Sisa uang receh saya cukup untuk ongkos angkot.

Sisa means what is left, the remainder, or leftover.

In this sentence, sisa uang receh saya means something like the loose change I have left or what remains of my small change.

A useful pattern is:

• sisa makanan = leftover food
• sisa waktu = remaining time
• sisa uang = remaining money

So sisa is often used as a noun meaning the remainder.

Uang receh means small change, loose change, or coins/small-denomination money.

Receh on its own often refers to money in small amounts, especially coins or low-value notes. So:

• uang = money
• receh = small change / low-value money
• uang receh = loose change

In everyday Indonesian, receh can also have extended meanings in slang, such as trivial, cheap, or corny, but here it simply refers to small change.

Because in Indonesian, possessors usually come after the noun.

So:

• uang receh saya = my loose change
• literally: loose change my

This is normal Indonesian word order. English says my money, but Indonesian usually says money my.

In the full phrase:

• sisa uang receh saya = the remainder of my loose change

Indonesian often leaves out the verb to be when connecting a subject to an adjective or noun.

So:

• Sisa uang receh saya cukup
  literally = My remaining loose change enough natural English = My remaining loose change is enough

This is completely normal in Indonesian. You do not need a separate word for is here.

Cukup means enough or sufficient.
Untuk usually means for or to.

Together, cukup untuk means enough for or sufficient for.

Examples:

• Uangnya cukup untuk makan. = The money is enough for food / enough to eat.
• Waktunya cukup untuk belajar. = The time is enough for studying.

So in your sentence, cukup untuk ongkos angkot means enough for the angkot fare.

Ongkos means fare, transport cost, or sometimes expense/cost.
Angkot is a type of public minibus used in Indonesian cities, short for angkutan kota.

So ongkos angkot means:

• the angkot fare
• the cost of taking an angkot

In this sentence, it means the speaker has enough loose change to pay for riding an angkot.

No. Angkot refers specifically to a kind of shared public minibus, especially common in Indonesia.

It comes from angkutan kota, literally city transport.

So it is more specific than:

• transportasi umum = public transportation
• bus = bus
• ojek = motorcycle taxi
• kereta = train

If a learner translates angkot as just bus, that may be acceptable in a rough translation, but it is more accurate to think of it as a shared city minibus.

No. There are several related words, but they are not all exactly the same.

Common options:

• ongkos = fare / cost, often for transport
• biaya = cost / expense, more general and often more formal
• tarif = rate / fare, often official or fixed
• harga = price

For public transport, ongkos is very natural in everyday speech.
So ongkos angkot sounds normal and idiomatic.

Yes. In casual Indonesian, buat often replaces untuk.

So you could say:

• Sisa uang receh saya cukup buat ongkos angkot.

This means the same thing and sounds natural in conversation.

In general:

• untuk = more neutral / standard
• buat = very common in speech, slightly more casual

It helps to think of it in layers:

1. uang receh = loose change
2. uang receh saya = my loose change
3. sisa uang receh saya = the remainder of my loose change / my remaining loose change

So yes, the whole beginning of the sentence is one noun phrase functioning as the subject.

A good way to read the structure is:

• [Sisa uang receh saya] [cukup] [untuk ongkos angkot].

That is:

• subject: sisa uang receh saya
• predicate/adjective: cukup
• complement: untuk ongkos angkot

Not always.

Very often, learners first meet receh as coins or small change, and that is a good starting point. But it can also refer more broadly to small-denomination money, not only metal coins.

So uang receh is best understood as loose change rather than only coins.

Possibly, especially in casual speech, but sisa uang receh saya is clearer and more standard.

Why?

Because receh by itself can be understood, but uang receh is the full, unambiguous phrase for loose change. A learner is usually safer using uang receh.

So:

• Sisa uang receh saya... = clear and natural
• Sisa receh saya... = possible in conversation, but more casual and slightly less explicit

Yes, it is understandable and natural, though in real conversation people might use slightly more casual versions, such as:

• Sisa uang receh saya cukup buat naik angkot.
• Uang receh saya masih cukup untuk ongkos angkot.
• Receh saya masih cukup buat bayar angkot.

These are all natural everyday alternatives.

Your original sentence is perfectly good, but it sounds a little more complete and careful than very casual speech.

Because Indonesian often leaves that idea understood from context.

Cukup untuk ongkos angkot literally means enough for angkot fare. English often says enough to pay the angkot fare, but Indonesian does not need to state pay if the meaning is obvious.

If you want to make it explicit, you could say:

• Sisa uang receh saya cukup untuk membayar ongkos angkot.

That is more explicit, but the original sentence is already natural.

A helpful breakdown is:

• sisa = remainder / what is left
• uang receh saya = my loose change
• cukup = enough
• untuk = for
• ongkos angkot = angkot fare

So a close literal reading is:

• The remainder of my loose change is enough for the angkot fare.

A more natural English version would be:

• The loose change I have left is enough for the angkot fare.
• My remaining loose change is enough to pay for the angkot.

Both capture the Indonesian well.