Learn Hardcore Malay: Akaun bank itu kosong sebelum saya pindah kerja ke syarikat baru. - That bank account was empty before I moved jobs to a new company.

It can mean “that bank account” (for example, the one we were just talking about).
In many contexts it’s essentially “the bank account”, especially when both speaker and listener know which account is meant.

So:

akaun bank = a bank account (not specific)
akaun bank itu = that specific bank account / the bank account we both know about

Malay doesn’t have a dedicated word for “the”, so itu (and sometimes ini) often does that job of marking something as specific/known.

Why is there no word for “is” in Akaun bank itu kosong? Why not say Akaun bank itu adalah kosong?

Malay usually does not use a verb equivalent to “to be” (am/is/are) in simple “A is B” sentences.

Akaun bank itu kosong.
Literally: “That bank account empty.” → “That bank account is empty.”

Using adalah is possible, but it sounds more formal and is more common when the part after it is a noun phrase, not an adjective:

Masalah utama adalah kekurangan modal.
“The main problem is lack of capital.”

With adjectives like kosong (“empty”), besar (“big”), mahal (“expensive”), you normally don’t use adalah in everyday language.

So Akaun bank itu kosong is the standard, natural way to say it.

Does kosong here mean “literally zero ringgit” or just “very little money”? Are there more natural ways to say this?

Kosong literally means “empty / zero”, so in Akaun bank itu kosong it suggests:

The balance is zero or effectively zero—the account is empty.

In everyday speech, people might also say:

Tak ada duit dalam akaun bank. – “There’s no money in the bank account.”
Akaun bank saya kering. – Informal: “My bank account is dry.” (very little or no money)
Duit dalam akaun bank dah habis. – “The money in the bank account is used up.”

But kosong is perfectly natural and clear; it’s just a bit more “literal”: the account is empty.

How do we know this sentence is about the past when the verbs don’t change form? There’s no past tense marking on kosong or pindah.

Malay verbs do not change form for tense the way English verbs do. Tense is shown by context and time words, not by changing the verb.

In the sentence:

Akaun bank itu kosong sebelum saya pindah kerja ke syarikat baru.
“The bank account was empty before I changed jobs to a new company.”

The word sebelum (“before”) tells you about the time relationship:

First event: bank account empty
Later event: I changed jobs

Because of that ordering, in English we interpret it in the past: “was empty before I changed jobs.”

If you really want to emphasize the past in Malay, you can add markers like dulu, sudah, telah:

Akaun bank itu sudah kosong sebelum saya pindah kerja ke syarikat baru.
Dulu akaun bank itu kosong sebelum saya pindah kerja ke syarikat baru.

But they’re not required; the original sentence is grammatically complete and natural.

What does pindah kerja literally mean, and is it the normal way to say “change jobs”?

Literally:

pindah = move (change location/position)
kerja = work / job

Together, pindah kerja means something like “move (in terms of) job”, which corresponds to “change jobs” or “switch jobs” in English.

Other common options:

tukar kerja – also “change jobs”; often used in speech.
bertukar kerja – slightly more formal/literary, same idea.
berhenti kerja – to quit a job (not necessarily to start a new one).

In everyday Malay, pindah kerja and tukar kerja are both very natural for “change jobs”; your sentence sounds completely normal.

Why is it ke syarikat baru and not di syarikat baru? What’s the difference between ke and di here?

Ke and di are prepositions with different functions:

ke = to / towards (movement to a place)
di = at / in / on (location, no movement)

In this sentence:

pindah kerja ke syarikat baru = “change jobs to a new company”
→ There is movement/transition towards a new workplace.

If you said di syarikat baru, it would sound like:

“change jobs at the new company” (strange; the company is the new destination, not the location where the change happens).

So for the idea of moving to a new company, ke syarikat baru is the correct and natural choice.

Why is it syarikat baru and not baru syarikat? Is the adjective order always noun + adjective in Malay?

Yes, in standard Malay the usual order is noun + adjective:

syarikat baru = new company
kereta besar = big car
rumah mahal = expensive house

So:

syarikat = company
baru = new
syarikat baru = “new company”

Baru syarikat is not a normal phrase and would sound wrong in this context.

(There are a few special patterns where baru can come before a verb or clause and mean “only just / just now”, but with nouns as pure adjectives, it follows the noun.)

Could baru here mean “just” (recently), like “before I just changed jobs”? How do I say “before I had just changed jobs”?

In syarikat baru, baru clearly modifies syarikat:

syarikat baru = new company

So it does not mean “just / recently” here; it’s about the company being new, not the timing of the action.

If you want to say “before I had just changed jobs” (emphasizing that the change was very recent), you would add baru or another time word near the verb:

… sebelum saya baru pindah kerja.
“before I had just changed jobs.”
… sebelum saya baru saja pindah kerja.
… sebelum saya baru-baru ini pindah kerja. (more like “recently” in general)

In your original sentence, syarikat baru = “new company”; no “just” meaning there.

Could I drop saya and just say … sebelum pindah kerja ke syarikat baru? Would that still be correct?

Yes, you can drop saya in many contexts, and Malay speakers often do if it’s clear who is being talked about.

Akaun bank itu kosong sebelum pindah kerja ke syarikat baru.
Literally: “The bank account was empty before (I/you/they) changed jobs to a new company.”

In a conversation where it’s obvious we’re talking about your or my job change, this will be understood as “before I changed jobs” or “before you changed jobs” from context.

However, if you need to be very clear, keeping saya is safer:

… sebelum saya pindah kerja ke syarikat baru.

Both are grammatically correct; the choice depends on how much context the listener already has.

Is this sentence more formal or informal? Would a native speaker actually say it like this in everyday conversation?

The sentence:

Akaun bank itu kosong sebelum saya pindah kerja ke syarikat baru.

is in neutral, standard Malay. It’s natural and can be used in both speech and writing.

In very casual conversation, someone might say it a bit more informally, for example:

Akaun bank aku kosong sebelum aku pindah kerja ke company baru.
Akaun bank tu kosong sebelum aku tukar kerja ke company baru.

Changes you might see informally:

saya → aku / saya (depending on closeness, region)
itu → tu (colloquial shortening)
pindah kerja → tukar kerja
syarikat → company (English loan in casual speech)

But your original sentence is perfectly natural and correct standard Malay.

Is there any difference between akaun bank itu and akaun bank saya here? Which sounds more natural?

Both are possible, but they focus on slightly different things:

akaun bank saya = my bank account (explicit ownership)
akaun bank itu = that / the bank account (a specific one both of us know about)

If the context is clearly about your own finances, many speakers would say:

Akaun bank saya kosong sebelum saya pindah kerja ke syarikat baru.
“My bank account was empty before I changed jobs to a new company.”

This makes it very explicit that you’re talking about your account.

Akaun bank itu is fine if:

You’ve already been talking about a particular account, or
You want to sound a bit more neutral/formal (for example in a report or a story).

In casual self-talk (“I was broke before I changed jobs”), akaun bank saya is often more direct and natural.