Learn Hardcore Portuguese (Portugal): O Pedro não é pobre, mas tem receio de perder o emprego. - Pedro is not poor, but he is afraid of losing his job.

In Portugal, using the article with names is widespread in spoken language and informal writing.
In more formal or very careful written Portuguese (e.g. academic texts, official documents), the article is often dropped:
- Pedro não é pobre, mas… – more formal / neutral written style.
In Brazil, using the article with names depends on region and is less universal; in much of Brazil you’ll more often hear just Pedro, Ana, etc.

So O Pedro is very natural in Portugal, but the sentence without the article (Pedro não é pobre…) is also grammatically correct and may sound slightly more formal or “written”.

Where does não go in a negative sentence like this? Why not é não pobre?

In Portuguese, não normally goes immediately before the main verb it negates:

O Pedro não é pobre. – Pedro is not poor.
Ela não trabalha aqui. – She doesn’t work here.
Nós não temos carro. – We don’t have a car.

You cannot say:

✗ O Pedro é não pobre. – wrong / unnatural

So the pattern is:

[subject] + não + [conjugated verb] + …

If there are auxiliary verbs, não usually comes before the first verb:

Ele não pode vir. – He can’t come.

Why is there no ele in the second part? Why isn’t it mas ele tem receio…?

Portuguese is a “pro‑drop” language: subject pronouns (eu, tu, ele, etc.) are often omitted when the subject is clear from context or from the verb ending.

In the second clause:

mas tem receio de perder o emprego

it’s obvious that the subject is still Pedro, so it’s natural to omit ele.

You could say:

O Pedro não é pobre, mas ele tem receio de perder o emprego.

This is perfectly correct, but in European Portuguese it often sounds more emphatic, as if you want to stress the change of focus to ele. The more neutral version is usually without the pronoun:

O Pedro não é pobre, mas tem receio de perder o emprego.

What does tem receio de literally mean, and how is it different from tem medo de?

Literally:

ter receio (de) = to have apprehension / to have misgivings (about)
ter medo (de) = to have fear (of)

Both can often be translated as “to be afraid (of)”, but there is a nuance:

ter receio de is usually a bit softer, like:
- to be worried that something might happen
- to be uneasy or apprehensive
  Example: Tem receio de falhar ao exame. – He’s worried/afraid of failing the exam.
ter medo de is usually stronger, more like clear fear:
- Tem medo de cães. – He is afraid of dogs.

In your sentence, tem receio de perder o emprego suggests a concern or anxiety about possibly losing his job, not necessarily panic-level fear.

What exactly is receio? Is it a verb or a noun? Could I say receia perder o emprego instead?

In the sentence:

tem receio de perder o emprego

receio is a noun meaning fear, apprehension, concern.

Structure:

ter + [noun] → ter receio (de…) = to be afraid/apprehensive (of…)

There is also a verb related to this noun:

recear = to fear, to be afraid (that)
Example:
- Receia perder o emprego. – He fears losing his job.

So yes, you could say:

O Pedro não é pobre, mas receia perder o emprego.

This is grammatically correct and common, especially in more formal or written language.
The original version with tem receio de is very typical in everyday Portuguese.

Why is there a de before perder? Could you say tem receio perder o emprego without de?

After the noun receio, Portuguese normally uses the preposition de to introduce what you are afraid of:

ter receio de [algo] – to be afraid of [something]
- Tem receio de acidentes. – He is afraid of accidents.
ter receio de [infinitive] – to be afraid of [doing something]
- Tem receio de perder o emprego.

Without de, the sentence would be wrong:

✗ tem receio perder o emprego – incorrect

You always need de in this pattern:

ter receio de + noun / de + infinitive

Why is perder in the infinitive? Could it be tem receio que perde o emprego?

In Portuguese, when a verb comes after a preposition (like de), it must be in the infinitive:

de perder – of losing
sem dizer – without saying
para trabalhar – in order to work

So here, because we have de, we must use the infinitive:

tem receio de perder o emprego

If you want to use a finite clause (with a conjugated verb), the usual pattern is:

ter receio de que + [subjunctive]

For example:

Tem receio de que o emprego acabe. – He is afraid that the job will end.
Tem receio de que o mandem embora. – He is afraid that they’ll fire him.

So:

✗ tem receio que perde o emprego – wrong (and wrong mood)
✓ tem receio de perder o emprego – correct (infinitive after de)
✓ tem receio de que perca o emprego – also correct, with subjunctive and explicit subject (that he might lose his job).

Why is it perder o emprego and not perder seu emprego or perder o seu emprego?

In Portuguese, especially in Portugal, you often use the definite article alone to refer to someone’s own thing when it’s obvious whose it is:

Perdeu o emprego. – He lost his job.
Fechou a porta. – He/she closed the door (his/her door).
Esqueceu-se da carteira. – He/she forgot (his/her) wallet.

The context tells you that o emprego is his job (the job that Pedro has). There’s no real ambiguity here.

You can say:

tem receio de perder o seu emprego
tem receio de perder o emprego dele

but:

o seu emprego can sound slightly more formal or sometimes ambiguous (it could mean “someone else’s job” depending on context),
o emprego dele is very clear but a bit heavier, and not needed if it’s obvious we’re talking about Pedro.

So the most natural and economical in this sentence is:

tem receio de perder o emprego = he is afraid of losing his job.

What is the difference between emprego and trabalho?

Both often translate as “job” or “work”, but they’re not identical:

emprego

Usually a post / position / job you have with an employer.
A countable “job”:
- Arranjou um emprego. – He found a job.
- Perdeu o emprego. – He lost his job.

trabalho

General work / labour / effort (uncountable)
- Tenho muito trabalho. – I have a lot of work.
Can also mean a job informally, but it’s broader:
- Anda à procura de trabalho. – He is looking for work.

In your sentence, perder o emprego is specifically about losing his job position, so emprego is the natural word.

Why is the conjunction mas used here? Could you use embora or porém instead?

mas is the most common everyday word for “but”, linking two clauses in contrast:

O Pedro não é pobre, mas tem receio de perder o emprego.

Alternatives:

porém – also means “but / however”, but is more formal / written:
- O Pedro não é pobre; porém, tem receio de perder o emprego.
embora – means “although / even though” and normally introduces a subordinate clause with the subjunctive:
- Embora o Pedro não seja pobre, tem receio de perder o emprego.

So you can’t just replace mas with embora without changing the structure and the verb forms.
mas is the most natural, neutral choice in the original sentence.

Could the word order be changed, for example O Pedro, mas tem receio de perder o emprego, não é pobre?

No, that order is not natural in Portuguese.

The normal patterns would be:

O Pedro não é pobre, mas tem receio de perder o emprego.
Embora o Pedro não seja pobre, tem receio de perder o emprego.
O Pedro, apesar de não ser pobre, tem receio de perder o emprego.

Trying to put mas tem receio de perder o emprego as a parenthetical in the middle of the subject and verb (O Pedro … não é pobre) makes the sentence confusing and unidiomatic. Portuguese word order is fairly flexible, but conjunctions like mas typically join complete clauses, not get inserted into the middle of one.