Learn Hardcore Indonesian: Sarapan instan yang kami makan di tenda tidak enak, tetapi cukup memberi energi. - The instant breakfast we ate in the tent was not delicious, but it gave enough energy.

Without yang, the sentence would be ungrammatical, because kami makan di tenda needs a linker to show that it is describing sarapan instan, not starting a new sentence.

Why is it sarapan instan and not instan sarapan?

In Indonesian, adjectives usually come after the noun they describe:

sarapan instan = instant breakfast
- sarapan = breakfast (noun)
- instan = instant (adjective)

This is the normal word order:

baju merah = red shirt
rumah besar = big house
kopi panas = hot coffee

So sarapan instan literally is “breakfast instant”, but it means “instant breakfast” in English.

What is the structure of sarapan instan yang kami makan di tenda? Is sarapan here a noun or a verb?

Here, sarapan is functioning as a noun: breakfast.

The structure is:

sarapan instan (noun phrase: “instant breakfast”)
yang (relative pronoun: “that / which”)
kami makan di tenda (clause: “we ate in the tent”)

So the whole chunk is: “the instant breakfast that we ate in the tent”.

Sarapan can also be used as a verb (to have breakfast), e.g.:

Kami sarapan di tenda. = We had breakfast in the tent.

But in your sentence, because it is modified by instan and followed by yang, it is clearly a noun.

Why is tidak enak used instead of kurang enak or something else?

Both are possible, but they have different nuances:

tidak enak = not tasty / tastes bad
- Clear negative judgment. You didn’t like it.
kurang enak = not very tasty / not so good
- Softer, more polite. Suggests it’s less than delicious, but not awful.

So:

Sarapan instan ... tidak enak = The instant breakfast was (plainly) not good.
Sarapan instan ... kurang enak = The instant breakfast was not very good / so-so.

The original sentence with tidak enak sounds more direct and more negative.

What is the difference between tetapi and tapi?

Both mean “but / however”.

tetapi
- More formal or neutral.
- Common in writing, speeches, news, essays.
tapi
- More informal / conversational.
- Very common in everyday speech.

In your sentence:

... tidak enak, tetapi cukup memberi energi.
This is stylistically neutral and fine in both spoken and written Indonesian.

In casual speech, you’d very often hear:

... tidak enak, tapi cukup memberi energi.

What does cukup mean here, and what are its other common uses?

In this sentence:

cukup memberi energi = gave enough energy / was sufficient to give us energy.

Cukup generally means enough / sufficient, and sometimes quite / rather depending on context.

Common patterns:

cukup + verb
- cukup memberi energi = give enough energy
- cukup tidur = sleep enough
cukup + adjective
- cukup enak = quite tasty / tasty enough
- cukup besar = quite big / big enough
cukup + noun
- cukup waktu = enough time
- cukup uang = enough money

Here, it emphasizes that even though the breakfast was not tasty, it was sufficient to provide energy.

Why is it memberi energi and not memberikan energi? Are both correct?

Both memberi energi and memberikan energi are grammatically correct.

memberi = to give
memberikan = to give (with a slightly more “complete” or formal feel)

In many cases, they are interchangeable:

memberi energi = give energy
memberikan energi = give energy

Memberi energi here sounds natural and concise, especially in everyday style. Using memberikan would make it a bit more formal or elaborate:

Sarapan instan ... tidak enak, tetapi cukup memberikan energi.
(Also correct, just slightly more formal-sounding.)

Why is it kami and not kita?

Both kami and kita mean “we / us”, but they differ in who is included:

kami = we (excluding the listener)
- The listener is not part of the group.
kita = we (including the listener)
- The listener is part of the group.

In this sentence, kami suggests:

The speaker is talking about their group only, and the person being spoken to is not included in the group that ate the instant breakfast.

If the listener had been there eating with them, you’d say:

Sarapan instan yang kita makan di tenda ...
= The instant breakfast that we (you and I) ate in the tent...

How do we know this is about the past if there is no past tense marker like sudah?

Indonesian verbs do not change form for tense (no -ed, -ing, etc.). Time is usually understood from context, or with time words:

kemarin = yesterday
tadi pagi = this morning
besok = tomorrow
sudah = already (often implies past)

Your sentence:

Sarapan instan yang kami makan di tenda tidak enak, tetapi cukup memberi energi.

By itself, this could technically be:

a general statement (the kind of instant breakfast we eat in the tent is not tasty but gives enough energy), or
a past event (the instant breakfast we ate in the tent was not tasty but gave us enough energy).

In real usage, context (for example, “Kemarin pagi, sarapan instan ...”) usually makes it clear:

Kemarin pagi, sarapan instan yang kami makan di tenda tidak enak...
= Yesterday morning, the instant breakfast we ate in the tent was not tasty...

Why is di tenda placed inside the relative clause (yang kami makan di tenda) and not elsewhere?

Di tenda here is meant to describe where the eating happened, not just to add a random location.

sarapan instan yang kami makan di tenda
= the instant breakfast that we ate in the tent
(the eating took place in the tent)

If you moved di tenda, it can change the nuance:

Sarapan instan yang kami makan tidak enak di tenda.
- Grammatically possible, but sounds awkward and unclear; di tenda might be misread as modifying tidak enak (e.g. “not tasty in the tent”).
Di tenda, sarapan instan yang kami makan tidak enak, tetapi cukup memberi energi.
- Also correct; here di tenda sets the scene: In the tent, the instant breakfast we ate was not tasty...
- But we lose the tight link between “what we ate” and “in the tent” inside the noun phrase.

The original placement keeps the relative clause yang kami makan di tenda as a complete description of sarapan instan.

Is there any difference in tone or style for the whole sentence? Is it formal, informal, or neutral?

The sentence is neutral and can be used in:

everyday conversation
written narratives (travel stories, journals)
semi-formal writing

Features that support this:

sarapan instan — everyday vocabulary
yang — standard relative pronoun
tidak enak — plain, neutral way to say “not tasty”
tetapi — slightly more formal than tapi, but still very common
cukup memberi energi — neutral, not slangy

If you wanted it more casual, you might say:

Sarapan instan yang kami makan di tenda rasanya nggak enak, tapi lumayan ngasih energi.

More formal:

Sarapan instan yang kami santap di tenda rasanya kurang enak, namun cukup memberikan energi.