Learn Hardcore Indonesian: Daripada berdebat terus, hakim itu menyarankan kami mencari kompromi di luar sidang. - Rather than arguing all the time, that judge suggested we look for a compromise outside the trial.

Comparative:
- Dia lebih tinggi daripada saya. = He is taller than me.
Alternative / preference (as here):
- Daripada berdebat terus, ... = Rather than keep arguing, ... / Instead of arguing all the time, ...

In the second use, there is usually an implied “better” (like lebih baik) that is often omitted because it’s understood from context:

(Lebih baik) daripada berdebat terus, ...
= (It’s better) rather than keep arguing, ...

So here daripada introduces something you don’t want to do, in order to contrast it with a better alternative in the main clause.

What exactly does berdebat terus mean? Is terus “then” or “continuously”?

In berdebat terus, the word terus means continuously / keep doing something, not then.

berdebat = to argue / to debate
terus (in this position) = keep on, continually, all the time

So berdebat terus is roughly:

to keep arguing
to argue all the time / constantly

terus can also mean then / next when it connects actions in a narrative:

Saya makan, terus saya tidur. = I ate, then I slept.

But when terus comes after a verb like here (berdebat terus), it usually means continuously / keep doing X.

Could we say terus berdebat instead of berdebat terus? Is there any difference?

Yes, you can say both berdebat terus and terus berdebat, and the meaning is very similar: keep arguing / continue arguing.

berdebat terus
- More like “argue continuously / argue all the time”
- terus acts as an adverb modifying the action.
terus berdebat
- Slightly more like “continue to argue / keep on arguing (from now)”
- terus feels more like “continue to” placed before the verb.

In many contexts, they are interchangeable. In this specific sentence, Daripada berdebat terus, ... sounds a bit more natural and idiomatic, but Daripada terus berdebat, ... is also acceptable.

Why is there a comma after Daripada berdebat terus? Is this a separate clause?

Yes. Structurally, the sentence is:

Daripada berdebat terus,
hakim itu menyarankan kami mencari kompromi di luar sidang.

The first part is a fronted subordinate clause that sets up an alternative:

Daripada berdebat terus, = Instead of / rather than keep arguing,

The main clause follows:

hakim itu menyarankan ... = the judge suggested ...

In Indonesian, you can put the subordinate clause first, separated by a comma, especially with connectors like daripada, karena, walaupun, kalau, etc.

You could also put the main clause first:

Hakim itu menyarankan kami mencari kompromi di luar sidang, daripada berdebat terus.

Both orders are grammatical; the original simply emphasizes the contrast (“Instead of arguing all the time...”).

What does hakim itu mean exactly? Why not just hakim?

hakim = judge (in general)
hakim itu = that judge / the judge (a specific one already known in the context)

The demonstrative itu here works a bit like “that/the …” in English when you refer to a particular judge, not judges in general.

Using hakim itu suggests:

This is a specific judge already identified in the situation (e.g., the judge presiding over this case).
It’s not just describing what judges usually do; it’s telling what that particular judge did.

You could see hakim alone in some contexts, especially in general statements:

Hakim harus adil. = Judges must be fair.

But in a narrative about a specific event, hakim itu is more natural.

Why is it kami and not kita? What’s the difference here?

Both kami and kita mean we / us, but:

kami = we (excluding the person you’re talking to)
kita = we (including the person you’re talking to)

In hakim itu menyarankan kami mencari kompromi..., kami refers to a group that does not include the listener.

For example, if the speaker is one of the parties in the case and they are telling someone else about what happened in court:

kami = the people involved in the case (party A and B), but not the person they’re talking to now.

If the speaker were talking to the people who were in court with them and wanted to include the listener in “we”, they might say:

Hakim itu menyarankan kita mencari kompromi di luar sidang.

So kami signals that the listener wasn’t part of that group.

How does menyarankan kami mencari kompromi work grammatically? It looks like two verbs in a row.

The structure is:

menyarankan (to suggest, to recommend)
kami (object: the people who receive the suggestion)
mencari kompromi (the action suggested: to seek a compromise)

So menyarankan kami mencari kompromi is essentially:

[The judge] suggested [that we] [seek a compromise].

