Learn Hardcore Indonesian: Pada musim kemarau, sumur tetangga pernah kering sehingga mereka memakai air lebih sedikit. - In the dry season, the neighbor’s well once dried up so they used less water.

Pada is the standard preposition for time expressions, especially in more formal or neutral Indonesian. It’s similar to “in/on/at” when talking about time:

pada musim kemarau = in the dry season
pada tahun 2020 = in 2020
pada pagi hari = in the morning

Di is primarily used for locations (places), but in everyday speech many people do say di musim kemarau. It sounds more informal/colloquial. In writing or careful speech, pada musim kemarau is preferred as the “correct” or more standard form.

So:

Formal/neutral: pada musim kemarau
Casual speech: pada / di musim kemarau (both commonly heard)

What exactly does pernah mean in this sentence, and can we omit it?

Pernah expresses that something has ever happened at least once in the past.

In this sentence:

sumur tetangga pernah kering
= the neighbor’s well has at some point been dry / has once been dry.

If you omit pernah:

sumur tetangga kering in this context would just state “the neighbor’s well was dry” (a simple past event, not necessarily emphasizing the “ever/once” experience).

Subtle difference:

pernah kering: focuses on the fact that such a situation has occurred at least once (experience).
kering (without pernah): focuses more on describing that state at a particular time.

Both can be correct; pernah adds the nuance “it once happened that…”.

Why is it sumur tetangga and not something with a possessive marker like sumur tetanggaku?

In Indonesian, a common way to show possession is simply by putting two nouns next to each other, with the possessor second:

rumah saya = my house
rumah tetangga = the neighbor’s house
sumur tetangga = the neighbor’s well

So sumur tetangga already means “the neighbor’s well” (or “the neighbors’ well”).

If you want to specify whose neighbor, then you’d add a pronoun:

sumur tetanggaku = my neighbor’s well
sumur tetangga kami = our neighbor’s well
sumur tetangga mereka = their neighbor’s well

In the given sentence, the context doesn’t require specifying whose neighbor; we just need “the neighbor’s well / the neighbors’ well,” so sumur tetangga is natural and sufficient.

Is tetangga singular or plural in this sentence?

On its own, tetangga is number-neutral: it can mean “neighbor” or “neighbors” depending on context.

Here we have:

sumur tetangga – neighbor’s/neighbors’ well
sehingga mereka memakai air lebih sedikit – so they used less water

The pronoun mereka (“they”) suggests that we’re talking about more than one person, so the natural reading is:

tetangga = the neighbors (as a group)
mereka = the neighbors

If you want to make it explicitly plural, you can say:

para tetangga = the neighbors (more formal / emphasized plural)
But it’s not necessary here.

What is the difference between kering here and words like habis or kosong?

All three relate to the idea of “nothing left,” but they have different nuances:

kering = dry (no water/liquid).
- sumur kering = the well is dry (no water in it).
habis = used up, finished, run out.
- airnya habis = the water has run out.
kosong = empty (no contents inside).
- botol kosong = an empty bottle.

For a well, kering is the most natural choice, because physical dryness is the key idea.
You could say things like air di sumur sudah habis (“the water in the well has run out”), but sumur kering is the standard phrase.

What does sehingga do grammatically, and could we use jadi or karena itu instead?

Sehingga is a conjunction that links a cause to its result, roughly “so that / as a result,” but with a clear sense of consequence:

sumur tetangga pernah kering sehingga mereka memakai air lebih sedikit
= the neighbor’s well once became dry, so (as a consequence) they used less water.

Alternatives:

jadi: very common in speech; a bit more informal.
- … kering, jadi mereka memakai air lebih sedikit.
karena itu: more like “for that reason/therefore”; sounds slightly more formal or written.
- … kering, karena itu mereka memakai air lebih sedikit.

All three can fit here:

sehingga – neutral/formal; tightly connects cause → effect.
jadi – conversational.
karena itu – more like a separate clause: “It was dry. For that reason, they used less water.”

Who does mereka refer to in this sentence?

Mereka means “they” and here it refers to the neighbors.

The structure is:

sumur tetangga pernah kering
→ the neighbor’s well once became dry
sehingga mereka memakai air lebih sedikit
→ so they used less water

The most natural interpretation is:

tetangga (neighbor(s)) → mereka (they).

Indonesian often relies on context for pronoun reference; there’s no extra marking like “their own well.” But in this sentence there’s no real ambiguity: the people affected by their well drying up are “they = the neighbors.”

Why is it memakai air lebih sedikit and not memakai lebih sedikit air? Are both possible?

Both orders are grammatically acceptable:

memakai air lebih sedikit
memakai lebih sedikit air

In Indonesian, the degree phrase lebih sedikit (“less”) can go:

after the noun:
- air lebih sedikit = less water
before the noun:
- lebih sedikit air = less water

In practice:

memakai air lebih sedikit is very common and sounds smooth and natural.
memakai lebih sedikit air is also correct and emphasizes the “less” a bit more strongly.

There’s no big meaning change; it’s mostly a matter of style and rhythm.

What is the difference between memakai, menggunakan, and pakai here? Could we just say pakai?

All three can mean “to use,” but they differ in formality and nuance:

memakai – standard, neutral; suitable for speech and writing.
menggunakan – slightly more formal; often used in formal writing, reports, etc.
pakai – the base verb; very common in casual speech.

In this sentence:

mereka memakai air lebih sedikit – neutral, perfectly natural.
mereka menggunakan air lebih sedikit – a bit more formal.
mereka pakai air lebih sedikit – informal / conversational.

So yes, you could say pakai in everyday spoken Indonesian, but memakai fits well in a neutral example sentence.

Does the sentence refer to one specific dry season in the past, or to dry seasons in general?

It leans toward a specific past occurrence, but there is some flexibility:

pada musim kemarau = during the dry season (could be a particular year, or generally “in dry season”).
pernah = at some point in the past, once/ever.

Combined, it suggests something like:

During a dry season (at some time in the past), their well once became dry, so they used less water.

Without extra context, a listener might interpret it as:

a past experience that happened in a dry season (or perhaps during dry seasons in general), but not something that happens constantly every year.

If you wanted clearly “every dry season,” you’d normally add something like setiap:

Pada setiap musim kemarau, sumur tetangga kering…
= Every dry season, the neighbor’s well becomes dry…

Is the comma after kemarau necessary?

The comma after kemarau is recommended, because pada musim kemarau is an initial time adverbial:

Pada musim kemarau, sumur tetangga pernah kering …

In Indonesian, when you put an adverbial phrase (time, place, etc.) at the beginning of the sentence, it is common and stylistically preferred to separate it with a comma. Without the comma, it’s still understandable, but the comma:

makes the structure clearer, and
mirrors the natural pause in speech.