Learn Hardcore Croatian: Prije nego što sam upoznala ovog poslodavca, bila sam radila u drugom odjelu. - Before I met this employer, I had worked in another department.

Because the speaker in the sentence is female (you also see bila sam radila, with feminine -la endings), Croatian uses upoznala, not upoznao. The auxiliary sam does not change for gender; only the participle does.

What tense is bila sam radila, and how is it different from radila sam?

Bila sam radila functions as a past perfect (an action completed before another past action), like English “I had worked”.

radila sam – simple past (Croatian perfekt): “I worked / I was working”
bila sam radila – past perfect‑like form: “I had worked / I had been working (before that)”

In the sentence:

Prije nego što sam upoznala … – “Before I met this employer…” (past)
bila sam radila u drugom odjelu – “I had worked in another department” (earlier past)

In everyday speech many Croatians would simply say:

Prije nego što sam upoznala ovog poslodavca, radila sam u drugom odjelu.

The version with bila sam radila sounds a bit more formal or it strongly emphasizes that this working period clearly happened before meeting the employer.

Why do we say prije nego što and not just prije nego or only prije?

When a full clause follows (with its own verb), standard Croatian normally uses:

prije nego što + finite verb

So:

Prije nego što sam upoznala ovog poslodavca… ✅

You can hear or see prije nego sam upoznala…, especially in speech, but school grammar and formal writing prefer prije nego što.

If no full clause follows, you just use prije:

Prije sastanka sam radila u drugom odjelu. – “Before the meeting I worked in another department.”

So the pattern is:

prije
- noun phrase
prije nego što
- full clause (with a verb).

What exactly is što doing in prije nego što? Isn’t što a question word (“what”)?

Historically, što is a pronoun (“what”), but in combinations like prije nego što, it has basically become a fixed part of a conjunction.

So in modern usage:

prije nego što ≈ “before (the fact that)…”

You don’t interpret što literally as “what” here; it just helps introduce the following clause. It behaves more like a conjunctional particle than a normal question word in this context.

Why is it ovog poslodavca and not ovaj poslodavac?

Because ovog poslodavca is in the accusative case, used for the direct object of the verb upoznati (“to meet, get to know”).

Base (nominative) forms:

ovaj poslodavac – “this employer” (subject)

But after upoznati, you need the object:

upoznati koga? što? – “to meet whom? what?” → accusative

For masculine animate nouns (people), the accusative singular has the same form as the genitive:

Nominative: ovaj poslodavac
Accusative: ovog poslodavca

So ovog poslodavca is the correct form after upoznala sam.

Could I say ovaj poslodavac here, or would that sound wrong?

In standard Croatian, ovaj poslodavac is not correct as a direct object in this sentence; it would sound ungrammatical or foreign.

You must use the accusative:

upoznala sam ovog poslodavca ✅

Ovaj poslodavac is only correct when it is the subject:

Ovaj poslodavac je jako pošten. – “This employer is very fair.”

Why is sam placed where it is? Could I say Prije nego što upoznala sam ovog poslodavca?

No, Prije nego što upoznala sam ovog poslodavca is ungrammatical.

Sam is a clitic (short unstressed word) and in Croatian clitics like sam, si, je, smo, ste, su normally go in the second position in the clause (Wackernagel position).

In the clause što sam upoznala ovog poslodavca:

First element of the clause: što
Clitic sam comes right after it → što sam upoznala…

You cannot freely move sam around the sentence like in English:

✅ Prije nego što sam upoznala ovog poslodavca…
❌ Prije nego što upoznala sam ovog poslodavca…

The clitic group must stay immediately after the first stressed element of its clause.

Why is it u drugom odjelu and not u drugi odjel?

Because u drugom odjelu describes location (where?), not movement (where to?).

With u, Croatian uses:

Accusative for movement into something: u + accusative (where to?)
Locative for being in something: u + locative (where?)

In the sentence:

She was working in another department → static location → locative

So:

u drugom odjelu – locative: “in another department” ✅
u drugi odjel – accusative: “into another department” (movement, e.g. “I was transferred into another department”)

If you said:

Premjestili su me u drugi odjel. – “They transferred me to another department.” (motion → accusative)

Why is drugom in that form? What is it agreeing with?

Drugom is the adjective drugi (“second, other, another”) declined to match odjel in case, gender, and number.

odjel – masculine singular
After u for location → locative case
Locative masculine singular of drugi is drugom

So:

Nominative: drugi odjel – “another department” (as subject)
Locative: u drugom odjelu – “in another department”

The endings match:

drugom (‑om)
odjelu (‑u)

This adjective–noun agreement is mandatory in Croatian.

Could I just say radila sam u drugom odjelu instead of bila sam radila u drugom odjelu?

Yes. Radila sam u drugom odjelu is completely correct and very common.

Nuance:

radila sam – neutral simple past, usual in conversation.
bila sam radila – emphasizes that this was an earlier, completed situation before the other past event; stylistically more marked.

Both fit after Prije nego što sam upoznala ovog poslodavca…:

…, radila sam u drugom odjelu. – normal, everyday wording.
…, bila sam radila u drugom odjelu. – more explicit about the “past of the past,” may sound more formal or literary.

Is upoznala perfective or imperfective, and could I use upoznavala instead?

Upoznala comes from upoznati, which is perfective – it presents the action as a single, completed event (“met, got to know”).

Upoznavala comes from upoznavati, which is imperfective – it describes an ongoing, repeated or incomplete process (“was getting to know, used to meet”).

In this sentence, you want a specific completed event in the past (the first time you met this employer), so:

Prije nego što sam upoznala ovog poslodavca… ✅

Using upoznavala would change the meaning:

Prije nego što sam upoznavala ovog poslodavca… – sounds wrong or at best very odd, because “before I was in the process of getting to know this employer” doesn’t logically fit the temporal structure. The reference point is that first meeting, so perfective upoznala is correct.

Is poslodavac the normal word for “employer”? Could I say šef instead?

Poslodavac is the standard, neutral term for “employer” (a person or company that employs people), often used in legal, formal, or business contexts.

poslodavac – employer (legal/official/neutral term)
šef – boss, (direct) manager, supervisor (more informal, everyday speech)

In your sentence, poslodavac suggests “my employer” in a somewhat formal or neutral register. If you said šef, the focus shifts more to “my boss,” the person who directly supervises you, and the style becomes more informal:

Prije nego što sam upoznala svog šefa, radila sam u drugom odjelu. – “Before I met my boss, I worked in another department.” (informal, person-focused)

Using poslodavac in the original sentence is completely natural, especially in a context like HR, contracts, or employment history.