אם המגהץ לא יעבוד, אני לא אגהץ את החולצה מחר.

אם means if.

It introduces a condition:

אם המגהץ לא יעבוד = if the iron doesn’t work / if the iron won’t work

So the whole sentence is a standard if ... then ... structure, even though Hebrew does not always need a separate word for then.

That is a very common question.

In Hebrew, when you talk about a real future condition, it is very normal to use the future tense in both parts of the sentence:

• אם המגהץ לא יעבוד
• אני לא אגהץ

Literally, that is close to:

• if the iron will not work, I will not iron

But in natural English, we usually translate it as:

• if the iron doesn’t work, I won’t iron

So the Hebrew grammar is normal; it just does not match English word-for-word here.

יעבוד is the 3rd person masculine singular future form of לעבוד (to work).

It matches המגהץ (the iron), which is grammatically masculine singular.

A helpful shortcut for future tense prefixes:

• א־ = I
• ת־ = you / she
• י־ = he / it (masculine)
• נ־ = we

So:

• אגהץ = I will iron
• יעבוד = it/he will work

Because מגהץ is masculine, יעבוד is the correct agreement.

Yes. Very naturally.

In Hebrew, לעבוד can mean:

• a person works
• a machine works / functions / operates

So:

• המגהץ עובד = the iron works / is working
• המגהץ לא יעבוד = the iron won’t work / won’t function

This is completely normal everyday Hebrew.

מגהץ means iron as a household appliance.

The prefix ה־ is the definite article, like the in English.

So:

• מגהץ = an iron / iron
• המגהץ = the iron

The same thing happens later in the sentence:

• חולצה = shirt
• החולצה = the shirt

Yes. They are closely related.

Both come from the same Hebrew root: ג־ה־ץ, which is connected with ironing.

• מגהץ = iron
• אגהץ = I will iron

This is similar to English, where you have both:

• an iron
• to iron

So the sentence uses the appliance and the action built from the same root.

Yes. אגהץ already tells you the subject is I.

So Hebrew can say:

• אם המגהץ לא יעבוד, לא אגהץ את החולצה מחר.

and that is perfectly correct.

Adding אני is also correct. It can make the sentence a little clearer, a little more explicit, or slightly more emphatic:

• אם המגהץ לא יעבוד, אני לא אגהץ...

So אני is not required, but it is natural.

את marks a definite direct object.

It usually is not translated into English.

So:

• אגהץ את החולצה = I will iron the shirt

Because החולצה is definite (the shirt), Hebrew uses את.

Compare:

• אגהץ חולצה = I will iron a shirt
• אגהץ את החולצה = I will iron the shirt

That is one of the most important uses of את in Hebrew.

Because there are two separate negative verbs:

• לא יעבוד = will not work
• לא אגהץ = I will not iron

In Hebrew, לא is the normal word for negating verbs in ordinary statements, including present, past, and future.

So the sentence is negative in both clauses:

• if the iron doesn’t work
• I won’t iron the shirt

Yes, it can move. Hebrew word order is fairly flexible.

The original sentence:

• אני לא אגהץ את החולצה מחר

is a very natural, neutral way to say I won’t iron the shirt tomorrow.

You could also say:

• מחר אני לא אגהץ את החולצה — puts more focus on tomorrow
• אני מחר לא אגהץ את החולצה — also possible, depending on style and emphasis

So מחר at the end is normal, but not the only option.

Yes. In unpointed Hebrew, מגהץ can also be the masculine singular present form of the verb לגהץ:

• הוא מגהץ = he is ironing / he irons

So the spelling מגהץ can mean either:

• iron (the appliance), or
• ironing / is ironing (verb form)

Usually the context makes the meaning clear.

In your sentence, אם המגהץ לא יעבוד can only sensibly mean if the iron doesn’t work, so here it is clearly the noun.