On želi ulagati novac u svoj stan, a ne u auto.

He wants to invest money in his apartment, not in the car.

Breakdown of On želi ulagati novac u svoj stan, a ne u auto.

• on: he
• ne: not
• u: in
• auto: car
• stan: apartment
• željeti: to want
• novac: money
• svoj: own
• ulagati: to invest
• a: but

Questions & Answers about On želi ulagati novac u svoj stan, a ne u auto.

Why do we need the pronoun On? Can we leave it out?

You don’t need On here; it can be omitted.

• On želi ulagati novac u svoj stan… = He wants to invest money in his apartment…
• Želi ulagati novac u svoj stan… = [He] wants to invest money in his apartment…

In Croatian, subject pronouns (ja, ti, on, ona, mi, vi, oni, etc.) are often dropped because the verb ending already shows the person and number.

You keep On if:

• you are starting a new topic (He—not someone else—wants to do this), or
• you want to emphasize he, e.g. in contrast: On želi ulagati…, ali ona ne želi.

What is the difference between želi ulagati and želi uložiti?

This is a classic aspect difference: ulagati (imperfective) vs uložiti (perfective).

• On želi ulagati novac u svoj stan…
  Suggests an ongoing or repeated activity: he wants to be investing, to keep investing money over time.

• On želi uložiti novac u svoj stan…
  Sounds more like a single, complete act: he wants to make an investment (do it once / complete it).

Both are correct. Which one you choose depends on whether you’re focusing on:

• the process / repeated action → ulagati
• the result / one complete action → uložiti

In English we say “wants to invest”. Why is there no word like “to” before ulagati?

Croatian infinitives don’t need a separate word like English to.

• English: wants to invest
• Croatian: želi ulagati

The verb željeti is followed directly by the infinitive:

• Želim jesti. – I want to eat.
• Želimo putovati. – We want to travel.
• On želi ulagati. – He wants to invest.

So you never add something like “da to” before the infinitive here; just use the infinitive on its own.

Could I also say On želi da ulaže novac u svoj stan instead of using the infinitive?

Yes, you can hear and see this structure:

• On želi da ulaže novac u svoj stan.

But there are stylistic and regional nuances:

• In standard Croatian, using the infinitive is more neutral and often preferred in writing:
  On želi ulagati novac u svoj stan.

• The “da + present tense” construction (da ulaže) is very common in speech and is also more typical of Serbian/Bosnian usage in many contexts.

In everyday conversation in Croatia, you will hear both. For learners aiming at standard Croatian, prioritize:

• željeti + infinitive → On želi ulagati…

Why is it u svoj stan and not u svom stanu?

Because u + accusative here expresses direction / movement into, not just location.

• ulagati novac u svoj stan
  Literally: “invest money into his apartment” – the money metaphorically goes into the apartment → u + accusative (svoj stan)

If you said:

• ulagati novac u svom stanu

that would sound like “invest money in his apartment (as a place where the act happens)”, which is odd in this context. You want to say he is investing into the apartment (renovations, improvements, etc.), so u + accusative is the natural choice.

General rule:

• u + accusative → direction (into, to)
• u + locative → location (in, inside)

Why is it svoj stan and not njegov stan?

Svoj is the reflexive possessive pronoun. It’s used when the owner is the subject of the sentence.

• On želi ulagati novac u svoj stan.
  = He wants to invest money in his (own) apartment.

If you use njegov (his), it can refer to some other male person, not the subject:

• On želi ulagati novac u njegov stan.
  ≈ He wants to invest money in his (another man’s) apartment.

So:

• Subject is the owner → use svoj
• Someone else is the owner → use njegov / njezin / njihov, etc.

Using svoj makes it clear we’re talking about his own apartment.

How does svoj agree with stan grammatically?

Stan is:

• gender: masculine
• number: singular
• case (here): accusative (because of u
  • movement into)

Svoj must match this:

• masculine
• singular
• accusative

For masculine inanimate nouns, the accusative form of the adjective/pronoun is the same as the nominative. So:

• nominative: svoj stan
• accusative: svoj stan

That’s why svoj doesn’t change its form here; the case change isn’t visible in the ending.

Why is the second part just a ne u auto and not a full sentence?

Croatian, like English, often omits repeated words if they’re obvious from context.

Full, explicit version:

• On želi ulagati novac u svoj stan, a ne ulagati novac u auto.

To avoid repetition, we shorten the second part and keep only what’s new:

• On želi ulagati novac u svoj stan, a ne u auto.
  = He wants to invest money in his apartment, not in a car.

The omitted part ulagati novac is understood. This kind of ellipsis is very natural and common.

Why is it a ne, and not just ne or nego?

Each option has a different feel:

1. a ne

   • a is a contrastive conjunction, similar to “and / but” in a lighter, more narrative sense.
   • ne simply negates the phrase that follows.
   • On želi ulagati novac u svoj stan, a ne u auto.
     → He wants to invest in his apartment, and not in a car.

2. nego

   • Typically used after a negation in the first part, like “not X but Y”:
   • Ne želi ulagati novac u auto, nego u svoj stan.
     → He doesn’t want to invest in a car, but rather in his apartment.

In your sentence, the first part is not negative, so a ne is the natural linking: X, and not Y.

Using nego without a prior negation would sound off in standard Croatian in this structure.

Why is auto unchanged? Shouldn’t the accusative have a different ending?

Auto is a masculine inanimate noun. For such nouns:

• nominative singular = accusative singular

So:

• Nominative: auto (as subject)
• Accusative: auto (as object or after u with motion into)

That’s why u auto looks the same as the dictionary form.

If it were masculine animate, you’d see a difference, e.g.:

• N: pas (dog)
• A: psa (I see the dog – Vidim psa.)

Does stan mean “house” or “apartment”?

In Croatian, stan usually means apartment / flat (a unit inside a building).

• stan – apartment, flat
• kuća – house (a whole building, usually on its own)

So ulagati novac u svoj stan typically suggests investing in his apartment (renovating, improving, buying furniture, etc.), not in a house.

Could I put the words in a different order, like On želi ulagati u svoj stan novac?

You could move things around, but some orders are much more natural.

Most neutral:

• On želi ulagati novac u svoj stan, a ne u auto.

Other possible orders with different emphasis:

• Novac želi ulagati u svoj stan, a ne u auto.
  (emphasis on the money in contrast to something else)
• U svoj stan želi ulagati novac, a ne u auto.
  (strong emphasis on in his apartment)

Your example:

• On želi ulagati u svoj stan novac

is grammatically possible but sounds awkward and unnatural. In Croatian, the verb–object–prepositional phrase order (ulagati novac u svoj stan) is preferred in neutral sentences like this.

Is there a difference between ulagati novac and investirati novac?

Both can mean to invest money, but there are nuances:

• ulagati (novac) – native Slavic verb; very common, neutral, used in all styles.
• investirati (novac) – loan from Latin via other European languages; slightly more formal, “business-like”.

In everyday speech and writing, ulagati novac is perfectly natural and probably more frequent.
In business or technical contexts, you will also see investirati, investicija, etc.

In your sentence, On želi ulagati novac u svoj stan… sounds completely normal and idiomatic.