Ako ne slušamo, nastane problem.

If we do not listen, a problem arises.

Breakdown of Ako ne slušamo, nastane problem.

• ne: not
• slušati: to listen
• ako: if
• problem: problem
• nastati: to arise

Questions & Answers about Ako ne slušamo, nastane problem.

What does ako mean here, and how is it different from other words like kad(a) or ukoliko?

Ako means if and introduces a condition that may or may not happen.

• Ako ne slušamo... = If we don’t listen… (it’s possible that we will / will not listen).
• Kad(a) ne slušamo... = more like When(ever) we don’t listen… – it suggests something that does happen at times, a kind of regular pattern.
• Ukoliko ne slušamo... is a bit more formal, roughly if / in case we don’t listen.

So ako is the default, neutral word for if in conditional sentences.

Why are both verbs in the present tense even though the sentence can talk about the future (If we don’t listen, a problem will arise)?

In Croatian, real and likely conditions (including future ones) usually use the present tense in both clauses:

• Ako ne slušamo, nastane problem.
  Literally: If we don’t listen, a problem arises.

In English you often say:
If we don’t listen, a problem *will arise.*

Croatian does not normally use the future tense after ako in such general or likely conditions. The present tense can cover:

• general truths: Ako previše jedeš, udebljaš se. – If you eat too much, you get fat.
• future possibilities: Ako dođeš sutra, vidimo se. – If you come tomorrow, we’ll see each other.

So the Croatian present is broader in use than the English present in conditional sentences.

Why is there no subject pronoun like mi – why not Ako mi ne slušamo?

Croatian is a pro‑drop language: subject pronouns are usually omitted because verb endings show person and number.

• slušamo already tells us we (1st person plural).
• Ako ne slušamo is the natural, normal version.
• Ako mi ne slušamo is possible, but it adds emphasis to mi: If *we don’t listen (as opposed to others)…*.

So you only add mi when you want to stress the subject.

What exactly is slušamo grammatically, and how is slušati conjugated?

Slušamo is:

• verb: slušati – to listen
• tense: present
• person: 1st person
• number: plural
• aspect: imperfective (ongoing / repeated action)

Part of the present conjugation:

• (ja) slušam – I listen
• (ti) slušaš – you listen (sg)
• (on/ona/ono) sluša – he/she/it listens
• (mi) slušamo – we listen
• (vi) slušate – you listen (pl / formal)
• (oni/one/ona) slušaju – they listen

You’ll also meet the perfective partner poslušati – often more like to listen (to someone) as they tell you or to obey / heed in a completed, one‑time sense.

Why is the negative particle ne separate (ne slušamo) and not written together as one word?

In Croatian, ne is normally written as a separate word in front of the verb:

• ne slušamo – we do not listen
• ne radim – I don’t work
• ne znam – I don’t know

It is joined to the verb only in a small set of special verbs, most notably:

• biti: ne
  • jesam → nisam, ne
    • je → nije
• htjeti: ne
  • ću → neću, ne
    • ćeš → nećeš, etc.

With normal lexical verbs like slušati, you keep ne separate:

• ✅ ne slušam
• ❌ neslušam (incorrect)

What does nastane mean, and how is it different from nastaje?

Both relate to something coming into existence / arising / occurring, but they differ in aspect:

• nastati – to arise, to come into being – perfective
  • present 3rd sg: nastane
  • focuses on the single event of a problem appearing.
• nastajati – to be arising, to be forming – imperfective
  • present 3rd sg: nastaje
  • focuses on the process / repeated occurrence or a more ongoing situation.

So:

• Ako ne slušamo, nastane problem.
  If we don’t listen, a problem (will) arise (one clear consequence).
• Ako ne slušamo, nastaje problem.
  If we don’t listen, a problem keeps arising / usually arises (more habitual / descriptive).

Both are grammatically fine; the choice is about nuance: perfective for the result as a single event, imperfective for process or regular pattern.