In more explicit forms, you may also see:

menyarankan agar kami mencari kompromi
- agar acts like “that / so that”.
menyarankan kami untuk mencari kompromi
- untuk functions like “to” before a verb phrase: “to seek a compromise”.

All three are acceptable:

menyarankan kami mencari kompromi
menyarankan agar kami mencari kompromi
menyarankan kami untuk mencari kompromi

The version in the sentence is a more compact form where the verb menyarankan takes both:

an indirect object: kami
and a verb phrase complement: mencari kompromi

Is kompromi just a loanword from English “compromise”? Is it used the same way?

Yes, kompromi is a loanword (from Dutch/English/European sources) and very similar to “compromise” in meaning.

Typical uses:

mencari kompromi = to seek a compromise
mencapai kompromi = to reach a compromise
membuat kompromi = to make a compromise

It usually has a neutral to slightly positive nuance: finding a middle way, a mutually acceptable solution.

There’s also a common expression:

mencari jalan tengah = literally “to find the middle path” → to look for a middle ground / compromise.

So mencari kompromi here is idiomatic and natural in a legal or negotiation context.

What does di luar sidang mean? Is it “outside the court building” or something more abstract?

di luar sidang literally means “outside the session / outside the hearing”, but in legal and everyday contexts it usually means:

outside the formal court session / outside the courtroom proceedings

So in this sentence, mencari kompromi di luar sidang suggests:

to look for a settlement or compromise outside the formal court proceedings,
possibly in private discussions, mediation, or negotiations separate from the official hearing.

It does not necessarily mean physically outside the building (like in the parking lot), though it could include that. The main contrast is formal court process vs. outside that process.

A closely related legal phrase you may hear is:

penyelesaian di luar pengadilan = out-of-court settlement

What’s the difference between sidang, persidangan, and pengadilan?

They are related but not identical:

sidang
- A session / hearing / meeting, especially in a formal context.
- In courts, sidang = a specific court hearing.
persidangan
- The process or event of holding sessions, or the series of sessions.
- Often used more formally or in official language.
pengadilan
- Court as an institution or place.
- E.g., pengadilan negeri (district court), pengadilan tinggi (high court).

In di luar sidang, the focus is on the session/hearing itself, not the building or institution. Saying di luar pengadilan would more strongly suggest outside the court (institutionally or physically), and di luar persidangan sounds more formal and legalistic.

Indonesian doesn’t mark tense. How do we know if this sentence is past, present, or future?

You can’t see tense from the verb form alone, because Indonesian verbs don’t change for tense.

The ambiguity in hakim itu menyarankan kami mencari kompromi di luar sidang could be resolved only by context:

Past: The judge suggested we seek a compromise out of court.
Present/habitual: The judge (generally) suggests that we seek a compromise out of court.
Narrative present: The judge suggests we seek a compromise out of court.

If you want to be explicit, you add time expressions:

Kemarin hakim itu menyarankan kami... = Yesterday the judge suggested...
Tadi hakim itu menyarankan kami... = Just now the judge suggested...
Nanti hakim itu akan menyarankan kami... = Later the judge will suggest...

So, by default, you infer the time from the broader story.

Could we add lebih baik to this sentence? How would that change it?

Yes, and it would sound very natural. You could say:

Daripada berdebat terus, lebih baik hakim itu menyarankan kami mencari kompromi di luar sidang.
(Less natural because it sounds like “rather than keep arguing, it’s better that the judge suggests…”)

More commonly, lebih baik goes with our action, not the judge’s action:

Daripada berdebat terus, lebih baik kami mencari kompromi di luar sidang.
= Rather than keep arguing, it’s better if we seek a compromise out of court.

In the original, lebih baik is basically implied by daripada (preference/alternative use). Adding lebih baik just makes the preference explicit.

You can think of the original as a slightly shortened form of:

(Lebih baik) daripada berdebat terus, hakim itu menyarankan kami mencari kompromi di luar sidang.