Learn Hardcore Romanian: După ce profesoara explică problema din nou, totul devine clar pentru elevi. - After the female teacher explains the problem again, everything becomes clear for the students.

după ce
- finite verb (a whole sentence):
  După ce termin lecția, plec acasă. – After I finish the lesson, I go home.
după
- noun/pronoun:
  După lecție plec acasă. – After the lesson, I go home.

What tense are explică and devine in, and how should I understand them?

Both explică and devine are in the present tense, 3rd person singular:

(profesoara) explică – the (female) teacher explains
(totul) devine – everything becomes

In this sentence the present has a general / habitual meaning, similar to English:

După ce profesoara explică problema din nou, totul devine clar pentru elevi.
After the teacher explains the problem again, everything becomes clear for the students.

So you should read it as describing something that usually / regularly happens, not a one‑time event.

Could this Romanian sentence also refer to the future, like “After the teacher explains…, everything will become clear”?

Yes, context can make the Romanian present refer to the future, especially in the clause with după ce:

După ce profesoara explică problema din nou, totul va deveni clar pentru elevi.
After the teacher explains the problem again, everything will become clear for the students.

Here:

explică (present) = “explains / has explained” (future time, because of the context),
va deveni is explicit future.

Your original sentence, with both verbs in the present (explică… devine), is more naturally understood as habitual present, but in the right context Romanians can use the present to talk about near‑future sequences too.

Why are profesoara and problema ending in -a? What is the difference between profesoară / problemă and profesoara / problema?

The -a at the end is the enclitic definite article: it marks “the”.

profesoară – a (female) teacher
profesoara – the (female) teacher
problemă – a problem
problema – the problem

Romanian usually attaches the definite article to the end of the noun, instead of putting a separate word like English “the”:

o profesoară – a teacher
profesoara – the teacher
o problemă – a problem
problema – the problem

So profesoara = the teacher, problema = the problem.

What’s the difference between elevi and studenți? Both mean “students”, right?

Both are translated as “students”, but they refer to different education levels:

elev / elevi – pupils, school students (usually primary + secondary school)
student / studenți – university / college students

In your sentence:

…totul devine clar pentru elevi.
…everything becomes clear for the (school) students / pupils.

If you were talking about university students, you’d say:

…totul devine clar pentru studenți.

Why is it pentru elevi and not something like pentru elevilor?

After pentru (“for”), Romanian uses the accusative, not the genitive‑dative:

pentru cine? pentru elevi – for whom? for (the) students

Formations like elevilor are genitive‑dative (used for things like “of the students / to the students”), and they do not follow pentru.

If you want to make it clearly “for the students” (definite), you have two correct options:

pentru elevi – for (the) students, often understood as “the students” from context
pentru elevii din clasă – for the students in the class

You can also say pentru elevii alone in some contexts, but there’s no -lor after pentru.

What exactly is totul and how is it different from tot or toate?

All three come from tot (“all / whole / entire”), but they’re used differently:

totul – “everything” (pronoun, singular neuter)
- Totul devine clar. – Everything becomes clear.
tot can mean:
- all / the whole (before a noun): tot cursul – the whole course
- or still / yet as an adverb in other contexts: E tot aici. – He’s still here.
toate – all (feminine or neuter plural, before nouns or as a pronoun)
- toate problemele – all the problems
- Toate sunt clare. – They are all clear.

In your sentence, totul is a singular subject, so the verb and adjective are in the singular: totul devine clar.

Why is it clar and not clare or clari? How does adjective agreement work here?

Adjectives in Romanian agree with the gender and number of the noun or pronoun they describe.

totul is neuter singular.
For most adjectives, the neuter singular form is the same as masculine singular.
So the correct form is clar.

Examples:

totul este clar – everything is clear (neuter singular)
lucrurile sunt clare – the things are clear (feminine plural form of the adjective)
băieții sunt clari – the boys are clear (masculine plural, a bit odd semantically, but correct grammatically)

So: totul devine clar is the required agreement.

What does din nou mean exactly, and are there other ways to say “again”? Can its position change?

din nou means “again / once again”.

Position:

Your sentence: explică problema din nou – explains the problem again
Also possible and common: explică din nou problema – explains again the problem

Romanian allows some flexibility in adverb placement, especially with short adverbials like din nou.

Common alternatives for “again”:

iarăși – again
încă o dată – one more time / once again
din nou – again (very common, neutral)

Examples:

După ce profesoara explică din nou problema…
După ce profesoara explică problema încă o dată…
După ce profesoara iarăși explică problema… (stylistically a bit marked)

Can the word order of the whole sentence be different, or must it start with După ce…?

The word order can vary. Both of these are natural:

După ce profesoara explică problema din nou, totul devine clar pentru elevi.
Totul devine clar pentru elevi după ce profesoara explică problema din nou.

General tendencies:

If you put the “after…” clause first, it sounds like you’re setting the time / condition and then giving the result.
If you put “Totul devine clar…” first, you emphasize the result, then explain when / why it happens.

Inside the clause, some small changes are also possible:

După ce profesoara explică din nou problema…
După ce profesoara explică problema din nou…

All of these are grammatically correct; they just shift focus slightly.

Could I say După ce profesoara a explicat problema din nou… instead of explică? What’s the difference?

Yes, you can, but the meaning and “feel” change:

După ce profesoara explică problema din nou, totul devine clar…
→ More general / habitual: whenever the teacher explains it again, everything becomes clear.
După ce profesoara a explicat problema din nou, totul a devenit clar…
→ Past event, completed: after the teacher explained the problem again, everything became clear.
După ce profesoara a explicat problema din nou, totul devine clar…
→ Mixed tenses, could be used in narrative or commentary (less neutral).

So:

explică (present) = suitable for general truths / repeated situations.
a explicat (perfect compus) = a specific, completed past action.

Why is there a comma after the după ce clause? Is that always required?

In your sentence, the subordinate clause comes first, so Romanian normally uses a comma to separate it from the main clause:

După ce profesoara explică problema din nou, totul devine clar pentru elevi.

If you reverse the order and start with the main clause, the comma is often optional (and usually omitted in simple sentences):

Totul devine clar pentru elevi după ce profesoara explică problema din nou.
(no comma is fine here)

So:

Subordinate first → generally use a comma.
Subordinate after main clause → usually no comma in simple cases like this.