The Meteora Trip Notice: Deposits, Unknowns and Two Kinds of 'Must'
Reading comprehension. Candidates read this notice from a cultural association and answer without a dictionary.
«Ο Πολιτιστικός Σύλλογος “Η Πιερία” διοργανώνει διήμερη εκδρομή στα Μετέωρα το τελευταίο Σαββατοκύριακο του μήνα. Η αναχώρηση θα γίνει στις 7:00 π.μ. του Σαββάτου από την πλατεία· παρακαλούμε να βρίσκεστε στο σημείο συνάντησης ένα τέταρτο νωρίτερα, γιατί το λεωφορείο δεν περιμένει. Το κόστος συμμετοχής είναι 45 ευρώ και περιλαμβάνει τη μεταφορά, μία διανυκτέρευση με πρωινό και ξεναγό. Τα εισιτήρια εισόδου στα μοναστήρια (3 ευρώ το ένα) και τα γεύματα δεν περιλαμβάνονται. Η προκαταβολή των 20 ευρώ δεν επιστρέφεται σε περίπτωση ακύρωσης μετά την Τετάρτη. Αν δεν συμπληρωθεί ο αριθμός των συμμετεχόντων μέχρι την Πέμπτη, η εκδρομή θα αναβληθεί και τα χρήματα θα επιστραφούν στο ακέραιο. Οι γυναίκες επισκέπτριες πρέπει να φορούν φούστα και να καλύπτουν τους ώμους τους μέσα στα μοναστήρια.»
1. Ελένη pays the €20 deposit on Monday. On Thursday morning she phones to cancel because of a family emergency, and the trip goes ahead as planned. How much is she refunded, and what would have changed if the association itself had called the trip off?
Read the worked answer
Refund: €0. The clause is «δεν επιστρέφεται σε περίπτωση ακύρωσης μετά την Τετάρτη» - cancellation after Wednesday. Thursday morning falls after Wednesday, so the deposit is forfeited. Monday payment does not help: the trigger is the date of cancellation, not the date of payment.
Counterfactual: if the association had cancelled for insufficient numbers, the second rule would apply - «τα χρήματα θα επιστραφούν στο ακέραιο», a full refund, because the trip no longer exists. The two rules govern different events, and only one of them can bite here.
Reasoning trap: candidates often merge the clauses into 'deposits are non-refundable' and answer €0 for both scenarios. Reading the conditions as a pair - participant cancels vs organiser cancels - is the point of the item.
2. A participant can spend exactly €45 and no more. Using only the notice, what will she still have to pay for, and can her minimum extra cost be calculated? Explain.
Read the worked answer
Covered by the €45: transport, one night with breakfast, and the guide.
Not covered: (i) entrance to the monasteries at €3 each, (ii) meals other than breakfast - realistically lunch and dinner on Saturday and lunch on Sunday.
Can the minimum be calculated? No - and saying so is the correct answer. The notice prices one monastery ticket but never states how many monasteries the group will enter. One ticket gives €3; three give €9. Because the programme is not given, a single figure would be invented.
What can be stated safely: the strictly unavoidable extra cost is at least €3 (one monastery) plus the cost of the meals, which is not priced at all. A sensible answer advises budgeting a margin and asking the organiser two questions: 'Πόσα μοναστήρια θα επισκεφτούμε;' and 'Περιλαμβάνεται κανένα γεύμα;'.
Skill tested: refusing to compute from missing data rather than producing a confident wrong number.
3. Why does the notice use «παρακαλούμε» for the meeting time but «πρέπει» for the dress rule? What does the shift tell a reader about who is imposing each requirement?
Read the worked answer
«Παρακαλούμε» ('we ask') is the association speaking about its own arrangement. The 6:45 meeting time is the club's logistical request, so it is phrased politely, softened by «γιατί το λεωφορείο δεν περιμένει» - the reason is practical, not moral. Politeness here does not make it optional; it is still a firm request, but the club has authority over it and chooses a courteous form.
«Πρέπει» ('must') marks an external rule. Skirts and covered shoulders are conditions set by the monasteries, not by the club. The association is reporting someone else's requirement, so it uses the flat obligation word and does not soften it. A club cannot negotiate it away, and a polite «παρακαλούμε» would wrongly suggest it could.
Payoff for the reader: both sentences are binding, but only the second failure has consequences beyond the club's annoyance - a visitor dressed improperly may be refused entry at the gate. The register therefore signals where the real risk lies.