Learn Hardcore Swahili: Hapo tulikokaa kulikuwa na upepo mwanana.

Hapo: “at that (just-mentioned/specific) place.”
tulikokaa: “where we sat/stayed,” built from tu- (we) + -li- (past) + -ko- (locative relative “where”) + kaa (sit/stay).
kulikuwa na: existential “there was,” from kuwa (to be) in the past (-li-) plus na introducing what existed.
upepo mwanana: “a gentle/pleasant breeze,” with upepo (wind/breeze, noun class 14) + adjective mwanana (“gentle/soft/pleasant”).

Why is the relative marker -ko- used in tulikokaa and not -po-?

Swahili has three locative relatives:

-po- specific/definite place (“right where”),
-ko- general/non-specific place,
-mo- inside/within.

With hapo (a specific place), many speakers would choose -po- and say tulipokaa. Using -ko- (tulikokaa) is still heard and understood, but -po- matches the definiteness of hapo more tightly. Both occur in real usage; -po- feels a bit “neater” here.

Should the verb be palikuwa instead of kulikuwa to agree with hapo?

You can do either, and both are acceptable:

Hapo tulipokaa palikuwa na upepo mwanana. (Agreement with the locative “pa-” of hapo.)
Hapo tulipokaa kulikuwa na upepo mwanana. (Default existential “there was.”)

Using pa- agreement (palikuwa) explicitly ties the verb to that place. Using kulikuwa is the very common, neutral existential and doesn’t feel wrong in normal speech.

What’s the difference between kuna, pana, and mna (and their past forms)?

They’re all existential “there is/are,” but with different locative flavors:

kuna / kulikuwa / kutakuwa: neutral/default “there is/was/will be.”
pana / palikuwa / patakuwa: “at that place (pa-),” often used when a specific spot is in focus (matches hapo/pale).
mna / mulikuwa / mutakuwa (often written mna/mulikuwa/mutakuwa or mna/ mlikuwa/ mtakuwa depending on region): “in/inside (mu-),” matches humo/humo mle.

In careful agreement with hapo, you’d use pana/palikuwa; in everyday speech, kuna/kulikuwa is extremely common.

What does the na in kulikuwa na do?

In existential clauses, na links the verb “to be” to the thing that exists. So kulikuwa na upepo mwanana literally means “there was with a gentle breeze,” idiomatically “there was a gentle breeze.” You generally keep na in this pattern.

Does kukaa mean “to sit” or “to stay,” and which one is intended here?

Kukaa means both “to sit” and “to stay/live/remain.” Context decides. Here, it can be “where we sat” (e.g., on a bench) or “where we stayed” (e.g., at a hotel/house). If you want to be unambiguously “to sit,” you can use the more formal kuketi: tulipoketi.

Can I move the place phrase to the end of the sentence?

Yes. Word order is flexible for focus:

Hapo tulipokaa (pa/kuli)kuwa na upepo mwanana. (Fronted place = strong place focus.)
(Pa/kuli)likuwa na upepo mwanana hapo tulipokaa. (Focus on what existed, place added after.)

Why is the adjective mwanana used with upepo? Are there alternatives?

Mwanana is a natural collocation with upepo to mean “gentle/pleasant/soft.” Alternatives:

upepo mpole (gentle) — possible, but more common for people/behavior.
upepo tulivu (calm/serene).
upepo laini (soft/smooth).
upepo baridi (cool/cold breeze) — changes the meaning to temperature rather than gentleness.

Does mwanana agree with upepo in noun class?

Yes. Upepo is class 14 (u-). Many adjectives in class 14 take the prefix m-, which becomes mw- before a vowel-initial stem. Hence m- + anana → mwanana. Compare:

upepo mzuri (nice wind),
upepo mkali (strong wind),
upepo mwepesi (light wind),
upepo mwanana (gentle wind).

What’s the difference between hapa, hapo, pale, and kule?

hapa: here (near the speaker).
hapo: there (near the addressee or just-mentioned spot; also “right here/there” depending on context).
pale: that place over there (more distant/specific).
kule: over there (farther/less specific than “pale”).

Your sentence uses hapo to point to a specific, contextually salient place.

Could I say Mahali tulipokaa palikuwa na upepo mwanana?

Yes. Mahali (place) makes the locative explicit:

Mahali tulipokaa palikuwa na upepo mwanana. This is very clear and uses pa- agreement with a definite place.

Is tuliokaa possible instead of tulikokaa/tulipokaa?

Not for a place. -o- is the general relative marker (who/which/that), and it needs an explicit head noun to refer to. You would say:

mahali tulipokaa (the place where we sat), not
tuliokaa alone.
For a locative “where” without a head noun, use -po/-ko/-mo inside the verb: tulipokaa/tulikokaa.

Is there any tense nuance I should notice in tulikokaa and kulikuwa?

Both use past -li-:

tu-li-ko-kaa: “where we sat/stayed (past).”
ku-li-kuwa na: “there was.” To talk about the present or habitual:
Hapo tunapokaa kuna upepo mwanana. (Where we sit/stay, there is a gentle breeze.)
Hapo tunapokaa huwa kuna upepo mwanana. (Habitually, there is a gentle breeze.)

Why is tulikokaa one word?

Relative marking in Swahili is infixed into the verb template. The pieces slot into one verb:

subject prefix + tense + relative marker + verb stem So tu- + -li- + -ko- + kaa becomes tulikokaa. Writing them separately would be ungrammatical.

Could upepo be plural, and is there any risk of confusion with pepo?

upepo (class 14) is typically mass/singular “wind/breeze.”
pepo can mean “wind” in some contexts but is also a common noun for “spirit/demon.” Its plural is mapepo (spirits). For everyday “wind/breeze,” upepo is safest and most common.

What’s the difference between saying Kulikuwa na upepo mwanana and Upepo mwanana ulikuwapo/ulikuwapo hapo?

Kulikuwa na upepo mwanana: neutral existential “there was a gentle breeze.”
Upepo mwanana ulikuwapo/ulikuwako/ulikuwemo hapo: “the gentle breeze was present/there/inside there,” using locative suffixes -po/-ko/-mo for presence. These are correct but a bit more formal/emphatic; the existential construction is the most common way to say “there was …” in conversation.