LINGUISTICS & CULTURE
|Data:||27/NOV/2005 10:35 AM|
Your example - "eating outdoors", or mine - "he ran outdoors", are incomplete, and very incorrect and misleading in the former case especially. Literally that would mean to consume the outdoors, a big task, aye? Although rarely said correctly and fully, they should be "eating out-of-doors" or "he ran out-of-doors". I think if you remember that 'outdoors' is an informal and shortened form of 'out-of-doors', three seperate words which cannot be combined into one adverb, that will make it more clear.
I'm not sure either, but I think of it in another way. The original expression "out-of-doors" (in the example above) could be classified as an adverbial phrase of place (locução adverbial de lugar), since it modifies the verb "eating", adding to it an idea of place. When the original expression got shortened to "outdoors", the most natural was to classify it, in this sense, as an adverb. Afterall, that's what adverbs do: they modify a verb, adding to it an idea of place, time, manner, degree, etc.
Let's try another example : "eating in the bathtub". Does that make 'bathtub' an adverb? Acho que nao. 'in-the-bathtub' if used very frequently as a term could eventually be shortened to 'intub' or some such. Still it would not be an adverb.
The expression "in the bathtub" is in fact an adverbial phrase of place (the word "bathtub" itself is just a noun). If the expression were eventually shortened to "intub", I'd find logical to classify it as an adverb of place, since it still modifies the verb "eating", adding to it an idea of place.
Envie uma resposta
Índice de mensagens