Learn Hardcore Swahili: Tulipokuwa tukila katika chumba cha kulia chakula, paka alikuwa akilala kimya kimya chini ya meza. - While we were eating in the dining room, the cat was sleeping quietly under the table.

Tulipokuwa tukila katika chumba cha kulia chakula, paka alikuwa akilala kimya kimya chini ya meza.

While we were eating in the dining room, the cat was sleeping quietly under the table.

Breakdown of Tulipokuwa tukila katika chumba cha kulia chakula, paka alikuwa akilala kimya kimya chini ya meza.

chumba cha kulia chakula

the dining room

tulipokuwa

while we were

Elon.io is an online learning platform

We have an entire course teaching Swahili grammar and vocabulary.

Start learning Swahili now

Questions & Answers about Tulipokuwa tukila katika chumba cha kulia chakula, paka alikuwa akilala kimya kimya chini ya meza.

In Tulipokuwa tukila, why is it tukila and not something like tulikula or tukula? What exactly does this combination mean?

Tulipokuwa tukila is a standard way in Swahili to say “when we were eating” (past continuous).

Breakdown:

tulipokuwa
- tuli- = we, past tense marker -li- → “we (past)”
- -po- = “when / at the time when / where” (locative/temporal relative marker)
- -kuwa = “to be”
  → tulipokuwa = “when we were”
tukila
- tu- = we
- -ki- = continuous/imperfective marker (used with kuwa to make a past progressive)
- -la (from kula) = eat
  → tukila ≈ “(were) eating”

Together: Tulipokuwa tukila = “When we were eating”.

Why not tulikula?

tulikula = tuli-ku-la = “we ate” (simple past, completed), not ongoing action.

Why not tukula?

tukula is not a correct tense form here; Swahili needs a tense/aspect marker like -na-, -li-, -ta-, -ki- etc. Between tu- and -la/-kul- you can’t just leave it empty in this structure.

So tulipokuwa tukila is the normal past continuous “when we were eating”, with -ki- showing the ongoing action at that time.

What is the difference between Tulipokuwa tukila and Tulipokula?

Both start with tuli-po-…, but they express different types of past time:

Tulipokuwa tukila
- tulipokuwa = “when we were”
- tukila = “(were) eating” (continuous)
  → “when we were eating / while we were eating”
  This paints the eating as an ongoing action that another event happened during.
Tulipokula
- tuli-po-kula = “when we ate” (simple completed action)
  → Often understood as “when we (had) eaten / at the time we ate (finished)”
  The action is viewed more as a point or completed event.

So:

Tulipokuwa tukila, paka alikuwa akilala…
= “While we were eating, the cat was (also) sleeping…”
Tulipokula, paka alikuwa amelala… (for example)
= “When we had eaten / After we ate, the cat was asleep…”

The first clearly expresses simultaneity; the second typically suggests a sequence or a single occasion.

Could we use wakati instead, like Wakati tulikuwa tukila or Wakati tulikula? How do those compare to Tulipokuwa tukila?

Yes, you can use wakati (“time, when”) to introduce a time clause:

Wakati tulikuwa tukila katika chumba cha kulia chakula, paka alikuwa akilala…
- Very close in meaning to Tulipokuwa tukila…
- Literally: “At the time when we were eating …, the cat was sleeping …”
- Slightly longer and more explicit; tulipokuwa already contains the “when” idea, so many speakers prefer Tulipokuwa tukila.
Wakati tulikula katika chumba cha kulia chakula…
- Literally: “When we ate in the dining room…”
- Like Tulipokula, this usually treats eating as a completed event, not an ongoing one.

Natural, “best” equivalents to the original :

Tulipokuwa tukila …
or Wakati tulikuwa tukila …

Both correspond to “while we were eating …”.

In paka alikuwa akilala, what does the combination alikuwa akilala do? Why not just paka alilala?

The pair alikuwa akilala expresses past continuous (“was sleeping”).

Breakdown:

alikuwa = a-li-kuwa
- a- = he/she/it
- -li- = past
- kuwa = to be
  → “he/she/it was”
akilala = a-ki-lal-a
- a- = he/she/it
- -ki- = continuous/imperfective
- -lal- = sleep
  → “(was) sleeping”

Together: alikuwa akilala = “(he/she/it) was sleeping”.

Compare:

paka alilala
- a-li-lal-a = “the cat slept” (simple past, a completed event)
- Typically: at some point, the cat went to sleep.
paka alikuwa akilala
- “the cat was sleeping” (ongoing at that time)
- Matches very well with Tulipokuwa tukila (“while we were eating”).

So alikuwa akilala is chosen to keep both clauses in the same past continuous frame: we were eating, and at that same time the cat was sleeping.

Could we also say paka alikuwa analala or paka alikuwa amelala? How would those differ from paka alikuwa akilala?

