Ponekad mi se čini da u usporedbi s drugima sporije učim, ali ne gubim nadu.

Elon.io is an online learning platform
We have an entire course teaching Croatian grammar and vocabulary.

Start learning Croatian now

Questions & Answers about Ponekad mi se čini da u usporedbi s drugima sporije učim, ali ne gubim nadu.

What does mi se čini literally mean, and why do we need both mi and se?

Literally, mi se čini means “it seems to me”.

  • čini (se) = “(it) seems / appears”
  • se is a reflexive pronoun used to form this impersonal expression.
  • mi is the dative pronoun “to me”.

So the structure is: (to me) (it) seems → “it seems to me”. Both mi and se are needed to express “to me” and to make the verb impersonal.

Can I say čini mi se instead of mi se čini? Is there a difference?

Both Ponekad mi se čini and Ponekad čini mi se are grammatically possible, but they don’t feel equally natural.

  • The most neutral and common is Ponekad mi se čini…
    Here, Ponekad is the first stressed word, and the clitics mi se come in the so‑called “second position”, which Croatian strongly prefers.
  • Ponekad čini mi se… is possible in speech but sounds a bit more “loose” or emphatic, like stressing čini mi se.

You should treat Ponekad mi se čini… as the standard, default word order.

How does the da-clause work in čini mi se da u usporedbi s drugima sporije učim?

In Croatian, da often introduces a subordinate clause that functions like “that” in English.

  • čini mi se = “it seems to me”
  • da u usporedbi s drugima sporije učim = “that, in comparison with others, I learn more slowly”

Together: čini mi se da… = “it seems to me that…”.
You cannot drop da here; ✗ čini mi se u usporedbi… would be wrong in standard Croatian.

Why is there no comma before da in čini mi se da u usporedbi s drugima sporije učim?

In standard Croatian, you normally do not put a comma before da when it introduces an object clause closely tied to the verb:

  • Rekao je da dolazi. – “He said that he is coming.”
  • Čini mi se da sporije učim. – “It seems to me that I learn more slowly.”

So čini mi se da… is written without a comma between se and da.

What case is usporedbi in, and why?

usporedbi is in the locative singular of the noun usporedba (“comparison”):

  • nominative: usporedba
  • locative singular: (u) usporedbi

The phrase u usporedbi (s nekim/čim) literally means “in (the) comparison (with someone/something)”, so the preposition u requires the locative case here.

Why is it u usporedbi s drugima and not u usporedbi s drugi?

Because drugima is the correct instrumental plural form of the adjective/pronoun drugi (“other, others”) used as a noun:

  • nominative plural: drugi – “(the) others”
  • instrumental plural: s (kim/čim?) – s drugima – “with (the) others”

In u usporedbi s drugima, the pattern is:

  • u usporedbi → locative (“in comparison”)
  • s drugima → instrumental (“with others”)
Could I say u usporedbi sa drugima instead of s drugima?

In everyday speech, you will hear both s drugima and sa drugima.

However, the normative preference in Croatian is:

  • s before most consonants: s drugima, s Petrom
  • sa mainly before s, š, z, ž or some consonant clusters for easier pronunciation: sa psom, sa ženom, sa mnom

So u usporedbi s drugima is considered stylistically better in standard Croatian, but sa drugima is also understood and not shocking.

What is sporije, and why is it not sporiji or više sporo?

sporije is the comparative form of the adverb from spor (“slow”).

  • adjective: spor – “slow”
  • adverb: sporo – “slowly”
  • comparative adjective: sporiji – “slower” (e.g. sporiji učenik)
  • comparative adverb: sporije – “more slowly” (e.g. sporije učim)

Because it’s describing how you learn (an adverb), you must use the adverbial comparative sporije, not sporiji.

Could I say učim sporije instead of sporije učim? Is there a difference?

Yes, both sporije učim and učim sporije are grammatical and natural.

  • sporije učim slightly emphasizes “more slowly” by placing sporije first.
  • učim sporije is a bit more neutral in rhythm.

In many contexts, they’re interchangeable; the difference is mostly about subtle emphasis and style, not grammar.

Why is učim in the present tense? Would a different tense or aspect be more natural?

učim is the present tense of the imperfective verb učiti (“to learn, to study”).

In combination with ponekad (“sometimes”), the present imperfective is exactly what you want to describe a repeated or habitual feeling:

  • Ponekad mi se čini… – “Sometimes it seems to me…”
  • …sporije učim – “…that I learn more slowly (as a general habit / over time).”

Using a perfective form here would sound wrong, because you’re not talking about a single, completed act of learning.

What does Ponekad express here, and could I use other words like katkad or povremeno?

Ponekad means “sometimes, occasionally” and sets the frequency of the feeling:

  • Ponekad mi se čini… – “Sometimes it seems to me…”

You can also use near‑synonyms:

  • Katkad mi se čini… – very similar, slightly more formal/literary.
  • Povremeno mi se čini… – “from time to time / occasionally”, also fine.

All three work; ponekad is the most common in everyday speech.

What exactly does ne gubim nadu mean, and why is it gubim, not izgubim?

ne gubim nadu literally means “I am not losing hope” / “I don’t lose hope”.

  • gubiti is an imperfective verb – it describes ongoing or repeated action (to be losing).
  • izgubiti is its perfective partner – a single, completed act (to lose once).

In this sentence, the speaker expresses a general attitude over time: “Even though I sometimes feel I learn more slowly, I (still) don’t lose hope” → so the imperfective present gubim is the natural choice.

Why is it nadu and not nada in ne gubim nadu?

nada (“hope”) is a feminine noun:

  • nominative singular: nada – “(the) hope”
  • accusative singular: nadu – used as the direct object of the verb.

With verbs like gubiti (“to lose”), the thing you lose is in the accusative:

  • gubim nadu – “I’m losing (the) hope”

So nadu is simply the correct accusative form of nada here.