Learn Hardcore Indonesian: Si kecil belum tahu apa yang ingin ia kerjakan di masa depan, dan itu wajar. - The little one doesn’t know yet what he/she wants to do in the future, and that is normal.

Together, si kecil means the little one (a child), and it has a warm, affectionate tone. It does not specify gender; context tells you whether it’s a boy or a girl.

You can use si with:

a name: si Budi, si Ani
a descriptive nickname: si gemuk (the chubby one), si cantik (the pretty one)

It’s not used for formal speech; it’s informal and often a bit cute or familiar.

Why is it belum tahu and not tidak tahu?

Both involve tahu (to know), but:

tidak tahu = do not know (simple negation)
belum tahu = do not know yet, but there is an expectation that this may change in the future

In the sentence, belum tahu suggests:

The child doesn’t know yet what they want to do in the future (but will probably know later).

If you said si kecil tidak tahu apa yang…, it would sound more like a flat fact, without the nuance that it’s normal and likely temporary. Using belum fits well with dan itu wajar (and that’s normal).

What is the function of apa yang in apa yang ingin ia kerjakan?

Apa yang here introduces an indirect question / object clause:

apa = what
yang = a linker that turns it into “what it is that …”

So apa yang ingin ia kerjakan literally feels like:

what it is that he/she wants to do

Structure:

apa yang
- clause
  - ingin ia kerjakan (he/she wants to do)

You’ll see the pattern [question word] + yang + clause quite often:

siapa yang datang tadi? – who came earlier?
kapan yang cocok untukmu? – when (what time) works for you?
apa yang kamu lihat? – what did you see?

Why is it ingin ia kerjakan and not ia ingin kerjakan?

Both orders are possible, but they sound different in natural usage.

The sentence has:

apa yang ingin ia kerjakan

Word-by-word order:

apa (what – object)
yang (linker)
ingin (want)
ia (subject: he/she)
kerjakan (verb)

Indonesian allows some flexibility, but in this apa yang … pattern, it’s very common and smooth to put ingin right after yang, then the subject, then the verb:

apa yang ingin ia kerjakan (very natural)
apa yang ia ingin kerjakan (grammatical, but less common / a bit heavier)

So the given order is simply the most idiomatic for this structure.

Where does kerjakan come from, and why not just kerja?

Root and forms:

kerja = to work; work (noun/verb)
mengerjakan = to do, to work on (a task)
kerjakan = object-focused form of mengerjakan, also used as an imperative

In apa yang ingin ia kerjakan, the object (apa = what) is placed before the verb. In this situation, Indonesian typically uses the object-focus form, so the meN- is dropped and -kan is kept:

Normal (subject focus):
- Ia mengerjakan tugas itu. – He/She is doing that assignment.
Object fronted (object focus):
- Tugas itu ia kerjakan. – That assignment, he/she is doing.

Similarly:

Ia ingin mengerjakan sesuatu. – He/She wants to do something.
Apa yang ingin ia kerjakan? – What does he/she want to do?

So kerjakan is used here because apa (the object) has been moved to the front.

Could the sentence use mengerjakan instead of kerjakan?

If you keep the structure exactly the same, mengerjakan would sound off or ungrammatical:

✗ apa yang ingin ia mengerjakan – this is not natural.

With apa yang …, where apa is the fronted object, the verb should normally be the object-focus form kerjakan.

If you want to use mengerjakan, you’d usually keep the object after the verb:

Ia ingin mengerjakan sesuatu di masa depan.
He/She wants to do something in the future.

Different structure, but then mengerjakan is fine.

Who or what is ia? How is it different from dia?

Ia is a third-person singular pronoun:

ia = he / she (no gender)
dia = he / she (also no gender)

Differences:

ia is more formal and is usually used only as a subject:
- Ia pergi ke sekolah. – He/She went to school.
dia is more neutral / informal and can be subject or object:
- Dia pergi ke sekolah. – He/She went to school.
- Saya melihat dia. – I saw him/her.

You would not normally use ia as an object:

✗ Saya melihat ia. – sounds wrong
✓ Saya melihat dia.

In our sentence, ia is the subject of kerjakan, so ia is perfectly natural, and the style is a bit formal/neutral.

What does di masa depan literally mean, and is di correct for time?

Literally:

di = in/at (usually location, but often used in time expressions)
masa = period / era
depan = front / ahead

So di masa depan literally is in the time ahead, which corresponds to in the future.

About di with time:

More formal/“textbook” Indonesian often prefers pada for time:
- pada masa depan – in the future
In real everyday usage, di masa depan is very common and widely accepted.

Both di masa depan and pada masa depan are understood and acceptable; di masa depan has a very natural, conversational feel.

What does dan itu wajar add to the sentence?

dan = and
itu = that / it
wajar = natural, normal, reasonable

Dan itu wajar means and that’s normal / and that’s perfectly natural.

It does two things:

Comments on the whole first clause (si kecil belum tahu apa yang ingin ia kerjakan di masa depan) and says this situation is normal.
Softens the statement, making it sound understanding and reassuring, not critical.

So the whole sentence carries a supportive tone: the child doesn’t know yet, and that’s okay.

What exactly does wajar mean here, and are there synonyms?

Wajar in this context means:

natural
normal
reasonable
to be expected

Some close synonyms you might hear in similar sentences:

lumrah – ordinary, very normal
normal – literally “normal”
biasa saja – just normal, nothing special

Example:

Kalau anak belum tahu mau jadi apa, itu wajar.
If a child doesn’t know what they want to be, that’s normal.

Why is there a comma before dan in ..., dan itu wajar? Is that normal in Indonesian?

Yes, it’s normal and correct.

Indonesian commonly uses a comma before dan when it connects two full clauses that each have their own subject:

Si kecil belum tahu apa yang ingin ia kerjakan di masa depan, dan itu wajar.
- Clause 1: Si kecil belum tahu ...
- Clause 2: itu wajar

Other examples:

Saya sudah siap, dan mereka juga sudah datang.
Dia ingin ikut, dan saya mengizinkannya.

If dan connects just words or short phrases (not full clauses), there is usually no comma:

Saya membeli roti dan susu.
Dia pintar dan rajin.

Can si kecil be replaced with a pronoun? How would that change the feel?

You could replace si kecil with a pronoun, but the nuance changes.

Alternatives:

Ia belum tahu apa yang ingin ia kerjakan di masa depan, dan itu wajar.
He/She doesn’t know yet what they want to do in the future, and that’s normal.
Dia belum tahu apa yang ingin ia kerjakan di masa depan, dan itu wajar.

Differences:

si kecil is specific and affectionate: you are clearly talking about a child, and it sounds warm.
ia/dia is more neutral; it loses the “little one” nuance and could refer to any person.

So si kecil emphasizes that the person is a child and creates a caring tone.

Is the whole sentence a statement or could it be a question in Indonesian?

As written, it’s clearly a statement:

Si kecil belum tahu apa yang ingin ia kerjakan di masa depan, dan itu wajar.

To turn it into a question, you would normally change the structure or add a question marker:

Apakah wajar kalau si kecil belum tahu apa yang ingin ia kerjakan di masa depan?
Is it normal if the little one doesn’t yet know what they want to do in the future?
Si kecil belum tahu apa yang ingin ia kerjakan di masa depan, itu wajar kan?
The little one doesn’t yet know what they want to do in the future; that’s normal, right?

So in the original form, it is not a question; it’s a descriptive, reassuring statement.