Learn Hardcore Croatian: Ako netko pokvari nož ili vilicu, moj otac to zna brzo popraviti. - If someone breaks a knife or a fork, my father knows how to fix it quickly.

Ako = if, introduces a condition that may or may not happen.
- Ako netko pokvari nož ili vilicu… – If someone breaks a knife or a fork… (it might happen, it might not).
Kad = when, usually for something seen as more regular, expected, or certain.
- Kad netko pokvari nož ili vilicu… – When someone (ever) breaks a knife or a fork… (sounds more like a regular or expected situation).

In this sentence, ako is natural because breaking a knife/fork is treated as a possible condition, not a regular habit.

Why is netko used here, and not neko? What’s the difference?

Netko means “someone”.

In standard Croatian, the correct form is netko.
Neko is more typical for Serbian and some dialects; Croatians will understand it, but it’s not standard Croatian.

So, for standard Croatian, you should learn and use netko in sentences like this.

Why is the verb pokvari (present tense) used here if we’re talking about a future situation (“if someone breaks…”)?

In Croatian conditionals with ako, the present tense is normally used in both parts, even when English would use the future:

Ako netko pokvari nož ili vilicu, moj otac to zna brzo popraviti.
Literally: If someone *breaks a knife or fork, my father knows how to fix it quickly.
Natural English: If someone **breaks a knife or fork, my father will fix it quickly.*

Also, pokvari is the present of a perfective verb (pokvariti).

Present of a perfective verb often refers to a single future event:
- Ako dođeš sutra… – If you come tomorrow…
- Ako pokvari nož… – If he breaks the knife…

So pokvari fits because we’re talking about one completed act of breaking in the (potential) future.

What is the difference between pokvariti and slomiti in this context? Could I say Ako netko slomi nož…?

Both can be used, but there is a nuance:

pokvariti = to damage / make unusable / spoil
- More general; the item stops working or is no longer usable (could be bent, dulled, warped, etc.).
slomiti = to break (into pieces)
- More physical, usually means something actually snaps or breaks.

For a knife or fork:

Ako netko pokvari nož ili vilicu… – the knife/fork becomes unusable in some way.
Ako netko slomi vilicu… – the fork is literally broken (tines snapped off, handle broken, etc.).

Both are grammatically OK, you just pick based on how you imagine the damage.

Why is it nož but vilicu? Aren’t they both objects of the verb, so both accusative?

Yes, both nož and vilicu are in the accusative singular as direct objects of pokvari.

The forms differ because of gender and noun type:

nož – masculine noun
- Nominative sg.: nož
- Accusative sg. (inanimate): nož (same form as nominative)
vilica – feminine noun
- Nominative sg.: vilica
- Accusative sg.: vilicu (feminine nouns ending in -a typically change -a → -u)

So:

pokvari nož ili vilicu is: breaks a knife (acc.) or a fork (acc.).

What exactly does to refer to in moj otac to zna brzo popraviti? Is it necessary?

To is the neuter pronoun “that / it”, and here it refers back to “nož ili vilicu” (the broken item).

So:

moj otac to zna brzo popraviti ≈ my father knows how to fix *that/it quickly.*

Is it necessary?

In this structure, it is very natural and common.
Without to, Moj otac zna brzo popraviti sounds incomplete or too abstract (my father knows how to fix quickly – fix what?).
If you repeat the noun instead, you can drop to:
- Ako netko pokvari nož, moj otac zna brzo popraviti nož.
  (correct, but more repetitive)

So in the original sentence, using to sounds smooth and idiomatic.

How does the construction zna + infinitive work? Does it literally mean “knows to fix”?

The pattern znati + infinitive is very common and usually means “to know how to [do something]”.

znati – to know
popraviti – to fix (perfective infinitive)

So:

moj otac zna popraviti = my father knows how to fix (it).
moj otac to zna brzo popraviti = my father knows how to fix it quickly.

Other examples:

Znam plivati. – I know how to swim.
Ne znaju kuhati. – They don’t know how to cook.

Literal word-for-word is “knows fix,” but the natural English meaning is “knows how to fix.”

Why is the adverb brzo placed before popraviti and not somewhere else? Can it move?

Brzo means “quickly”, and its standard, neutral place here is right before the infinitive popraviti:

moj otac to zna brzo popraviti – my father knows how to fix it quickly.

Croatian word order is fairly flexible; you can move brzo to change nuance/emphasis:

Moj otac brzo zna to popraviti.
– Sounds like the knowing or ability is what’s quick; less common and slightly odd.
Moj otac zna to brzo popraviti.
– Acceptable; a bit more emphasis on to (“that thing specifically”).
Moj otac zna popraviti to brzo.
– Possible, but feels marked; added emphasis on brzo at the end.

The original to zna brzo popraviti is the most natural, neutral version.

Why is there a comma in Ako netko pokvari nož ili vilicu, moj otac…? Is that mandatory?

Yes, that comma follows a normal rule of Croatian punctuation:

When you have a subordinate clause (like a conditional clause with ako) followed by the main clause, you usually separate them with a comma.

So:

Ako netko pokvari nož ili vilicu, moj otac to zna brzo popraviti.

If the ako-clause comes second, you still use a comma:

Moj otac to zna brzo popraviti, ako netko pokvari nož ili vilicu.

So in this sentence, the comma is both correct and expected.

Why is ili used here instead of i? Can I say nož i vilicu?

ili = or
i = and

The original:

nož ili vilicu = a knife or a fork (one or the other).

If you say:

Ako netko pokvari nož i vilicu…
– If someone breaks the knife and the fork…
Now it sounds like both are broken, not just one of them.

So:

Use ili when you mean “one or the other.”
Use i when both are included together.

Could the sentence use će somewhere, like Ako netko će pokvariti… or moj otac će to popraviti?

Two different points:

Ako + future with će
- In Croatian, you don’t say Ako netko će pokvariti…
- The normal pattern is Ako + present tense:
  - ✅ Ako netko pokvari nož ili vilicu…
  - ❌ Ako netko će pokvariti…
Future in the main clause
- Using će in the main clause is possible and correct:
  - Ako netko pokvari nož ili vilicu, moj otac će to brzo popraviti.
    – If someone breaks a knife or fork, my father will fix it quickly.

So:

Keep present after ako.
You may choose present or future (će) in the main clause, depending on nuance:
- moj otac to zna brzo popraviti – he generally has the skill.
- moj otac će to brzo popraviti – he will (on that occasion) fix it quickly.