Wakili anamwakilisha mrufani.

It can be broken down like this:

• a- = he/she (the subject marker for a singular person)
• -na- = present tense / ongoing action
• -m- = him/her (the object marker for a singular person)
• wakilisha = represent

So anamwakilisha literally means something like:

• he/she is representing him/her

In the full sentence, Wakili tells you who the subject is, and mrufani tells you who the object is.

That -m- is an object marker. In Swahili, it is very common to include an object marker when the object is:

• a person
• specific
• already known in the context

So anamwakilisha mrufani includes both:

• the object marker -m- inside the verb
• the full noun mrufani after the verb

For an English speaker, this can feel repetitive, but in Swahili it is natural. It is especially common with human objects.

Great question. A learner might expect wa- to mean plural because many class 2 plural nouns begin with wa-, but wakili is a loanword. Its form does not follow the usual native noun-prefix pattern.

Even though it starts with wa-, wakili is singular here, and the verb agrees with it as a singular human subject:

• wakili an... = the lawyer he/she...

So you should not assume noun class just from the first letters of a borrowed word.

Yes. They are closely related in meaning.

• wakili = lawyer / representative
• wakilisha = to represent

So the sentence has a nice built-in connection:

• Wakili anamwakilisha mrufani.
• The lawyer represents the appellant.

This kind of noun-verb relationship is common in Swahili vocabulary.

Swahili does not normally use articles like English a and the.

So wakili can mean:

• a lawyer
• the lawyer

And mrufani can mean:

• an appellant
• the appellant

Context tells you which one is meant. If the meaning has already been shown to you, that is how you know which English article fits best.

The basic word order is:

• Subject – Verb – Object

So here:

• Wakili = subject
• anamwakilisha = verb
• mrufani = object

That matches English fairly well:

• The lawyer | represents | the appellant

So in this sentence, the overall order is quite friendly for an English speaker.

Yes, if the subject is already clear from context.

Because the verb already contains the subject marker a-, anamwakilisha mrufani can mean:

• He/she is representing the appellant

Adding Wakili makes the subject explicit:

• Wakili anamwakilisha mrufani
• The lawyer is representing the appellant

Swahili often allows the subject noun to be omitted when the verb already shows who the subject is.

-na- is the present tense marker.

In many contexts, it can be translated as:

• is ...-ing
• simple present, depending on context

So anamwakilisha can be understood as:

• is representing
• represents

English chooses between those more strictly than Swahili does. In Swahili, -na- often covers both a present action and a general present statement.

Both wakili and mrufani refer to human beings, so they use animate / personal agreement.

That is why you see:

• a- for the singular human subject
• -m- for the singular human object

So even if the noun shape looks unusual, the agreement tells you that both are being treated as singular persons.

This is very important in Swahili: agreement often tells you more than the noun ending itself.

Yes. In this sentence, mrufani is the person being represented, so it is the direct object.

You can see that in two ways:

• it comes after the verb
• it is echoed by the object marker -m- inside the verb

So the structure is:

• Wakili = the one doing the action
• mrufani = the one receiving the action of representation

Not completely. By itself, anamwakilisha only tells you:

• he/she is representing him/her

It does not tell you exactly who those people are. The nouns in the full sentence supply that information:

• Wakili = who the subject is
• mrufani = who the object is

So the verb gives grammatical information, while the nouns give the full meaning.

Because anawakilisha would mean something different.

Compare:

• anawakilisha = he/she represents or is representing
  (no object marker inside the verb)
• anamwakilisha = he/she represents him/her
  (with the singular human object marker -m-)

Since the sentence has a specific human object, mrufani, the form with -m- fits naturally.

Yes. The verb agreement shows singular people:

• a- = singular subject
• -m- = singular object

So the sentence is about:

• one lawyer
• one appellant

If either one were plural, the agreement inside the verb would change.