היא הבטיחה לבדוק את המסמך עוד פעם, ואחרי זה גילתה שאין חתימה על המסמך.

Because the subject is היא = she, and in Hebrew the verb agrees with the subject in gender and number.

• הבטיחה = she promised
• גילתה = she discovered

These are both past tense, 3rd person, feminine singular forms.

If the subject were he, you would get:

• הוא הבטיח
• הוא גילה

So the final ־ה here is part of the feminine singular past-tense form.

After הבטיחה (promised), Hebrew normally uses an infinitive for the action that was promised.

• לבדוק = to check

So:

• הבטיחה לבדוק = promised to check

This works very much like English promised to check.

The ל־ at the start of לבדוק is the normal marker of the infinitive in Hebrew.

את marks a definite direct object.

Here, המסמך means the document, which is definite because of ה־ (the). So Hebrew requires את:

• לבדוק את המסמך = to check the document

A very important point: את usually is not translated into English. It is a grammatical marker, not a word with its own meaning here.

Compare:

• לבדוק מסמך = to check a document
• לבדוק את המסמך = to check the document

Because את is only used for a direct object.

In לבדוק את המסמך, המסמך is the direct object of לבדוק.

But in על המסמך, the noun comes after the preposition על (on), so it is not a direct object. Once a noun is introduced by a preposition like על, ב, ל, מ, and so on, you do not use את.

So:

• את המסמך = the definite direct object
• על המסמך = on the document

Yes, שוב could also be used.

• עוד פעם literally means one more time
• In everyday Hebrew, it commonly means again
• שוב also means again

So these are both possible:

• לבדוק את המסמך עוד פעם
• לבדוק את המסמך שוב

The difference is mostly stylistic:

• עוד פעם sounds very natural and conversational
• שוב can sound a little more neutral or slightly more formal/literary, depending on context

In normal speech, עוד פעם is extremely common.

ואחרי זה means and after that, and then, or afterwards.

It is made of:

• ו־ = and
• אחרי = after
• זה = this / that

So literally it is something like and after this/that, but in natural English it often becomes simply then or after that.

This is a very common way to connect events in Hebrew.

Because Hebrew often leaves out subject pronouns when the subject is already clear from the context.

The sentence starts with היא הבטיחה..., so once we know we are talking about she, Hebrew does not need to repeat היא before גילתה.

So:

• ואחרי זה גילתה... = and after that, she discovered...

You could say ואחרי זה היא גילתה, but that would usually sound a bit more explicit or emphatic. Without היא, the sentence sounds very natural.

שאין is made from two parts:

• ש־ = that
• אין = there is no / there isn’t

So שאין means that there is no or that there isn’t.

In this sentence:

• גילתה שאין חתימה על המסמך
• literally: she discovered that there is no signature on the document

This is a very common Hebrew structure after verbs like say, know, discover, think, and so on.

Because אין and לא do different jobs in Hebrew.

• לא usually negates a verb
• אין expresses non-existence: there is no / there isn’t

So when Hebrew wants to say that something is absent, it often uses אין:

• אין חתימה = there is no signature

Using לא חתימה would not be natural Hebrew.

A useful rule of thumb:

• לא = not
• אין = there is no / there isn’t

This is a very common learner question.

It is true that אין is the usual form for there is no / there isn’t. But after a past-tense verb like גילתה (discovered), Hebrew often still uses שאין to describe the state that she discovered.

So:

• גילתה שאין חתימה על המסמך is completely natural Hebrew

It means she discovered that the document had no signature / there was no signature on it.

If you want a more explicitly past wording, Hebrew could also say something like:

• גילתה שלא הייתה חתימה על המסמך

But the version with שאין is very common and idiomatic.

Because the idea is there was no signature, not there was no the signature.

After אין, Hebrew often uses a bare indefinite noun:

• אין חתימה = there is no signature
• אין זמן = there is no time
• אין בעיה = there is no problem

Using החתימה would suggest a specific known signature, and in this sentence that is not the natural idea. The sentence is simply stating the absence of any signature.

Because a signature is understood as something physically placed on a document, page, or form.

So:

• חתימה על המסמך = a signature on the document

That is the most natural preposition here.

In other situations, Hebrew may use other prepositions depending on meaning, but for an actual signature appearing on a document, על is exactly what you would expect.

Yes. Hebrew could say:

• ואחרי זה גילתה שאין עליו חתימה

Here עליו means on it.

Hebrew often repeats the full noun anyway, especially for clarity:

• ...שאין חתימה על המסמך

Both are natural. Repeating המסמך can sound a little clearer, especially if there could be any ambiguity about what it refers to.