Why is it nastane problem and not problem nastane? Is the word order fixed?

Croatian word order is flexible, but it affects emphasis:

• Nastane problem.
  Neutral / common order here: verb + new information. The focus is on the appearance of a problem as a result.
• Problem nastane.
  Puts more emphasis on problem as the topic: the problem arises (for example, in contrast to something else that doesn’t arise).

In your sentence:

• Ako ne slušamo, nastane problem.
  Sounds very natural and neutral.

Problem nastane is also possible, but it feels slightly more marked, often used when problem is already a topic in the conversation.

What case is problem in, and why doesn’t it have an ending or any article like a/the?

Problem here is:

• nominative singular, masculine
• subject of the verb nastane

Croatian has no articles (a, an, the), so:

• problem can mean a problem or the problem depending on context.

Basic forms of problem:

• nominative sg: problem – a/the problem (subject)
• genitive sg: problema – of a/the problem
• nominative pl: problemi – problems
• genitive pl: problema – of problems

So nastane problem = a/the problem arises, without any article word.

Why is there a comma after Ako ne slušamo?

Because Ako ne slušamo is a subordinate clause (the if‑clause) placed before the main clause (nastane problem).

Croatian convention:

• If a subordinate clause (introduced by ako, kad, jer, da, iako, etc.) comes first, you normally put a comma between it and the main clause:

  • Ako ne slušamo, nastane problem.
  • Kad dođeš, javi mi se.

• If the main clause comes first, the comma is often optional:

  • Nastane problem ako ne slušamo. (comma usually omitted)

Can we use kad(a) instead of ako here? What would change?

Yes, you can say:

• Kad ne slušamo, nastane problem.

The difference in nuance:

• Ako ne slušamo... – If we don’t listen...
  Focuses on the condition; it may or may not happen.
• Kad ne slušamo... – When(ever) we don’t listen...
  Suggests this does happen sometimes / regularly, and whenever it does, a problem arises.

In many everyday contexts, speakers might switch between ako and kad quite freely, but this is the basic distinction.

Could the sentence be expressed with bit će or imati instead of nastane? For example: Ako ne slušamo, bit će problem.

Yes, there are natural alternatives:

• Ako ne slušamo, bit će problem.
  If we don’t listen, there will be a problem.
  – Uses future tense of biti, neutral and very common.

• Ako ne slušamo, imat ćemo problem.
  If we don’t listen, we’ll have a problem.
  – Emphasizes that we will have to deal with it.

These versions are often more colloquial / everyday than nastane problem, which can sound a bit more formal or “bookish.” All are correct; choice depends on style and nuance.

How would this sentence look with the conditional mood (would) in Croatian, and how is that different?

With a more hypothetical, less real situation, Croatian would use the conditional (with bih, bi, bismo, biste, bi) plus usually da:

• Da ne slušamo, nastao bi problem.
  If we didn’t listen, a problem would arise.

Differences:

• Ako ne slušamo, nastane problem.
  → A real or likely situation, almost like a rule or prediction.

• Da ne slušamo, nastao bi problem.
  → More hypothetical (If we were not to listen… / If we didn’t listen…), often implying that in reality we do listen, or we are just imagining the scenario.

So: ako + present = real / general condition;
da + past or imperfective + conditional = more hypothetical / counterfactual condition.

Is the whole sentence closer to a general rule or a single future event, and does the grammar reflect that?

As written:

• Ako ne slušamo, nastane problem.

It can work as both, depending on context:

• As a general rule:
  If we (people / we as a group) don’t listen, a problem arises (that’s how things generally go). – Here present tense

  • often imperfective (nastaje) is very natural.

• As a single future event:
  If we (on this occasion) don’t listen, a problem will arise.
  – Here many speakers would slightly prefer something like bit će problem or imat ćemo problem, but nastane problem still works, especially in more formal or “compact” style.

The present tense and lack of an explicit future marker make the sentence quite compact and give it a slightly rule‑like, proverbial feel.