Šefica je rekla da u izvještaju nedostaje datum, ali da ga mogu sastaviti ponovno bez žurbe.

Because šefica is a feminine noun meaning female boss / manager, and the past participle agrees with the subject in gender.

So:

• šefica → feminine
• je rekla → said with feminine agreement

If the boss were male, you would get:

• Šef je rekao ...

Croatian past tense is usually made with:

• the auxiliary biti (to be) in the present tense
• plus the l-participle

So here:

• je = is/has as an auxiliary
• rekla = the participle of reći (to say), feminine singular

Together, je rekla means said.

This is very normal in Croatian:

• je rekao = he said
• je rekla = she said
• su rekli = they said

Because both parts are dependent on rekla (said).

The structure is:

• Šefica je rekla [da ...], ali [da ...].

In English, we often avoid repeating that:

• She said that X, but that Y
• or more naturally: She said that X, but Y

Croatian often keeps the second da to make the parallel structure clear. It sounds natural and tidy.

Because u takes the locative when it means in / inside / within a location.

Here it means in the report, so:

• izvještaj = nominative
• u izvještaju = locative

Compare:

• u izvještaju = in the report
• u školi = in school
• u knjizi = in the book

If u means motion into, it usually takes the accusative instead:

• staviti u izvještaj = to put into the report

With nedostajati (to be missing / to lack), the thing that is missing is often in the nominative.

So:

• u izvještaju nedostaje datum = a/the date is missing from the report

Here datum is the thing missing, so it stays in the nominative singular.

A very common related pattern is:

• Nedostaje mi novac. = I’m missing money / I lack money.

There, novac is still nominative, while mi shows the person affected.

In your sentence, there is no affected person expressed; the location is expressed instead:

• u izvještaju = in the report

Because Croatian has no articles.

So Croatian does not have direct equivalents of English a/an and the.

That means:

• datum can mean a date or the date
• izvještaj can mean a report or the report

The exact meaning comes from context. Since the learner already knows the meaning, the sentence is simply relying on context in the normal Croatian way.

Ga most naturally refers to izvještaj (report).

So:

• ga mogu sastaviti ponovno = can put it together / compile it again

Why not datum? Because sastaviti (to put together, compile, draw up) fits naturally with izvještaj, not with datum.

So the idea is:

• the date is missing from the report,
• but the report can be compiled/drawn up again.

Because ga is the unstressed accusative singular form of on (he/it) for a masculine noun.

Since izvještaj is masculine singular, the direct object pronoun is:

• ga = him/it

So:

• izvještaj → ga

Compare:

• Vidim izvještaj. → Vidim ga.
• Sastaviti izvještaj. → Sastaviti ga.

Because ga is a clitic: a short, unstressed word that tends to appear very early in the clause.

Croatian clitics often come in second position or near the beginning of their clause. After da, it is very normal to place the clitic immediately after it:

• da ga mogu sastaviti

That is much more natural than placing ga later.

So Croatian prefers:

• ... da ga mogu sastaviti ...

rather than something more English-like such as:

• ... da mogu sastaviti ga ... ✗

Croatian often drops subject pronouns when they are understood from context.

The form mogu can mean:

• I can
• they can

So by itself it is ambiguous. Croatian allows this, and the wider context usually makes it clear.

That means this sentence, taken alone, does not fully tell you whether it means:

• I can compile it again
• or they can compile it again

If the meaning has already been shown to the learner, that context resolves it. The important grammar point is that Croatian often leaves subject pronouns unstated.

Because after modal verbs like moći (can, to be able to), Croatian normally uses the infinitive.

So:

• mogu sastaviti = can compile / can put together

This is very similar to English:

• I can go
• I can do it
• I can write

Croatian:

• mogu ići
• mogu to učiniti
• mogu sastaviti izvještaj

This is about aspect.

• sastaviti = perfective
• sastavljati = imperfective

The perfective sastaviti presents the action as a whole completed act: drawing up / putting together the report again.

That fits well after mogu here, because the meaning is something like can compile it again as a complete task.

If you used sastavljati, it would suggest more of an ongoing or repeated process.

Very roughly:

• mogu sastaviti = I/they can get it done
• mogu sastavljati = I/they can be compiling it / can compile it repeatedly

It is genitive singular.

The preposition bez (without) requires the genitive.

So:

• žurba = nominative
• bez žurbe = without hurry / without rushing

This is a very common pattern:

• bez problema = without problems
• bez šećera = without sugar
• bez odmora = without rest

Yes, it is very natural. It means something like:

• without hurry
• without rushing
• there’s no need to rush

English usually prefers a more verbal expression, while Croatian comfortably uses the noun žurba.

So Croatian says literally:

• without hurry

but in natural English we often say:

• without rushing
• take your time
• there’s no rush

Not completely. Croatian word order is fairly flexible, and different orders can shift emphasis.

This sentence puts u izvještaju early, which highlights the place where the problem is:

• u izvještaju nedostaje datum = in the report, the date is missing

You could also hear:

• Datum nedostaje u izvještaju

but that sounds different in emphasis. The original version is very natural because it first sets the scene (in the report) and then states what is missing.

Yes, in many contexts the meaning would be similar.

• ponovno = again, anew
• opet = again

In this sentence, ponovno fits well because it sounds slightly more formal or neutral, which matches the tone of šefica, izvještaj, and sastaviti.

So:

• ga mogu sastaviti ponovno = perfectly natural
• ga mogu sastaviti opet = also understandable, a bit more everyday in tone

Because that would make the second part feel more independent.

The actual sentence keeps both clauses under rekla:

• Šefica je rekla da ... , ali da ...

That means both ideas are things the boss said.

If you said:

• Šefica je rekla da ..., ali mogu ga sastaviti ponovno

it would sound more like:

• The boss said that ..., but I/they can compile it again

That changes the structure, because the second part is no longer clearly inside what the boss said.