Learn Hardcore Swahili: Chakula tulichopika jana ni kitamu. - The food we cooked yesterday is delicious.

tu- = we (subject prefix, 1st person plural)
-li- = past tense marker (did / -ed)
-cho- = relative marker agreeing with chakula (class 7), meaning roughly that / which
pik = verb root cook
-a = final vowel that most Swahili verbs end with

So tulichopika literally packs in: we + past + which + cook → which we cooked.

Why is it tulichopika and not just tulipika?

Tulipika = we cooked (simple past verb).
Tulichopika = which we cooked (verb inside a relative clause).

In the sentence:

Chakula tulichopika jana ni kitamu.
The food (that) we cooked yesterday is tasty.

You need the idea of “that/which we cooked” to describe chakula. Swahili usually does this by adding a relative marker (-cho-) inside the verb, not by adding a separate word like “that” in English.

If you said Chakula tulipika jana ni kitamu, it would sound wrong/ungrammatical, because the clause tulipika jana is not grammatically linked to chakula as a modifier. The -cho- is what ties them together.

What exactly does the -cho- part do, and does it change with other nouns?

-cho- is a relative marker. It means that / which and agrees with the noun class of the noun it refers to—in this case, chakula (class 7).

So:

chakula (class 7) → relative marker -cho-
- tulichopika = that/which we cooked (referring to chakula)

For other noun classes, the relative marker changes. For example:

mtoto (child, class 1) → -ye-
- mtoto tuliyemwona = the child whom we saw
kitabu (book, class 7) → -cho-
- kitabu ulicholeta = the book that you brought
magari (cars, class 6) → -yo-
- magari uliyoyaona = the cars that you saw

So -cho- is not random; it’s the class‑7 relative marker matching chakula.

Could I also say Chakula ambacho tulipika jana ni kitamu?

Yes, that is also correct.

Chakula tulichopika jana ni kitamu.
Chakula ambacho tulipika jana ni kitamu.

They both mean essentially the same thing: The food that we cooked yesterday is tasty.

Difference:

tulichopika: the relative idea (which/that) is expressed inside the verb as -cho-.
ambacho tulipika: the relative idea is expressed with a separate word ambacho, and the verb is a normal past tulipika.

Important: don’t combine them in the same clause:

✅ Chakula tulichopika jana …
✅ Chakula ambacho tulipika jana …
❌ Chakula ambacho tulichopika jana … (double relative; sounds wrong)

Why does the sentence start with Chakula? Could I put chakula later?

In Swahili, when you use a relative clause, the noun being described (the “head noun”) usually comes first, and the relative verb phrase follows it:

Chakula tulichopika jana … = The food that we cooked yesterday …
Kitabu ulichokinunua … = The book that you bought …

Putting chakula after the relative verb as in:

❌ Tulichopika chakula jana ni kitamu

does not have the same structure and sounds wrong if you intend “the food that we cooked…”. You would instead be saying something more like a simple statement: We cooked food yesterday; it is tasty—and even that would normally be split into two clauses.

So for this relative-clause meaning, chakula needs to be at the front.

Why don’t we say sisi for “we” here?

Swahili usually doesn’t use separate subject pronouns (like I, you, we) inside the sentence, because they are already built into the verb.

tu- in tulichopika already means “we”.
So tulichopika alone already means we cooked / which we cooked.

You can add sisi for emphasis, e.g.:

Chakula tulichopika sisi jana ni kitamu
= The food that we (as opposed to someone else) cooked yesterday is tasty.

But in a neutral sentence, sisi is omitted and tu- does all the work.

What is the function of ni in ni kitamu, and can it be left out?

Ni is the copula—it works like the English is / are.

Chakula … ni kitamu.
→ The food … is tasty.

About leaving it out:

In standard, careful Swahili, you usually keep ni in sentences like this.
In informal speech, people sometimes say things like Chakula hiki kitamu sana, dropping ni. That’s more elliptical/colloquial.

For a clear, textbook-style sentence like this, Chakula tulichopika jana ni kitamu with ni is the best form.

To negate this copula, you use si:

Chakula tulichopika jana si kitamu.
= The food that we cooked yesterday is not tasty.

Why is it kitamu and not just tamu?

-tamu is an adjective meaning sweet / tasty. In Swahili, adjectives normally get a prefix that agrees with the noun class of the noun they describe.

chakula is class 7 → agreement prefix ki-
So: chakula kitamu = tasty food

In the sentence:

Chakula tulichopika jana ni kitamu.

Kitamu agrees with chakula (class 7), even though it’s in the predicate after ni.

A note on real usage:

You’ll hear both Chakula ni kitamu and Chakula ni tamu in everyday Swahili.
Many speakers drop the agreement prefix after ni (so just tamu), especially in casual speech.
In your sentence, ni kitamu is perfectly fine and clearly shows the agreement with chakula.

Can jana (yesterday) go anywhere else in the sentence?

The most natural positions for jana here are:

After the relative verb:
- Chakula tulichopika jana ni kitamu.
At the very beginning, for emphasis on time:
- Jana tulipika chakula kitamu.
  (Yesterday we cooked tasty food. – slightly different structure, no relative clause.)

If you keep the same structure with the relative clause, jana usually stays close to the verb “cook” (because it’s the cooking that happened yesterday):

✅ Chakula tulichopika jana ni kitamu.
✅ Jana tulichopika chakula kitamu.

Putting jana at the very end of the whole sentence, like:

? Chakula tulichopika ni kitamu jana.

sounds strange, because it would imply the being tasty happened yesterday, which is not usually how you talk about food in Swahili.

Is there any connection between chakula and the verb kula “to eat”?

Yes. They’re directly related.

kula = to eat (verb)
chakula = food (noun)

Historically, chakula is the noun form built from the verb kula, with a class 7 prefix (in older Bantu morphology).

Additional useful info:

Plural of chakula is vyakula (class 8).
- chakula – a food / food (singular or mass)
- vyakula – foods / kinds of food

Adjectives and pronouns still agree with the ki-/vi- pattern:

chakula kitamu – tasty food
vyakula vitamu – tasty foods

Could I say Chakula tulichokipika jana ni kitamu? What’s the difference?

Yes, you can.

Chakula tulichopika jana ni kitamu.
Chakula tulichokipika jana ni kitamu.

Both are grammatical.

The second form tulichokipika has an extra object marker -ki- that also refers to chakula:

tu- = we
-li- = past
-cho- = relative marker (class 7, “which”)
-ki- = object marker (class 7, “it”)
-pik- = cook
-a = final vowel

So tulichokipika literally means which we cooked it (referring to “the food”).

Nuance:

Without -ki- (tulichopika) is very common and perfectly natural.
With -ki- (tulichokipika) can sound a bit more explicit/emphatic about that specific food, but the meaning is essentially the same.

In many everyday contexts, speakers will omit the object marker when the noun is already present, just as in tulichopika.

How would I say this sentence in the passive voice?

You’d make “the food” the subject of the verb be cooked:

Chakula kilichopikwa jana ni kitamu.
= The food that was cooked yesterday is tasty.

Breakdown of kilichopikwa:

ki- = subject prefix agreeing with chakula (class 7)
-li- = past tense
-cho- = relative marker (class 7)
-pik- = root cook
-w- = passive marker
-a = final vowel

So kilichopikwa = which was cooked.