Learn Hardcore Malay: Strategi utama kami ialah ulang kaji nota dan tanya guru tentang persoalan susah. - Our main strategy is to revise notes and ask the teacher about difficult questions.

ialah is more natural when:
- The subject is a noun phrase, and
- The complement is also a noun phrase or noun-like phrase.
Example:
- Strategi utama kami ialah ulang kaji nota dan tanya guru…
  → Strategi utama kami (noun phrase)
  → ulang kaji nota dan tanya guru (functions as a noun-like phrase: “reviewing notes and asking the teacher” as an activity).
adalah is more often used when the complement is:
- An adjective, or
- A longer, more formal description, especially in writing.

In this sentence, ialah fits well because we’re equating “Our main strategy” with the set of activities that follow.

Can we omit it?

In informal speech, many native speakers might say:
- Strategi utama kami: ulang kaji nota dan tanya guru…
In standard written Malay, including ialah makes the sentence clearer and more formal, so it’s better to keep it.

Why is it ulang kaji and not mengulang kaji? Is ulang kaji a verb or a noun?

Ulang kaji literally means “review” (as in reviewing what you’ve studied).

ulang kaji (without prefix) often functions like a noun:
- Saya buat ulang kaji. – I do revision.
- Ulang kaji nota – (the) revision of notes.
mengulang kaji is an active verb form:
- Saya mengulang kaji nota. – I review my notes.

In the sentence Strategi utama kami ialah ulang kaji nota…, the whole phrase after ialah is describing what the strategy is. Treat it like a noun phrase:

(Our main strategy is) the revision of notes and asking the teacher…

So ulang kaji is functioning as a noun-like activity, not as a fully conjugated verb.
If you changed it to mengulang kaji, the tone becomes more like a direct action clause; you’d typically then rephrase the sentence, for example:

Strategi utama kami ialah dengan mengulang kaji nota dan bertanya kepada guru…
(Our main strategy is by reviewing notes and asking the teacher…)

Why is it tanya guru instead of bertanya kepada guru? Are both correct?

Both are grammatically correct, but they differ in style and tone:

tanya guru
- tanya is the base form (informal/simple) for “ask”.
- This is shorter and more informal.
- Common in everyday speech and casual writing:
  - Kalau tak faham, tanya guru.
bertanya kepada guru
- bertanya is a verb with the prefix ber-, more formal/polite.
- kepada is the preposition “to”.
- Sounds more formal and complete, often used in formal writing or careful speech:
  - Jika tidak faham, bertanyalah kepada guru.

In this sentence, tanya guru is natural and concise. If you wanted a more formal version, you could write:

…ialah ulang kaji nota dan bertanya kepada guru tentang persoalan susah.

What’s the difference between kami and kita? Why is kami used here?

Both kami and kita mean “we / us”, but:

kami = we (excluding the listener)
kita = we (including the listener)

So:

Strategi utama kami… = Our main strategy (but not necessarily including you, the listener).
Strategi utama kita… = Our main strategy (including you, the listener).

In many classroom contexts, if a teacher is talking to students, they might choose:

Strategi utama kita ialah…
to include the students.

Using kami suggests the speaker is talking about their own group (e.g., their study group, their class, their team) without necessarily including the person they’re speaking to. The sentence as given is correct; whether kami or kita is better depends on who is included.

Does nota mean “note” or “notes”? How do you mark plural in Malay here?

In Malay, nota can mean “note” or “notes” depending on context. There is usually no change in form for plural.

nota = note / notes
- Saya baca nota. – I read my notes.
- Ini nota saya. – This is my note / these are my notes (context decides).

If you really want to emphasise plurality, you can say:

nota-nota – notes (reduplication)
semua nota – all the notes
banyak nota – many notes

In ulang kaji nota, it’s naturally understood as “review notes” (plural) even though nota is not marked as plural.

What’s the difference between persoalan and soalan? Why not just say soalan susah?

Both words relate to “questions”, but they have different nuances:

soalan
- The most common word for “question”.
- Used for exam questions, test questions, a question someone asks.
- soalan susah = difficult questions.
persoalan
- More abstract or formal.
- Can mean “issue”, “problematic question”, or “matter to be discussed”.
- Often used in essays, literature, or discussion of ideas:
  - persoalan masyarakat – social issues
  - persoalan moral – moral questions/issues

In daily speech about schoolwork, soalan susah is more common and neutral:

…tanya guru tentang soalan susah.

Using persoalan susah makes it sound a bit more formal or abstract, like “difficult issues/questions”. Both are grammatically correct; the difference is tone and nuance.

Could we say Strategi utama kami ialah untuk mengulang kaji nota dan bertanya kepada guru…? When do we use untuk?

Yes, you can say:

Strategi utama kami ialah untuk mengulang kaji nota dan bertanya kepada guru tentang persoalan susah.

Adding untuk (“to / in order to”) plus the verb makes the structure look more like English.

Difference in feel:

…ialah ulang kaji nota dan tanya guru…
- Treats “reviewing notes and asking the teacher” as activities or a plan (noun-like).
- Slightly more concise.
…ialah untuk mengulang kaji nota dan bertanya kepada guru…
- Treats it as “to review notes and to ask the teacher…” (purpose/infinitive-like).
- Slightly more formal and explicit.

Both are correct; the original is perfectly natural, especially if the focus is “our strategy is (these activities)”.

Why is it tentang persoalan susah and not tentang persoalan yang susah? When do we need yang?

yang is a relative marker, often like “that / which / who” in English, and also used to link a noun with a descriptive phrase.

persoalan susah
- susah directly describes persoalan.
- This is very common when an adjective immediately follows a noun.
persoalan yang susah
- Also correct.
- Emphasises the description a bit more: “the questions that are difficult”.
- Often used when the description is longer or when you want extra emphasis.

In short, both:

tentang persoalan susah
tentang persoalan yang susah

are grammatically fine. The version without yang is shorter and in many cases more natural for simple noun + adjective combinations.

Is tanya guru tentang persoalan susah polite enough, or should we add kepada or something else?

The phrase tanya guru tentang persoalan susah is grammatically correct and acceptable in many contexts.

Politeness and formality can be raised by:

Adding bertanya and kepada:
- bertanya kepada guru tentang persoalan susah
  → more formal and polite.
Using particles or softeners in speech:
- Cuba tanya guru tentang persoalan susah. – Try asking the teacher about difficult questions.
- Bolehlah tanya guru… – (You) can ask the teacher…

So:

Neutral/informal: tanya guru tentang persoalan susah
More formal/polite: bertanya kepada guru tentang persoalan susah

Both are correct; choose based on the level of formality you want.

What exactly is being linked by dan here? Is it joining nouns, verbs, or something else?

In ulang kaji nota dan tanya guru tentang persoalan susah, dan (“and”) links two activities:

ulang kaji nota – revising notes
tanya guru tentang persoalan susah – asking the teacher about difficult questions/issues

Grammatically, each piece functions as a noun-like activity phrase after ialah:

[Strategi utama kami] ialah [ulang kaji nota] dan [tanya guru tentang persoalan susah].

So dan is joining two coordinated phrases of the same type (two things that make up “our main strategy”).