وقت كنا عم نولع الفحم، حطيت لحمة عسيخ الشوي.

Here وقت means when or while, not just time as a noun.

So وقت كنا عم نولع الفحم means something like when we were lighting the charcoal or while we were lighting the charcoal.

In Levantine, وقت + clause is a common way to introduce a time clause. A similar word you may also hear is لما.

Because this part is describing an action that was in progress in the past.

• كنا = we were
• عم = marks an ongoing action
• نولع = we light / we are lighting

So كنا عم نولع means we were lighting or we were in the middle of lighting.

This contrasts nicely with حطيت, which is a completed action: I put.
So the sentence has the pattern:

• background ongoing action: we were lighting the charcoal
• main finished action: I put the meat on the skewer

In Levantine, the prefix بـ often marks the ordinary present or habitual, but with عم it is usually dropped.

So you normally say:

• عم نولع = we are lighting not
• عم بنولع

That is why كنا عم نولع is the expected structure for we were lighting.

نولع comes from the verb ولّع, which means to light, to ignite, or sometimes to switch on, depending on context.

Here it means to light the charcoal.

It is roughly pronounced nwalleʿ in many Levantine accents. Arabic spelling usually leaves out short vowels, so the written form نولع does not tell you every vowel sound directly.

حطيت is the past tense of حطّ, a very common Levantine verb meaning to put.

The ending -يت shows first person singular, so:

• حطيت = I put

This verb is extremely common in spoken Arabic. In formal Arabic, you might learn وضعت, but in Levantine everyday speech حطّ is much more natural.

That difference is very natural in Arabic.

• الفحم = the charcoal
  Here the charcoal is understood as the specific charcoal being used for the grill, so the definite article makes sense.

• لحمة = meat / a piece of meat
  Without الـ, it sounds more like some meat or a piece of meat, not necessarily a specific previously mentioned piece.

So the sentence treats the charcoal as a known item in the situation, while the meat is introduced more indefinitely.

In Levantine, لحمة is very common in everyday speech.

Broadly speaking:

• لحم = meat as a general mass noun
• لحمة = meat in a more everyday, countable, or portion-like sense

In real speech, لحمة often just sounds more natural when talking about food you are preparing or eating. Here it can suggest a piece of meat or simply meat in a practical cooking context.

It is best understood as ع سيخ, not as one true dictionary word.

• ع = shortened colloquial form of على = on
• سيخ = skewer

So ع سيخ means on a skewer.

In informal writing, people often join short words together, so عسيخ is just a casual spelling. A clearer version would be ع سيخ or عَ سيخ.

سيخ الشوي is an iḍāfa structure, often called a construct phrase.

It literally means something like:

• skewer of grilling
• more naturally: grill skewer or barbecue skewer

In Arabic iḍāfa:

• the first noun usually does not take الـ
• the second noun can be definite

So:

• سيخ = skewer
• الشوي = the grilling / the barbecue

Together: سيخ الشوي = the barbecue skewer / the skewer used for grilling

Yes. A clearer written version would be:

وقت كنا عم نولّع الفحم، حطّيت لحمة عَ سيخ الشوي.

That version makes a few things easier to read:

• نولّع shows the doubled consonant more clearly
• حطّيت also shows the doubled consonant
• عَ سيخ is spaced more clearly than عسيخ

So the original sentence is understandable, but this version is easier for a learner to parse.