An inference (isi tersirat) is a conclusion the passage supports but never states. A good answer has three parts: the clue from the text, the reason the clue points that way, and a conclusion whose strength matches the clue.
This lesson follows locating explicit information in the general comprehension cluster. If stated facts still cause trouble, repair those first.
What makes an inference supported?
A supported inference can be traced. A marker should be able to put a finger on the clue, read your reason, and agree with the conclusion.
Think of it as a short chain: clue, reason, conclusion. If a link is missing, the answer reads as a guess, even when the conclusion is correct.
Worked example: a clue-reason-conclusion chain
This passage is original, written for practice.
Puan Rahimah menyelak jam tangannya dan memandang ke hujung jalan. Sudah setengah jam berlalu sejak waktu yang dijanjikan. Dia menekan telefon bimbitnya sekali lagi, tetapi panggilannya tidak dijawab.
The question: Apakah perasaan Puan Rahimah? Berikan satu bukti daripada petikan.
| Part | What to write |
|---|---|
| Clue | Dia menyelak jam tangannya dan menelefon berkali-kali |
| Reason | Seseorang yang terus menyemak masa dan cuba menghubungi orang lain sedang menunggu dengan gelisah |
| Conclusion | Puan Rahimah berasa bimbang |
As one answer: Puan Rahimah berasa bimbang kerana dia berulang kali menyelak jam tangannya dan menelefon orang yang ditunggunya, tetapi panggilan itu tidak dijawab.
The clue is an action in the passage. The reason is the link between that action and the feeling. The conclusion uses the word bimbang, which fits the evidence.
What goes wrong: the unsupported guess
Here is a plausible attempt at the same question.
Weak answer: Puan Rahimah berasa marah kerana orang itu sangat tidak bertanggungjawab.
Nothing in the passage shows anger. No raised voice, no complaint, no harsh word. The answer also adds a judgement, “tidak bertanggungjawab”, which the passage never makes. The conclusion is stronger than the clue can carry, and it names no evidence.
Repair: Keep the clue, choose a word the clue supports, and connect them with kerana. The repaired version is the answer in the table above.
The test is simple. Cover the passage and show only your answer to a classmate. If they cannot guess which line you used, the clue is missing.
Check yourself
Read this original passage and answer the question.
Sejak pagi Amir menyemak poket begnya tiga kali. Dia duduk di tangga perpustakaan sambil memandang ke arah pintu pagar. Apabila bas terakhir meninggalkan perhentian, dia masih belum berganjak.
Soalan: Apakah yang mungkin dialami oleh Amir? Nyatakan satu bukti.
Answer
More than one conclusion fits, so the answer must name a clue and stay measured.
One supported answer: Amir mungkin kehilangan sesuatu kerana dia menyemak poket begnya tiga kali.
Another: Amir mungkin menunggu seseorang kerana dia memandang ke arah pintu pagar dan tidak berganjak walaupun bas terakhir telah pergi.
The word “mungkin” is honest here, because the passage gives clues and no statement. A flat claim such as “Amir kehilangan wang” invents a detail that the text never mentions.
What should I study next?
Test both lessons on the general comprehension practice set, which has original passages and explained answers. The BM essay plan builder uses the same clue-and-reason habit when you plan a paragraph.
A teacher who reads your inference answers one by one can see which link in the chain you skip. Online one-to-one SPM Bahasa Melayu tuition gives you that.