Learn Hardcore Croatian: Konobar nam ljubazno opisuje sastojke i piše recept na papir. - The waiter kindly describes the ingredients to us and writes the recipe on paper.

The ingredients (sastojke) are the direct object (accusative), and nam is the indirect object (dative) – the people who receive the explanation.

You could also say (less clitic-like, more emphatic):

Konobar nama ljubazno opisuje sastojke.

But nam in second position is the most natural everyday form.

Why is sastojke in that form? Which case is it and why?

Sastojke is the accusative plural of sastojak (ingredient).

The verb opisivati / opisati (opisuje here) is a transitive verb, so it takes a direct object in the accusative:

opisuje što? → sastojke
(describes what? → the ingredients)

Singular:

nominative: sastojak
accusative: sastojak (same form for many masculine nouns)

Plural:

nominative: sastojci
accusative: sastojke

So in this sentence sastojke is simply “(the) ingredients” as the thing being described.

Why is recept not changed? Shouldn’t it also have some ending in this sentence?

Recept is in the accusative singular, but for many masculine inanimate nouns, the accusative form is identical to the nominative.

nominative singular: recept (a recipe)
accusative singular: recept (writing what? → the recipe)

So in piše recept, recept is grammatically accusative as the direct object of piše, even though it looks the same as the dictionary form.

What’s the difference between opisuje and opiše (or opisivati and opisati)?

Croatian has aspect:

opisivati (present stem opisuje-) = imperfective
opisati (future/past stem opiše-) = perfective

opisuje (imperfective present) focuses on the process or an action in progress / repeated:

Konobar nam ljubazno opisuje sastojke.
→ He is (in the process of) describing the ingredients to us / tends to describe them.

opiše (perfective, usually used in future or past tenses) focuses on the completion of the action:

Konobar će nam ljubazno opisati sastojke.
→ The waiter will (fully, completely) describe the ingredients to us.
Konobar nam je ljubazno opisao sastojke.
→ The waiter (has) kindly described the ingredients to us.

In the bare present tense describing what’s happening right now, you normally use the imperfective: opisuje.

Similarly, what’s the difference between piše and napiše?

Again, it’s aspect:

pisati (piše) = imperfective
napisati (napiše) = perfective

piše recept = he is writing the recipe / he writes a recipe (focus on the ongoing action or habit).
napiše recept = he (will) write(s) the recipe to completion / finish(es) writing it.

Examples:

Konobar nam piše recept na papir.
→ The waiter is writing the recipe on paper (right now / in general).
Konobar će nam napisati recept na papir.
→ The waiter will write the recipe on paper (and finish it).

In a narrative present about what is currently happening, piše is the natural choice.

Why is it na papir and not na papiru?

The preposition na can take accusative or locative, with a clear meaning difference:

na + accusative = motion / direction onto something
na + locative = location on something (no movement implied)

In the sentence:

piše recept na papir
– papir is accusative (same form as nominative here)
– meaning: He writes the recipe *onto (a) paper / onto a sheet of paper.*

If you said:

piše recept na papiru (locative)
it would sound more like “He writes the recipe on the paper (that already exists somewhere)”, focusing on the location, not the action of putting it there.

For “writing onto paper” as the goal, na papir with accusative is the standard form.

Why is ljubazno used, and how is it related to ljubazan?

ljubazan = kind, polite (adjective, masculine singular)
ljubazno (here) = kindly, politely (adverb)

In this sentence, ljubazno does not agree with any noun. It modifies the verb, telling us how the waiter does the action:

opisuje (kako?) ljubazno
piše (kako?) ljubazno (implicitly – the adverb semantically applies to both actions)

Compare:

ljubazan konobar = a kind/polite waiter (adjective modifying a noun)
konobar ljubazno opisuje… = the waiter describes (how?) kindly (adverb modifying a verb)

So ljubazno here is the adverbial form of ljubazan.

Does ljubazno have to come before opisuje? Could I say opisuje ljubazno?

You can say opisuje ljubazno, and it is grammatically correct, but:

ljubazno opisuje is the more neutral and common order.
opisuje ljubazno can sound a bit more emphatic or stylistic, sometimes adding a little pause or stress on how he describes.

In Croatian, adverbs often stand before the verb in neutral word order, especially in simple sentences:

on polako govori – he speaks slowly
ona tiho čita – she reads quietly
konobar nam ljubazno opisuje… – the waiter kindly describes…

Putting the adverb after the verb is still possible, but it can subtly shift emphasis or sound slightly marked.

Why is there no word for “the” or “a” (e.g. “the waiter”, “a recipe”)?

Croatian has no articles like a / an / the.

Definiteness and indefiniteness (“a waiter” vs “the waiter”) are understood from context, word order, and the situation, rather than from a separate word.

So:

Konobar nam ljubazno opisuje sastojke i piše recept na papir.

can translate as:

A waiter kindly describes the ingredients to us and writes the recipe on (a) piece of paper.
or
The waiter kindly describes the ingredients to us and writes the recipe on (a) piece of paper.

Which one is correct depends on what was mentioned before in the conversation, not on any specific word in the Croatian sentence.

Why is the subject konobar not repeated before piše? Is the second part missing a subject?

The subject is shared between the two verbs:

Konobar nam ljubazno opisuje sastojke
i
(konobar) piše recept na papir.

In Croatian (as in English), when you have the same subject for two coordinated verbs joined by i (and), you usually don’t repeat it:

Djevojka pjeva i pleše.
– The girl sings and dances.
Konobar opisuje sastojke i piše recept.
– The waiter describes the ingredients and writes (the) recipe.

You would only repeat konobar for strong emphasis or contrast:

Konobar opisuje sastojke, a kuhar piše recept.
– The waiter describes the ingredients, and the cook writes the recipe.

Do I need a comma before i here, like in English sometimes?

No comma is needed in this sentence:

Konobar nam ljubazno opisuje sastojke i piše recept na papir.

General rule: when i connects two verbs with the same subject in a simple sentence, no comma is used.

You would use a comma before i if you are linking more separate clauses, especially with different subjects or clearer separation:

Konobar nam opisuje sastojke, i mi pažljivo slušamo.
→ “The waiter describes the ingredients to us, and we listen carefully.”

Why is the verb in the present tense (opisuje, piše) instead of some progressive form like “is describing / is writing”?

Croatian does not have a separate present continuous form like is describing, is writing.
The present tense of an imperfective verb covers both:

He describes (habitual / general)
and
He is describing (right now, in progress).

So:

Konobar nam ljubazno opisuje sastojke…
can mean either:
- “The waiter is kindly describing the ingredients to us (right now).”
- “The waiter kindly describes the ingredients to us (whenever we ask him).”

The context usually makes it clear whether it’s a one-time ongoing action or a habitual one.
To express a completed action (rather than one in progress), Croatian typically switches to a perfective verb, often in past or future, not to a special “is doing” form.

Is konobar always male? How would I refer to a female waiter?

Konobar is grammatically masculine and typically used for a male waiter.

For a female waiter, you normally use:

konobarica – a waitress.

Examples:

Konobar nam ljubazno opisuje sastojke.
→ A (male) waiter is kindly describing the ingredients to us.
Konobarica nam ljubazno opisuje sastojke.
→ A (female) waiter / waitress is kindly describing the ingredients to us.

All verb forms (opisuje, piše) stay the same; only the noun for the person changes.