Završivši predstavu, glumci i redatelj su se poklonili na pozornici.

Having finished the play, the actors and the director bowed on the stage.

Breakdown of Završivši predstavu, glumci i redatelj su se poklonili na pozornici.

• biti: to be
• i: and
• na: on
• završiti: to finish
• predstava: play
• glumac: actor
• redatelj: director
• pozornica: stage
• pokloniti se: to bow

Questions & Answers about Završivši predstavu, glumci i redatelj su se poklonili na pozornici.

What exactly is završivši? Is it a tense or some kind of participle, and how would I translate its structure into English?

Završivši is an adverbial past active participle (in Croatian: glagolski prilog prošli).

• It’s formed from the perfective verb završiti (to finish) + the suffix -vši → završivši (having finished).
• It describes an action that is completed before the action in the main clause.

So the structure is roughly:

• Završivši predstavu, … → Having finished the play, … / After finishing the play, …

It always refers to the same subject as the main verb (glumci i redatelj in this sentence).

Why is it predstavu and not predstava after završivši?

Predstavu is in the accusative singular (feminine), because it is the direct object of the verb završiti (inside the participial form završivši).

• završiti što? → predstavu (what did they finish? the play)

Predstava is the nominative form (used for the subject), but here the play is not the subject, it’s a thing being finished, so it must be accusative: predstavu.

Could I rewrite Završivši predstavu with a more “normal” clause instead of this participle?

Yes. A very natural replacement would be something like:

• Nakon što su završili predstavu, glumci i redatelj su se poklonili na pozornici.
  (After they finished the play, the actors and the director bowed on the stage.)

Other options:

• Kad su završili predstavu, …
• Po završetku predstave, …

The meaning is the same; završivši predstavu is just a more compact, slightly more formal/literary way to say it.

Why is it glumci i redatelj su se poklonili, and not glumci i redatelj su poklonili se? Where does se have to go?

In Croatian, clitics (short unstressed words like se, su, je, ga, mi…) normally want to be in the second position in the clause, and they also tend to stick together in a fixed order.

Here:

• glumci i redatelj = first “slot” (the first stressed element)
• then come the clitics in a group: su se
• then the main verb: poklonili

So the natural order is:

• Glumci i redatelj su se poklonili.

*Glumci i redatelj su poklonili se sounds wrong to native speakers because se is “pushed” away from its usual clitic cluster position.

Why do we need se in poklonili se? Could we just say poklonili?

No. In Croatian, pokloniti se and pokloniti are two different verbs:

• pokloniti se = to bow (literally: to bow oneself) – reflexive
• pokloniti (nekome nešto) = to give something as a gift (to someone)

So:

• glumci i redatelj su se poklonili = the actors and the director bowed
• glumci i redatelj su poklonili cvijeće publici = they gave flowers to the audience

Without se, the meaning changes completely or becomes incorrect in this context.

Why is it na pozornici and not na pozornicu? What case is that, and what’s the difference?

Pozornici is locative singular, used with na to express location (where):

• na pozornici = on the stage (where are they bowing?)

With na:

• na
  • locative → static location (where?)
    
    • Glumci su na pozornici. – The actors are on the stage.
• na
  • accusative → movement/direction (where to?)
    
    • Idu na pozornicu. – They are going onto the stage.

In this sentence, they are already on the stage, bowing there, so na pozornici (locative) is correct.

Why is there a comma after predstavu: Završivši predstavu, glumci i redatelj…?

The comma separates the adverbial participle clause from the main clause.

• Završivši predstavu = separate, introductory clause (time/circumstance: “having finished the play”)
• glumci i redatelj su se poklonili na pozornici = main sentence

In standard Croatian, such introductory participial phrases are always set off by a comma.

Why is the verb poklonili in the masculine plural form? How is that decided?

The past participle poklonili agrees with the grammatical subject in number and gender.

The subject is glumci i redatelj:

• glumci = actors → masculine plural
• redatelj = director → masculine singular

Combined, that’s a masculine plural group, so the verb must be masculine plural:

• glumci i redatelj su se poklonili

If the subject were all feminine, you’d see a feminine form:

• Glumice i redateljica su se poklonile. (The actresses and the (female) director bowed.)

Is su absolutely necessary here, or can it be left out?

In standard Croatian, su is necessary. It’s the auxiliary verb for the perfect tense (past):

• (oni) su se poklonili = they have bowed / they bowed

So the correct standard form is:

• Glumci i redatelj su se poklonili.

In colloquial speech, people often drop su in fast, informal speech:

• Glumci i redatelj se poklonili.

This is common in conversation but considered non‑standard in careful writing.

Is završivši predstavu considered formal or literary? Would people actually say this in everyday speech?

The adverbial participle završivši is more typical of written, formal, or literary Croatian (books, journalism, essays, narration).

In everyday spoken Croatian, people usually prefer a finite clause instead, for example:

• Kad su završili predstavu, glumci i redatelj su se poklonili na pozornici.
• Nakon što je predstava završila, glumci i redatelj su se poklonili na pozornici.

So the original sentence is perfectly correct and natural in written or narrative style, but would sound a bit elevated or bookish in casual conversation.

Could we move završivši predstavu to the end of the sentence, like:
Glumci i redatelj su se poklonili na pozornici, završivši predstavu?

Yes, that is grammatically correct:

• Glumci i redatelj su se poklonili na pozornici, završivši predstavu.

This is also used in Croatian. The difference is mostly one of emphasis and flow:

• At the beginning (Završivši predstavu, …), the sentence starts by setting the time/context: after finishing the play…
• At the end, it feels more like an afterthought or a way to add extra information: their bow is presented first, and then you clarify that it happened upon finishing the play.

Both orders are acceptable stylistically.

Does završivši predstavu always refer to glumci i redatelj, or could it be ambiguous who finished the play?

By the rules of standard Croatian, the subject of završivši predstavu must be the same as the subject of the main clause that follows it.

So in:

• Završivši predstavu, glumci i redatelj su se poklonili na pozornici.

it is understood that glumci i redatelj are the ones who finished the play.

If the participle logically referred to some other subject than the main one, that would be felt as a kind of “dangling participle” and considered bad style or even incorrect in careful Croatian. Here, though, there’s no such problem: it’s clear and grammatical.