• Πλήρωσα με κάρτα = I paid by card

Because χαρτονόμισμα is a neuter singular noun, and both the article and adjective must agree with it.

So:

• ένα = neuter singular a/an
• μεγάλο = neuter singular big/large
• χαρτονόμισμα = banknote

Greek adjectives agree with the noun in gender, number, and case.

Compare:

• ένας μεγάλος άντρας = a big man
• μία μεγάλη τσάντα = a big bag
• ένα μεγάλο χαρτονόμισμα = a big banknote

Χαρτονόμισμα means banknote or paper bill.

It is different from:

• νόμισμα = coin
• χρήματα = money
• μετρητά = cash

So in this sentence, the speaker did not pay with coins or a card, but with a large bill/banknote.

Ο ταμίας means the cashier and here it is masculine singular.

• ο = the (masculine singular)
• ταμίας = cashier

So this sentence specifically refers to a male cashier.

If the cashier were female, you would typically see:

• η ταμίας = the female cashier

The noun ταμίας is commonly used for both genders, with the article showing the gender.

Because είχε is the past tense form: he/she was having / had.

• έχει = he/she has
• είχε = he/she had

So:

• ο ταμίας δεν είχε αρκετά ρέστα = the cashier did not have enough change

This sentence also shows a very common Greek past-tense pattern:

• Πλήρωσα = aorist, a completed action (I paid)
• δεν είχε = imperfect, a past situation/state (he didn’t have)

That combination is very natural:

• one action happened,
• and at that moment a situation was true.

Greek often uses:

• aorist for a single completed event
• imperfect for an ongoing state, background situation, or repeated action in the past

So here:

• Πλήρωσα = I paid → one completed action
• δεν είχε = he didn’t have → a state/situation at that time

In English, we often just use the simple past for both, but Greek distinguishes them more clearly.

A rough way to feel the difference is:

• Πλήρωσα = the event
• δεν είχε αρκετά ρέστα = the background problem

Αρκετά ρέστα means enough change.

• αρκετά = enough
• ρέστα = change, as in money returned after paying

So the cashier did not have enough small money to give back the correct amount.

A useful note: ρέστα is normally used in the plural in this meaning:

• Δεν έχω ρέστα = I don’t have change
• Έχετε ρέστα από πενήντα ευρώ; = Do you have change for fifty euros?

Because ρέστα is neuter plural, and the word modifying it must agree with it.

So:

• αρκετός = masculine singular
• αρκετή = feminine singular
• αρκετό = neuter singular
• αρκετά = neuter plural

Since ρέστα is neuter plural, Greek uses αρκετά.

Greek often leaves out the article when talking about an indefinite amount of something.

So:

• δεν είχε αρκετά ρέστα = he didn’t have enough change

This sounds natural because the idea is not the specific change, but simply enough change in general.

If you added an article, the meaning would become more specific or marked, and it would sound less natural in this everyday context.

In Greek, δεν is the normal negation word used before verbs in ordinary statements.

So:

• είχε = he had
• δεν είχε = he didn’t have

This is the standard pattern:

• δεν ξέρω = I don’t know
• δεν θέλω = I don’t want
• δεν πήγα = I didn’t go

So δεν directly negates the verb that follows it.

Not completely. Greek word order is more flexible than English because the endings show grammatical relationships.

The given sentence is very natural:

• Πλήρωσα με ένα μεγάλο χαρτονόμισμα και ο ταμίας δεν είχε αρκετά ρέστα.

But Greek could rearrange parts for emphasis, for example:

• Ο ταμίας δεν είχε αρκετά ρέστα, και πλήρωσα με ένα μεγάλο χαρτονόμισμα.
• Με ένα μεγάλο χαρτονόμισμα πλήρωσα... (emphasizing the banknote)

Even though word order can change, the original version is the most neutral and straightforward.

A Greek speaker would probably hear it as:

1. Πλήρωσα με ένα μεγάλο χαρτονόμισμα
   = I paid with a large bill

2. και ο ταμίας δεν είχε αρκετά ρέστα
   = and the cashier didn’t have enough change

So the second part explains the practical problem caused by the first part.

This kind of και structure is very common in everyday Greek storytelling:

• first, what happened
• then, the consequence or problem

Yes. Literally it means a big/large banknote, but in context it usually means a high-value bill, not physically a bigger piece of paper.

So a Greek speaker would understand something like:

• a 50-euro or 100-euro note, depending on context

This is similar to English when we say a large bill. It is really about value, not size.