Breakdown of Siyo tu wanafunzi wa darasa letu, bali pia walimu wanapenda kusoma vitabu vizuri.
Questions & Answers about Siyo tu wanafunzi wa darasa letu, bali pia walimu wanapenda kusoma vitabu vizuri.
“Siyo tu … bali pia …” is a set construction that means “not only … but also …”.
So in your sentence, it has this structure:
- Siyo tu wanafunzi wa darasa letu
→ Not only the students of our class - bali pia walimu
→ but also the teachers
You can think of it as the Swahili equivalent of English “Not only X, but also Y.”
Both “siyo tu” and “si tu” are used in everyday Swahili, and both are understood.
- si = “is/are not” (negative of ni)
- yo can be seen as a kind of emphatic element here; in practice, “siyo” behaves like a single word.
In this structure, you will commonly see:
- Siyo tu wanafunzi…
- Si tu wanafunzi…
Neither is “wrong”; “siyo tu” is very common in writing and speech, and many speakers use them almost interchangeably here.
Yes, you can say:
- Si wanafunzi tu wa darasa letu, bali pia walimu wanapenda…
This is still natural and means essentially the same thing: “It’s not only (just) the students of our class, but also the teachers who like…”
The difference is mostly word order and slight emphasis:
- Siyo tu wanafunzi…
→ Emphasis falls a bit more on the “not only” idea as a fixed phrase. - Si wanafunzi tu…
→ Visually and rhythmically puts “tu” (only/just) closer to “wanafunzi”, so some speakers feel the “only students” idea more strongly.
In everyday speech, both are acceptable, and the meaning is practically the same.
“wa” here is a linking preposition meaning “of”:
- wanafunzi wa darasa letu
→ students of our class
So the structure is:
- wanafunzi (students)
- wa (of)
- darasa letu (our class)
You could say “wanafunzi katika darasa letu” (= students in our class), and it would be understood, but it’s slightly different:
- wanafunzi wa darasa letu
→ stresses belonging/association (students of that class). - wanafunzi katika darasa letu
→ literally “students in our class”; sounds a bit more spatial/locational.
For “students of our class” in a general sense, “wanafunzi wa darasa letu” is the most idiomatic.
Swahili possessives agree with the noun class of the thing being possessed.
- darasa is a class 5 noun (singular; plural: madarasa, class 6).
- The class 5/6 form of “our” is -etu with the appropriate prefix:
- class 5/6: l- + -etu → letu
So:
- darasa letu = our class
- madarasa yetu = our classes
“wetu” is used with class 2 (people plural) nouns, e.g.:
- walimu wetu = our teachers
- wanafunzi wetu = our students
So here “darasa letu” is correct because “darasa” is not a person-noun; it belongs to class 5.
In Swahili, the subject marker on the verb is obligatory, even if the subject noun is mentioned.
- walimu = teachers
- wana- (wa- + -na-) = they + present tense marker
So:
- walimu wanapenda
→ literally “teachers they-like”
Here:
- walimu gives you who (which group).
- wa- in wanapenda is a grammatical requirement showing 3rd person plural, class 2.
You cannot normally drop the subject marker and say “walimu napenda”; that would be wrong.
You can drop walimu if the context is clear and just say “wanapenda kusoma vitabu vizuri” = they like to read good books.
“wanapenda” uses the -na- tense marker, which generally marks present time. In practice it usually corresponds to simple present / present habitual in English:
- wanapenda kusoma vitabu vizuri
→ they like to read good books / they enjoy reading good books
It can also sometimes feel like a present continuous (“are liking”), but with stative verbs like penda (“to love/like”), we normally translate it as “like” in English, not “are liking.”
The verb penda usually takes:
- either a direct object (thing):
- wanapenda vitabu vizuri = they like good books (as objects)
- or a verb in the infinitive (ku- form):
- wanapenda kusoma vitabu vizuri = they like to read good books
Your sentence is emphasizing the activity:
- wanapenda kusoma vitabu vizuri
→ they enjoy the action of reading good books.
If you said “wanapenda vitabu vizuri”, that would mean they like those books themselves (owning them, having them, etc.), not specifically the act of reading them.
Both bali and lakini can be translated as “but”, but they are used differently:
- lakini = but / however (general contrast)
- bali = but rather / but instead, and it is especially common after a negative.
In the structure “siyo tu X, bali pia Y”:
- The negative part siyo tu X sets up something that is partially denied (not only X).
- bali then introduces the additional/corrected part.
So:
- Siyo tu wanafunzi…, bali pia walimu…
→ Not only the students…, but (rather) also the teachers…
“Lakini pia walimu…” would sound more like a simple contrast and doesn’t fit as naturally in this “not only … but also …” pattern.
The basic adjective is -zuri = good, beautiful, nice.
It must agree with the noun class:
- kitabu kizuri = a good book (class 7)
- vitabu vizuri = good books (class 8)
Notice the class 7/8 agreement:
- class 7: ki- → kizuri
- class 8: vi- → vizuri
You may also see “nzuri”, often used with class 9/10 and some others (e.g., nyumba nzuri, siku nzuri).
So in your sentence:
- vitabu (books, class 8)
- vizuri (good, agreeing with class 8)
That’s why “vitabu vizuri” is correct.
The noun “kitabu” (book) belongs to noun class 7; its plural is “vitabu” (class 8).
- singular: kitabu (ki- class 7)
- plural: vitabu (vi- class 8)
Not all plurals in Swahili use “ma-”. The “ma-” plural pattern is mainly for nouns in class 5/6 (e.g. tunda / matunda, jicho / macho).
So “mavitabu” is incorrect; the standard plural is simply vitabu.
Yes, you can say:
- Siyo tu wanafunzi wa darasa letu, bali walimu wanapenda kusoma vitabu vizuri.
It would still be understood as “Not only the students of our class, but the teachers also like to read good books.”
However, “bali pia” is a very common fixed pair in the “not only … but also …” pattern. Including “pia”:
- makes the “also” meaning explicit, and
- makes the phrase feel more formulaic and natural in this specific construction.
So “bali pia” is stylistically smoother here, but omitting “pia” is not ungrammatical.