Learn Hardcore Indonesian: Psikolog kampus mengajar si kecil bagaimana mengatakan apa yang ia rasakan. - The campus psychologist teaches the little one how to say what he/she feels.

In Indonesian, when you have two nouns together, the second noun usually modifies the first one, similar to “Noun of Noun” or an adjective in English:

psikolog kampus = psychologist (of the) campus → campus psychologist
mahasiswa kampus = student (of the) campus → campus student
perpustakaan kota = library (of the) city → city library

So psikolog (psychologist) is the main noun, and kampus tells you what kind of psychologist.

You normally wouldn’t say kampus psikolog; that would sound wrong, like saying “campus of psychologist” in English. The default pattern is [main noun] + [modifier noun].

What is “si kecil”? Is “si” like “the”? Is it formal or informal?

Si kecil literally means “the little one” and is a common, affectionate way to refer to a small child.

si is a particle used before names or nicknames, often with a familiar or affectionate tone:
- si Budi – (little) Budi / that Budi
- si gemuk – the chubby one
- si kecil – the little one (usually a child)

Notes:

It does not translate directly as “the”; it’s more like “that (so‑and‑so)” or “the little…”, with a personal, familiar nuance.
si kecil is fairly informal and affectionate. A psychologist talking kindly about or to a child could say this, especially in a narrative context.
It doesn’t say anything about gender. Si kecil could be a boy or a girl.

More neutral alternatives:

anak kecil – small child
seorang anak – a child

Why is it “mengajar si kecil” without any preposition? In English we say “teach the child”, but sometimes also “teach to the child”.

In Indonesian, mengajar (“to teach”) can take a direct object (the person being taught) without any preposition:

Psikolog kampus mengajar si kecil…
= The campus psychologist taught the little one…

Here, si kecil is the direct object of mengajar.

Patterns with mengajar:

mengajar [someone] [something]
- Guru itu mengajar murid-murid matematika.
  The teacher teaches the students math.
mengajar [someone] untuk / supaya [do something]
- Ia mengajar anaknya untuk jujur.
  He/she teaches his/her child to be honest.

So the sentence could also be written:

Psikolog kampus mengajar si kecil untuk mengatakan apa yang ia rasakan.
(This is also correct and quite natural.)

You normally don’t say “mengajar kepada si kecil” here. Adding kepada is possible in some structures, but it usually sounds more natural with mengajarkan:

Psikolog kampus mengajarkan kepada si kecil bagaimana mengatakan… (more formal, a bit heavier)

What’s the difference between “mengajar” and “mengajarkan”? Could we use “mengajarkan” here?

Both come from the root ajar (“to teach / lesson”), but they’re used a bit differently.

mengajar focuses on the activity of teaching.
mengajarkan tends to highlight the thing that is being taught and often (not always) appears together with kepada (“to”) for the person.

Examples:

Psikolog kampus mengajar si kecil bagaimana mengatakan apa yang ia rasakan.
The campus psychologist taught the little one how to say what they feel.
→ Focus: teaching the child.

You could also say:

Psikolog kampus mengajarkan kepada si kecil bagaimana mengatakan apa yang ia rasakan.
→ Focus: teaching that skill to the child. This is fine, a bit more formal/bookish.

In everyday speech, mengajar [person] [skill] is very common and perfectly correct. In your sentence, mengajar is very natural.

Why is it “bagaimana mengatakan” and not something like “bagaimana untuk mengatakan”?

In Indonesian, bagaimana + verb is a standard way to say “how to [do something]”.

bagaimana mengatakan… = how to say…
bagaimana menjelaskan… = how to explain…
bagaimana menulis surat… = how to write a letter…

You don’t usually insert untuk between bagaimana and the verb in this pattern. So:

✅ bagaimana mengatakan… (natural)
❌ bagaimana untuk mengatakan… (sounds awkward / non‑native)

Other natural alternatives:

cara mengatakan apa yang ia rasakan – the way to say what he/she feels
bagaimana caranya mengatakan apa yang ia rasakan – how (the way) to say what he/she feels

But with bagaimana, you normally go straight to the verb: bagaimana + VERB.

Why use “mengatakan” instead of “bilang” or “berkata”? Are they interchangeable?

They’re related but not always interchangeable. All of them are about speaking/saying, but the usage differs:

mengatakan
- More formal / neutral, often used with “what” is said.
- Pattern: mengatakan [something] (often with an object clause)
- Example: Ia mengatakan bahwa ia sedih. – He/she said that he/she was sad.
bilang
- Informal, everyday speech.
- Pattern: bilang [something], or bilang ke/kepada [someone].
- Example: Dia bilang dia sedih. – He/she said he/she was sad.
berkata
- More literary/formal, often used with kepada
  - person.
- Pattern: berkata kepada [someone] [that…]
- Example: Ia berkata kepada saya bahwa ia sedih. – He/she said to me that he/she was sad.

