Ora acampamos no vale, ora descansamos no abrigo de montanha.

Here, ora ... ora shows alternation between two situations. A natural English equivalent is:

• sometimes ... sometimes
• now ... now
• at one moment ... at another

So the idea is that the speakers do one thing in some circumstances and another thing in others: they camp in the valley at some times, and rest in the mountain shelter at others.

It is repeated because the structure is a fixed pairing: ora X, ora Y.

This repeated pattern sets up a contrast or alternation between two actions, states, or possibilities. It works a bit like:

• either ... or
• sometimes ... sometimes
• now ... now

So ora is not just being unnecessarily repeated; the repetition is what creates the meaning.

No. They are the same word in form, but not the same use.

In your sentence, ora is a connector used in the pattern ora ... ora.

But Ora! by itself can be an interjection, expressing surprise, impatience, emphasis, or something like well!, come on!, or really now!, depending on context.

So:

• Ora acampamos..., ora descansamos... = alternating actions
• Ora! = an exclamation

Formally, acampamos can mean either:

• we camp — present tense
• we camped — preterite

The same is true of descansamos.

In this sentence, the meaning is understood from context. With ora ... ora, the sentence usually sounds like a general or habitual present: sometimes we camp, sometimes we rest.

If the wider context were clearly about the past, it could also be interpreted as past. But on its own, here, the most natural reading is the present habitual.

Portuguese often omits subject pronouns when the verb ending already makes the subject clear.

• acampamos = we camp
• descansamos = we rest

Because the ending -amos shows first person plural, nós is unnecessary unless the speaker wants extra emphasis or contrast.

So:

• Ora acampamos no vale... = perfectly normal
• Ora nós acampamos no vale... = possible, but more emphatic

No is a contraction of:

• em
  • o = no

So:

• no vale = in the valley
• no abrigo = in the shelter

This contraction is very common in Portuguese.

Other similar contractions are:

• na = em + a
• nos = em + os
• nas = em + as

Because abrigo de montanha means a type of shelter: a mountain shelter or mountain refuge.

Here, de montanha works like a classifier, describing what kind of shelter it is. It is not referring to one specific mountain.

Compare:

• abrigo de montanha = a mountain shelter / a shelter for mountain use
• abrigo da montanha = the shelter of the mountain / the mountain’s shelter, or a shelter belonging to a specific mountain area

So de montanha is the natural choice when you mean the general concept.

It refers to a shelter in a mountain area, usually a simple place where hikers, climbers, or travellers can rest or take refuge.

Depending on context, English translations could include:

• mountain shelter
• mountain hut
• mountain refuge

The exact choice depends on the kind of building. Abrigo often suggests shelter/protection, not necessarily a large or comfortable building.

Because the sentence is not saying in the mountain or on the mountain. It is saying in the mountain shelter:

• no vale = in the valley
• no abrigo de montanha = in the mountain shelter

So montanha is not the place directly governed by the preposition. It is part of the noun phrase abrigo de montanha, describing the kind of shelter.

It is natural and correct, but ora ... ora sounds a bit more elevated, literary, or carefully written than the most everyday spoken alternatives.

In casual speech, people might more often say things like:

• Às vezes acampamos no vale, outras vezes descansamos no abrigo de montanha.
• Umas vezes acampamos no vale, outras vezes descansamos no abrigo de montanha.

So your original sentence is good Portuguese, but it has a slightly more polished tone.

Yes. In everyday European Portuguese, common alternatives include:

• às vezes ... outras vezes
• umas vezes ... outras vezes

For example:

• Às vezes acampamos no vale, outras vezes descansamos no abrigo de montanha.
• Umas vezes acampamos no vale, outras vezes descansamos no abrigo de montanha.

These feel more conversational. Ora ... ora is still perfectly correct, but stylistically it is less plain and neutral.

The commas separate the two parallel parts of the ora ... ora structure:

• Ora acampamos no vale,
• ora descansamos no abrigo de montanha.

They help mark the alternation clearly and make the sentence easier to read. In writing, this punctuation is very normal with this kind of repeated connector.

Yes. You could say:

• Ora descansamos no abrigo de montanha, ora acampamos no vale.

The basic meaning stays the same: the two actions alternate. The order just changes which idea comes first, and therefore which one gets slightly more prominence.