Learn Hardcore Croatian: Roditelji su rekli da moram više paziti na vrijeme i ne kasniti na ispit. - The parents said that I have to pay more attention to the time and not be late for the exam.

In Roditelji su rekli, why is the verb in the form rekli (masculine plural) and not rekle (feminine plural), even though roditelji can mean “mother and father”?

In Croatian, when a group is mixed gender (at least one male + one female), the verb agreement is masculine plural by default.

Roditelji (“parents”) almost always implies mother + father, so the verb takes masculine plural: rekli.
Feminine plural rekle would be used only with an all‑female subject, e.g. Učiteljice su rekle (“The (female) teachers said”).
There is no special “mixed” form; masculine plural covers “all men” and “mixed group” in standard Croatian.

So Roditelji su rekli is the expected agreement.

Why is the auxiliary su placed after Roditelji in Roditelji su rekli, and can I say Roditelji rekli su instead?

The word su is a clitic form of the verb biti (“to be”). Croatian clitics normally go in second position in the clause.

Correct: Roditelji su rekli… (subject Roditelji, then clitic su, then main verb rekli)
Incorrect: ✗ Roditelji rekli su… – putting su at the end breaks the second‑position rule.

You can move the whole phrase around, but su must still stay in second position relative to the first stressed word:

Moji su roditelji rekli…
Jučer su roditelji rekli…

In each case, su comes right after the first stressed word in the clause.

What is the nuance of using rekli (from reći) here? Could we also say Roditelji su mi govorili da…?

Reći (past rekli) is perfective and usually refers to a single, complete act of saying:

Roditelji su rekli… – “My parents (once) said / told me…”

Govoriti (past govorili) is imperfective and suggests repeated or ongoing speech:

Roditelji su mi govorili da moram više paziti… – “My parents kept telling me / used to tell me that I have to pay more attention…”

Both are grammatical, but:

rekli → one specific occasion
govorili → repeated advice over time

Why do we need da in rekli da moram, and can we ever drop it?

In rekli da moram…, da introduces a subordinate clause (“that I must…”), just like that in English:

Roditelji su rekli da moram… = “My parents said that I must…”

Without da, the sentence feels ungrammatical or very unnatural:

✗ Roditelji su rekli moram više paziti…

In standard Croatian, after verbs of saying, thinking, etc. (reći, misliti, znati, čuti…), the da is normally required to link the main clause and the subordinate clause. You don’t drop it the way English sometimes drops that.

In rekli da moram, why is moram in the present tense, even though rekli is past? In English we might say “said I had to…”.

Croatian does not automatically “backshift” tenses in reported speech the way English often does.

Roditelji su rekli da moram više paziti…
→ literally: “Parents said that I must pay more attention…”
→ implies the obligation is still valid now.

If you used past instead:

Roditelji su rekli da sam morao više paziti…
→ “Parents said that I had to pay more attention…” (about some past situation/one specific event).

So:

rekli da moram – obligation continues into the present.
rekli da sam morao – obligation applied in some earlier context.

The shift to past in English (“had to”) is often not mirrored in Croatian.

What verb is moram from, and how is it conjugated?

Moram is the 1st person singular present of morati (“must, have to”).

Present tense of morati:

ja moram – I must / have to
ti moraš – you (sg.) must
on/ona/ono mora – he/she/it must
mi moramo – we must
vi morate – you (pl./formal) must
oni/one/ona moraju – they must

It behaves like a normal verb (unlike modals in English which are defective), and it normally takes an infinitive:

moram učiti – I must study
moraš ići – you have to go
moramo više paziti – we must pay more attention

In moram više paziti na vrijeme, could I move više and say moram paziti više na vrijeme or više moram paziti na vrijeme?

Yes, Croatian word order is flexible, and all three are grammatically correct:

moram više paziti na vrijeme – neutral, standard; “I must pay more attention to the time.”
moram paziti više na vrijeme – slightly more focus on na vrijeme (“on the time”) as what gets more attention.
više moram paziti na vrijeme – emphasizes više (“it’s more that I must pay attention to the time (than something else)”).

The basic meaning is the same; changes in word order just shift emphasis.

How does paziti na vrijeme work grammatically? Why do we use na and what case is vrijeme in?

The verb is paziti (na) – “to watch, to be careful, to pay attention (to)”. It typically takes na + accusative:

paziti na dijete – watch the child
paziti na cestu – watch the road
paziti na vrijeme – pay attention to the time

Here:

na is a preposition that requires the accusative case when it means “onto / towards / with respect to”.
vrijeme happens to have the same form in nominative and accusative singular, so it looks unchanged, but grammatically it is accusative.

So paziti na + [accusative] is the pattern you should remember.

Since vrijeme can mean both “time” and “weather”, how do I know which meaning it has here?

Context and collocations decide the meaning:

With paziti na vrijeme, it clearly means time → “watch the time / be careful about time”.
For weather, you typically see patterns like:
- Vrijeme je lijepo / ružno. – The weather is nice / bad.
- Kakvo je vrijeme danas? – What’s the weather like today?
- Prognoza vremena – weather forecast.

So in this sentence, because it’s about not being late for an exam, vrijeme = clock/time management, not weather.

Why is it ne kasniti na ispit (infinitive) and not da ne kasnim na ispit?

Here moram controls two parallel infinitive phrases:

moram [više paziti na vrijeme] i [ne kasniti na ispit]

Both paziti and kasniti are infinitives dependent on moram.

You could rephrase with a da‑clause, but the structure changes:

Roditelji su rekli da ne smijem kasniti na ispit. – “My parents said (that) I mustn’t be late for the exam.”
Roditelji su rekli da moram paziti na vrijeme i da ne kasnim na ispit. – both obligations expressed in finite da‑clauses.

The original keeps it compact by using infinitives under moram. Using da ne kasnim is grammatical, but you’d then normally also mirror that structure for the first part (da više pazim na vrijeme i da ne kasnim…) for parallel style.

Why do we say kasniti na ispit with na, and not something like kasniti za ispit or kasniti u ispit?

With kasniti (“to be late”), Croatian usually uses:

kasniti na
- event/appointment:
  - kasniti na ispit – be late for the exam
  - kasniti na sastanak – be late for the meeting
  - kasniti na avion – be late for the plane

Za with kasniti has a different meaning: “late by (an amount of time)”:

kasniti za pet minuta – to be five minutes late.

U is more for entering closed spaces/institutions (e.g. ići u školu – go to school), not for an event like an exam. So kasniti na ispit is the natural choice.

Why is it na ispit and not na ispitu?

The preposition na changes meaning depending on the case:

na
- accusative → movement towards / entering an event or surface
- ići na ispit – go to the exam
- kasniti na ispit – be late for the exam (late in going there)
na
- locative → being at / on something
- biti na ispitu – be at the exam (physically there, taking it)

In ne kasniti na ispit, the idea is “don’t be late for getting to the exam”, so na + accusative (ispit) is used.

Could I say the same idea in a simpler or more common way, for example using doći na vrijeme?

Yes, a very natural variant would be:

Roditelji su rekli da moram doći na vrijeme na ispit i da ne smijem kasniti.
– “My parents said that I must arrive at the exam on time and that I mustn’t be late.”

Here:

doći na vrijeme – “to arrive on time” (very common expression)
ne smijem kasniti – “I mustn’t be late” (using smjeti = “be allowed to / be permitted to”).

Your original sentence is also correct and natural; this is just another typical way a native might phrase the same message.