בולם הזעזועים מתחת לאוכף.

In Hebrew, the verb to be is usually omitted in the present tense in sentences like this.

So:

• בולם הזעזועים מתחת לאוכף.
  = The shock absorber is under the saddle.

There is no separate present-tense word for is here.

But in other tenses, Hebrew does use a form of היה:

• בולם הזעזועים היה מתחת לאוכף. = The shock absorber was under the saddle.
• בולם הזעזועים יהיה מתחת לאוכף. = The shock absorber will be under the saddle.

This is a very common Hebrew structure called a construct chain (סמיכות).

• בולם = absorber / damper
• זעזועים = shocks / jolts

Together, בולם זעזועים literally means something like absorber of shocks, which is how Hebrew says shock absorber.

In a construct chain, definiteness is usually marked on the second noun, not the first. So:

• בולם זעזועים = a shock absorber
• בולם הזעזועים = the shock absorber

So even though the ה־ appears on הזעזועים, the whole phrase becomes definite.

That is why הבולם הזעזועים would normally be wrong in standard Hebrew for this meaning.

בולם comes from the root בלם, related to stopping, braking, or damping.

In this sentence, בולם is being used as a noun, not as a verb. It means something like:

• damper
• absorber
• shock absorber as part of the full phrase

So בולם הזעזועים is a technical/mechanical expression, especially natural in contexts like bicycles, motorcycles, or vehicles.

Because Hebrew expresses shock absorber as absorber of shocks/jolts.

• זעזוע = a shock, jolt
• זעזועים = shocks, jolts

So the idea is not that it absorbs one single shock, but that it is a device meant to absorb shocks in general.

This is similar to how English sometimes uses plurals in compound meanings, even when the whole device is singular.

After מתחת, Hebrew normally uses the preposition ל־ before the noun.

So the pattern is:

• מתחת ל... = under ...

That gives:

• מתחת לאוכף = under the saddle

This is just the normal way Hebrew builds this expression, much like:

• מעל ל... = above ...
• מתחת ל... = under ...

So the ל is not random; it is part of the standard prepositional pattern.

In unpointed Hebrew spelling, both can look exactly the same: לאוכף.

That is because:

• ל + אוכף can mean to/under a saddle
• ל + ה + אוכף can mean to/under the saddle

Without vowel marks, both are written לאוכף.

So how do you know? Usually from:

• context
• meaning
• sometimes the broader sentence or situation

In this sentence, the intended meaning is under the saddle.

If vowel marks were shown, the difference would be clearer in pronunciation.

Because אוכף is not a direct object here.

The word את is used before a definite direct object, but in this sentence אוכף is part of a prepositional phrase:

• מתחת לאוכף = under the saddle

Since it comes after the prepositional expression מתחת ל־, you do not use את.

Compare:

• אני רואה את האוכף. = I see the saddle.
  Here את appears because האוכף is the direct object.

But:

• האופניים מתחת לאוכף would still not take את, because it is a location phrase.

Yes. אוכף literally means saddle, and it is also the normal word for a bicycle saddle/seat in many contexts.

So in a bike-related sentence, מתחת לאוכף naturally means under the saddle.

English often says seat, but Hebrew commonly uses אוכף when referring to the saddle-shaped bike seat.

Yes. This is a very normal Hebrew sentence pattern:

• [noun phrase] + [location]

So:

• בולם הזעזועים מתחת לאוכף.

means literally:

• The shock absorber — under the saddle

with the present-tense is understood.

Hebrew can change word order for emphasis, but this version is straightforward and natural. If you wanted a more explicitly locational phrasing, Hebrew might also use נמצא:

• בולם הזעזועים נמצא מתחת לאוכף.
  = The shock absorber is located under the saddle.

That is slightly more explicit, but the original sentence is perfectly normal.