In your sentence:

mengatakan apa yang ia rasakan = to say what he/she feels
This fits well in a neutral or slightly formal style. A psychologist talking in a narrative or semi-formal text would often use mengatakan.

Informal alternative (less suitable in a formal context):

…bagaimana bilang apa yang dia rasakan. (informal, spoken)

How does the structure “apa yang ia rasakan” work? Why do we need “yang”?

Apa yang ia rasakan literally breaks down as:

apa = what
yang = a relative marker (like “that/which” connecting clauses)
ia rasakan = he/she feels (literally: he/she feels it)

So: apa yang ia rasakan ≈ “what it is that he/she feels” or more simply “what he/she feels”.

This is a very common pattern:

apa yang kamu mau – what you want
apa yang mereka katakan – what they say/said
apa yang terjadi – what happened

Why yang?
In Indonesian, yang is used to connect “apa” (what) with a description or action that defines that “what”. It functions similarly to “that/which” in English relative clauses.

You cannot simply say “apa ia rasakan”; it’s ungrammatical. You need yang:

✅ apa yang ia rasakan
❌ apa ia rasakan

What is the role of the suffix “-kan” in “rasakan”? Why not just “apa yang ia rasa” or “apa yang ia merasa”?

The root here is rasa (“feeling/taste”). Different forms:

rasa – noun: feeling, taste
merasa – intransitive verb: to feel (no direct object)
- Ia merasa sedih. – He/she feels sad.
merasakan / rasakan – transitive verb: to feel something as an object

In apa yang ia rasakan:

rasakan is the verb merasakan with its object (apa) moved in front:
- Underlying idea: ia merasakan apa → apa yang ia rasakan

So:

apa = the thing being felt (object)
rasakan = “feel (it)”

Why not “apa yang ia rasa”?

You might hear “rasa” used as a verb in some informal speech, but standard Indonesian prefers merasakan / rasakan for this pattern.

Why not “apa yang ia merasa”?

merasa is intransitive and normally followed by an adjective/noun, not a direct object:
- Ia merasa bahagia. – He/she feels happy.
- Saying “ia merasa apa” is unnatural.

So the correct, natural form in this structure is apa yang ia rasakan.

What’s the difference between “ia” and “dia”? Why use “ia” here?

Both ia and dia mean “he/she”. Indonesian third-person pronouns are not gendered.

Differences:

ia
- More formal / written.
- Often used as a subject pronoun in writing (stories, articles, etc.).
- Rarely used in casual spoken language.
dia
- More neutral / colloquial.
- Very common in spoken Indonesian.
- Can be subject or object.

In your sentence:

apa yang ia rasakan sounds more written or literary, which matches the slightly formal tone (talking about a campus psychologist, emotional expression, etc.)

In everyday spoken Indonesian, people might say:

…bagaimana mengatakan apa yang dia rasakan.
(same meaning, more conversational)

Both are correct; the choice affects formality and style, not meaning.

How can we tell this sentence is in the past tense (“taught”) if there’s no tense marker?

Indonesian verbs don’t change form for tense. There’s no equivalent of English verb conjugations like teach/taught/teaches.

Instead, tense is understood from context or from optional time words:

Psikolog kampus mengajar si kecil…
Without context, this could mean:
- The campus psychologist teaches the little one… (habitual / present)
- The campus psychologist taught the little one… (past)
- The campus psychologist will teach the little one… (future, with context)

To make the past explicit, you could add a time adverb:

Kemarin psikolog kampus mengajar si kecil…
Yesterday the campus psychologist taught the little one…

But it’s perfectly normal in Indonesian to leave this to context. In many translations, we choose past tense in English simply because it sounds like a completed event in a story.

Is it also correct to say “mengajar si kecil untuk mengatakan apa yang ia rasakan”? Does it change the meaning?

Yes, that’s also correct and natural:

Psikolog kampus mengajar si kecil untuk mengatakan apa yang ia rasakan.

The meaning is essentially the same: the psychologist taught the child to say what they feel.

Subtle nuance:

mengajar si kecil bagaimana mengatakan…
→ Slight emphasis on the method/how (the “how to say it”).
mengajar si kecil untuk mengatakan…
→ Slight emphasis on the goal/purpose (to get the child to say it).

Both are fine; the difference is small. The original sentence focuses a bit more on teaching the “how” (bagaimana).