Learn Hardcore Croatian: Da su naši prijatelji volontirali s nama prošle subote, skupljali bismo više smeća. - If our friends had volunteered with us last Saturday, we would have collected more trash.

Da su naši prijatelji volontirali s nama prošle subote, skupljali bismo više smeća.

If our friends had volunteered with us last Saturday, we would have collected more trash.

Breakdown of Da su naši prijatelji volontirali s nama prošle subote, skupljali bismo više smeća.

Elon.io is an online learning platform

We have an entire course teaching Croatian grammar and vocabulary.

Start learning Croatian now

Questions & Answers about Da su naši prijatelji volontirali s nama prošle subote, skupljali bismo više smeća.

In this sentence, why do we use da su instead of ako su at the beginning?

Da su naši prijatelji… here means “if our friends had…” in a counterfactual (unreal) past condition.

da + past tense (perfekt) = unreal / counterfactual condition in the past
- Da su volontirali… = If they had volunteered (but they didn’t)…
ako is for real or possible conditions, usually present or future
- Ako su volontirali… = If they volunteered… (and maybe they did, I don’t know)

So da su signals “this is contrary to what actually happened,” which is exactly what the English “if … had …” does in this context.

What does da mean here in general? I thought da means “yes” in some Slavic languages.

In Croatian, da does not mean “yes.” The word for “yes” is da in Russian, but in Croatian it’s da only as a conjunction, not as “yes.”

In Croatian, da is a conjunction with several uses:

“that” after verbs of thinking, saying, etc.
- Mislim da je doma. = I think that he’s at home.
“so that / in order that” expressing purpose
- Govori glasnije da te čujem. = Speak louder so that I can hear you.
In conditionals like yours, da + past tense = “if (had)” for unreal past:
- Da su došli ranije, vidjeli bi koncert.
  If they had come earlier, they would have seen the concert.

So here da ≈ “if (had)”, not “yes.”

Why is it da su volontirali and not da bi volontirali?

Croatian distinguishes between:

Real / hypothetical present–future conditions:
- Ako / kad bi volontirali… = If they volunteered / if they would volunteer… (talking about a possible situation)
Unreal past conditions:
- Da su volontirali… = If they had volunteered… (but they didn’t)

So:

da su volontirali = past tense (perfekt) → unreal past
da bi volontirali would sound like a hypothetical present/future (and is unusual in this exact structure for a past event).

To talk about something that did not happen last Saturday, da su volontirali is the natural choice.

Why is there su volontirali in the first part but bismo skupljali in the second part?

You have two different things:

su volontirali
- su = present of biti (to be), auxiliary for the past tense (perfekt)
- volontirali = l-participle of volontirati
  → su volontirali = “(they) volunteered / had volunteered”
bismo skupljali
- bismo = conditional auxiliary of biti (1st person plural)
- skupljali = l-participle of skupljati
  → bismo skupljali = “we would collect / would have been collecting”

So the pattern is:

if they had done X (past tense) → we would do Y (conditional)
Da su volontirali…, skupljali bismo…

Why is it skupljali bismo and not bismo skupljali? Which word order is correct?

Both are correct:

Skupljali bismo više smeća.
Bismo skupljali više smeća.

The key point is the auxiliary bismo. It is a clitic: normally it wants to stand in the second position in its clause. In practice:

If the clause starts with Skupljali, then bismo naturally comes second:
Skupljali bismo…
If the clause starts with some other word (for example, više), bismo still tends to go second:
Više bismo smeća skupljali.

Word order is fairly flexible here; skupljali bismo is slightly more common and sounds very natural.

Can I write bi smo as two words instead of bismo?

No. In standard Croatian spelling:

1st person plural conditional = bismo (one word)
2nd person plural conditional = biste (one word)

The full set is:

ja: bih
ti: bi
on/ona/ono: bi
mi: bismo
vi: biste
oni/one/ona: bi

Writing bi smo or bi ste is considered a spelling mistake in standard language.

Why is it skupljali and not skupili? Don’t both mean “collected”?

They are two different aspects:

skupljati → skupljali = imperfective
- Emphasizes the process, duration or repeated action: “(we) were collecting / would be collecting.”
skupiti → skupili = perfective
- Emphasizes the completed result: “(we) would have collected (a certain amount).”

In many contexts here, Croatians would actually prefer:

…skupili bismo više smeća.
= we would have collected more trash (focus on the total amount)

Your version with skupljali bismo focuses a bit more on the activity itself (“we would have been collecting more trash”), but it is still grammatical and understandable.

Why is it s nama and not something like sa mi?

This is about the case of the pronoun and the preposition:

The preposition s / sa (“with”) requires the instrumental case.
The pronoun mi (“we”) in instrumental is nama.

Pronoun mi (we) declines like this:

Nominative: mi (we)
Genitive: nas
Dative / Locative / Instrumental: nama
Accusative: nas

So after s / sa, you need nama:

s nama = with us
sa mnom = with me
s tobom = with you (sg.)

Both s nama and sa nama are used; s nama is a bit more standard here, but sa often appears before words starting with s, z, š, ž, or clusters that are harder to pronounce.

Why is it prošle subote and not prošla subota?

Prošle subote is genitive singular, used as a common way to express time:

prošla subota (nominative) = the last Saturday (as a subject)
prošle subote (genitive) = last Saturday (as a time expression, “on last Saturday”)

In sentences like yours, time expressions often use the genitive:

prošle subote, prošlog tjedna, tog dana, jednog jutra

You can also hear prošlu subotu (accusative) as a time phrase:

Vidjeli smo se prošlu subotu.
Vidjeli smo se prošle subote.

Both are acceptable, but prošle subote is very common and sounds very natural in your sentence.

Why is smeća in the genitive? Why not just smeće?

Because of the word više (“more”).

In Croatian, quantifiers like:

više (more)
manje (less)
puno (a lot of)
mnogo (much/many)

usually require the genitive case:

više smeća = more trash (literally: “more of trash”)
puno ljudi = a lot of people
manje vremena = less time

The noun smeće is neuter and behaves like this:

Nominative / Accusative singular: smeće
Genitive singular: smeća

So after više, we use genitive → više smeća.

Could I leave out naši and just say Da su prijatelji volontirali s nama…?

Yes, grammatically you can say:

Da su prijatelji volontirali s nama prošle subote, skupljali bismo više smeća.

The difference is in specificity:

naši prijatelji = our friends (clear whose friends they are)
prijatelji on its own usually means “friends” in general, or “the friends” already known from context.

If the context already makes it obvious that you are talking about our friends, you can omit naši. Otherwise, naši prijatelji is clearer and more natural.

How flexible is the word order in this sentence? Can I move prošle subote or više smeća?

Croatian word order is fairly flexible. All of these are possible (with small differences in emphasis):

Da su naši prijatelji volontirali s nama prošle subote, skupljali bismo više smeća.
Da su naši prijatelji prošle subote volontirali s nama, skupljali bismo više smeća.
Da su naši prijatelji volontirali s nama prošle subote, više bismo smeća skupljali.
Da su naši prijatelji volontirali s nama prošle subote, više bismo skupljali smeća.

General tendencies:

Time phrases like prošle subote often go near the verb but can move around.
Quantifier + noun više smeća can also move; placing više early often emphasizes the amount:
- Više bismo smeća skupljali. = strong focus on “more.”
The only relatively fixed element is the clitic bismo, which tends to stand in second position in its clause.

All of the above variants are understandable and natural-sounding.