لوحة فحص النظر على الحائط.

In Arabic, present-tense sentences like this usually do not use a separate word for is/are.

So:

لوحة فحص النظر على الحائط
literally looks like
eye-chart on the wall

but it means:

The eye chart is on the wall.

If you wanted was, Arabic would use a verb such as كان: كانت لوحة فحص النظر على الحائط = The eye chart was on the wall.

Yes. It is a single noun phrase meaning something like eye chart.

It is built as a chain:

• لوحة = board, panel, chart
• فحص = examination, test
• النظر = sight, vision

So literally it is something like:

chart of the examination of vision

A more natural English rendering is eye chart or vision-test chart.

Because this is an iḍāfa (construct phrase). In an iḍāfa, the first noun normally does not take الـ.

So Arabic does not say:

اللوحة الفحص النظر ❌

Instead it says:

لوحة فحص النظر

Even without الـ on لوحة, the whole phrase can still be definite. In this chain, definiteness comes from the end of the construction.

This is a nested iḍāfa:

• فحص النظر = the examination of vision / eye test
• then لوحة فحص النظر = the chart of the eye test

Because the last noun النظر is definite, the whole chain becomes definite.

So even though لوحة itself has no الـ, the full phrase can still mean the eye chart.

Because فحص is in the middle of an iḍāfa chain.

In Arabic, a noun that is the first part of an iḍāfa does not take الـ. Here:

• فحص is linked to النظر
• لوحة is linked to فحص النظر

So both لوحة and فحص are in construct position, and that is why neither takes الـ.

Only the last noun in the chain, النظر, shows the definiteness directly.

Because it ends in ة (taa marbuuṭa).

When the word is said by itself, it is usually pronounced like lawḥa.
But when it is followed by another word in an iḍāfa, the ة is pronounced as t:

• alone: لوحة → lawḥa
• in this phrase: لوحة فحص → lawḥat faḥṣ...

So English-speaking learners often hear both lawḥa and lawḥat, and both come from the same spelling.

It means on the wall.

• على = on, upon
• الحائط = the wall

This whole prepositional phrase tells you the location of the chart.

So the sentence structure is basically:

[لوحة فحص النظر] [على الحائط]
[The eye chart] [is on the wall]

Because it comes after the preposition على.

In Arabic, a noun after a preposition is normally in the genitive case. So in full vowel marking, you would write:

على الحائطِ

The same is true inside the iḍāfa:

فحصِ النظرِ

In normal everyday writing, these short case endings are usually not written, so you commonly just see:

لوحة فحص النظر على الحائط

A fully vocalized version would be:

لوحةُ فحصِ النظرِ على الحائطِ

Here is why:

• لوحةُ: nominative, because it is the main noun of the sentence
• فحصِ: genitive, because it is in an iḍāfa
• النظرِ: genitive, because it is the second part of that iḍāfa
• الحائطِ: genitive, because it comes after على

In ordinary printed Arabic, these endings are usually omitted.

In context, it works very naturally as a full sentence:
The eye chart is on the wall.

Grammatically, it is a nominal sentence with:

• لوحة فحص النظر as the topic/subject
• على الحائط as the predicate

That said, Arabic captions and labels often look similar, so without context it could also feel a bit phrase-like, like eye chart on the wall. Context tells you which reading is intended.

Yes. Arabic allows some flexibility.

The neutral order here is:

لوحة فحص النظر على الحائط

But you could also say:

على الحائط لوحة فحص النظر

That gives more emphasis to the location, similar to English:

On the wall is the eye chart.

Both are understandable, but the original order is the more straightforward one for learners.

A careful pronunciation with full endings would be roughly:

lawḥatu faḥṣi n-naẓari ʿalā l-ḥāʾiṭi

A less formal pause-based pronunciation would sound closer to:

lawḥat faḥṣ in-naẓar ʿala l-ḥāʾiṭ

Two things English speakers often notice:

• النظر is pronounced with n right after the article, so it sounds like an-naẓar
• لوحة becomes lawḥat here because of the taa marbuuṭa in construct position