All three are possible, but they’re not identical in nuance:

paka alikuwa akilala
- Standard, textbook way to express past continuous: “the cat was sleeping”.
- Focus is on the ongoing process of sleeping at that time.
paka alikuwa analala
- Literally “the cat was (is) sleeping”, mixing past (alikuwa) with present progressive (analala).
- In colloquial Swahili you will hear patterns like nilikuwa naenda / nilikuwa ninaenda used for past continuous.
- In standard / formal Swahili, alikuwa akilala is preferred for “was sleeping”.
paka alikuwa amelala
- a-li-kuwa a-me-lal-a
- Emphasis on the resulting state: “the cat was (already) asleep / had slept”.
- This suggests the cat had already fallen asleep before that moment; we’re focusing on its condition (asleep), not the process.

In the given sentence, alikuwa akilala matches best with “while we were eating, the cat was sleeping (at that time)”.

What does chumba cha kulia chakula literally mean, and how is this phrase built?

chumba cha kulia chakula is a descriptive noun phrase meaning “the dining room”.

Breakdown:

chumba = room (noun class 7)
cha = “of” for class 7 nouns (genitive agreement with chumba)
kulia = “to eat (at/in somewhere)” – an applicative form related to kula (“to eat”)
chakula = food

Literal sense: “room of eating food (in)”, i.e. “room for eating food” → dining room.

Grammar point:
The cha agrees with chumba (class 7), not with chakula. It links chumba with the activity kulia chakula (“eating food”).

Could we just say chumba cha kulia or chumba cha kula for “dining room”? Are kulia and kula different here?

Yes, you will see several variants, and they’re all understandable:

chumba cha kulia
- Common dictionary expression for “dining room”.
- kulia here is an applicative form connected to kula (“to eat”), with a sense like “to eat at/in (a place)”.
- So: “room for eating (in)”.
chumba cha kula
- Also used, literally “room of eating”.
- Uses the basic infinitive kula (“to eat”) without the applicative extension.
chumba cha kulia chakula (your sentence)
- Slightly more explicit: “room for eating food”.
- Can feel a bit more descriptive or explanatory.

About kulia:
There are two verbs spelled kulia:

from kula (eat) + applicative → kulia = to eat at/from/for (somewhere/something)
from lia = to cry → kulia = to cry, to weep

In fixed phrases like chumba cha kulia or chumba cha kulia chakula, the meaning is clearly from kula (“to eat”), not “to cry”. Adding chakula (“food”) removes any possible ambiguity.

Why is there no word like “the” before paka or meza? How do we know it means “the cat” and “the table”?

Swahili does not have articles like “a/an” or “the”. Nouns stand alone:

paka can mean “a cat” or “the cat”
meza can mean “a table” or “the table”

Definiteness is understood from context, not from a separate word:

If we’re talking about a specific, known cat in the situation, paka = “the cat”.
If it’s just any cat, paka can be translated as “a cat”.

To force the idea of “one specific cat”, Swahili can use:

paka mmoja = one cat (often “a cat”)
yule paka = that cat (definite)

But in most sentences, plain paka and meza are enough; the listener uses context to interpret “a” or “the”.

What does the reduplication in kimya kimya do? Could we just say kimya?

kimya kimya is a reduplicated form that works like an adverb, meaning roughly:

“very quietly”
“completely silently”
“in utter silence / without making any noise”

Reduplication in Swahili often:

intensifies the meaning, and/or
makes a more adverb-like expression.

Examples:

pole → polepole = gently → very slowly/gently
taratibu → taratibu taratibu = carefully, very carefully
kimya → kimya kimya = quiet → very quiet / silently

You can say just paka alikuwa amelala kimya (the cat was asleep, quiet), but:

kimya kimya sounds more vivid and natural here for “silently / very quietly”.

In chini ya meza, why do we use ya, not cha or some other connector? What’s the grammar here?

chini ya meza literally means “the underside / the bottom of the table”, used idiomatically as “under the table”.

chini = bottom, underside, down (a relational/locative noun, class 9)
ya = “of” agreeing with a class 9 noun
meza = table (class 9)

So:

chini ya meza = “the bottom/under-part of the table” → “under the table”
The ya agrees with chini (class 9), not with meza.

Other common patterns:

juu ya meza = on top of the table
mbele ya nyumba = in front of the house
nyuma ya nyumba = behind the house

Each of these locative nouns (juu, chini, mbele, nyuma, kati) typically takes ya plus the noun it relates to.

We don’t use cha here because cha agrees with class 7 nouns (like chumba). chini is not class 7; it’s treated as class 9, so it takes ya.

Could we change the word order, putting the cat first, like Paka alikuwa akilala… tulipokuwa tukila…? Would that still be correct?

Yes, you can change the order; Swahili word order is relatively flexible with subordinate time clauses.

Original:

Tulipokuwa tukila katika chumba cha kulia chakula, paka alikuwa akilala kimya kimya chini ya meza.
→ “When we were eating …, the cat was sleeping …”

You could also say:

Paka alikuwa akilala kimya kimya chini ya meza tulipokuwa tukila katika chumba cha kulia chakula.

This is still grammatical and understandable:

The time clause tulipokuwa tukila… now comes after the main clause, but it still means “while we were eating…”.

However, the original order (time clause first, then main clause) is very natural for storytelling and for clearly setting the background before the main event. Both orders are correct; the choice is stylistic.