No hospital, a avó do Pedro recebeu oxigénio porque o vírus afetou os pulmões dela.

Elon.io is an online learning platform
We have an entire course teaching Portuguese grammar and vocabulary.

Start learning Portuguese now

Questions & Answers about No hospital, a avó do Pedro recebeu oxigénio porque o vírus afetou os pulmões dela.

Why is it No hospital and not em o hospital or just no at the end like in English?

In Portuguese, the preposition em (in/at) often contracts with the definite article:

  • em + o = no
  • em + a = na
  • em + os = nos
  • em + as = nas

So no hospital literally means in the hospital / at the hospital.

You cannot say em o hospital in normal modern Portuguese; you must use the contracted form no hospital.

Also, no at the end of an English sentence (e.g. “He didn’t go, no”) has nothing to do with this no. In Portuguese no here is simply em + o, not the English word “no”.


Why is there a comma after No hospital? Is that required?

Yes, that comma is normal and stylistically preferred.

No hospital is an introductory adverbial phrase of place. In Portuguese, when you start a sentence with such a phrase (time, place, condition, etc.), it is very common—and usually recommended—to separate it with a comma:

  • No hospital, a avó do Pedro recebeu oxigénio.
  • Ontem, choveu muito.
  • Em casa, estou mais relaxado.

You could sometimes see it without a comma in informal writing, but with the comma is the standard, especially in European Portuguese.


Why is it a avó do Pedro and not just avó do Pedro or a avó de Pedro?

Two separate points here: the article and the preposition.

  1. The article with family members:
    In Portuguese, you normally use the definite article with family members:

    • a avó = the grandmother
    • o pai = the father
    • a mãe = the mother

    So a avó do Pedro = Pedro’s grandmother (literally the grandmother of Pedro).

  2. de + o = do, and why do Pedro:

    • de + o = do
    • de + a = da

    With names of people in European Portuguese, you very often use the article:

    • do Pedro, da Maria, do João

    So a avó do Pedro (with do) sounds much more natural than a avó de Pedro in European Portuguese. A avó de Pedro is not wrong, but do Pedro is the normal choice.


What’s the difference between avó and avô?

They differ in both meaning and pronunciation:

  • a avó (stressed on ó) = grandmother (feminine)
  • o avô (stressed on ô) = grandfather (masculine)

So in the sentence a avó do Pedro, we are talking about Pedro’s grandmother, not his grandfather. The article also agrees:

  • a avó (feminine)
  • o avô (masculine)

How is possession formed in a avó do Pedro? Why isn’t it something like Pedro’s avó as in English?

Portuguese doesn’t use the English ’s structure. Instead, it typically uses:

[definite article] + [possessed noun] + de / do / da + [possessor]

So:

  • a avó do Pedro = Pedro’s grandmother
    literally: the grandmother of Pedro

More examples:

  • o carro do João = João’s car
  • a casa da Maria = Maria’s house
  • os amigos do meu irmão = my brother’s friends

The possessor usually comes after the thing possessed, linked with de / do / da / dos / das.


What tense is recebeu and what does it tell us about the action?

Recebeu is the 3rd person singular of the verb receber in the pretérito perfeito simples (simple past).

  • receber = to receive
  • ela recebeu = she received

This tense describes a completed action in the past:

  • A avó do Pedro recebeu oxigénio.
    → She received oxygen (at some specific time in the past; the action is finished).

It contrasts with recebia (imperfect), which would suggest a repeated/ongoing action in the past, like “she used to receive” or “she was receiving.”


Why is it oxigénio and not oxigênio? Which is correct?

Both forms are correct, but they correspond to different varieties of Portuguese:

  • oxigénio – standard spelling in European Portuguese
  • oxigênio – standard spelling in Brazilian Portuguese

The difference reflects pronunciation: in Portugal the vowel is more open (é), in Brazil more closed (ê). The spelling follows the local pronunciation, so your sentence is using the European Portuguese form.


Why is the conjunction porque written as one word here, not por que?

Porque in one word usually means “because” or “since” (a conjunction of cause):

  • … recebeu oxigénio porque o vírus afetou os pulmões dela.
    … received oxygen because the virus affected her lungs.

The form por que (two words) is mainly used in questions or certain relative structures:

  • Por que estás triste? = Why are you sad?
  • Não sei por que estás triste. = I don’t know why you are sad.

So here we express a cause, so we must use porque (one word).


Why is vírus preceded by o, and does vírus change in the plural?

Vírus is a masculine noun in Portuguese:

  • o vírus = the virus

An important detail: vírus is invariable in number: the singular and the plural are spelled the same:

  • singular: o vírus
  • plural: os vírus

So you don’t say “víruses” or “vírusses” in Portuguese; it stays vírus.


Why does afetou not have a c, like afectou?

Before the 1990 Orthographic Agreement, European Portuguese often wrote silent consonants like c and p before t or c, for example:

  • afectar, afectou
  • acção, facto, óptimo

The new standard spelling removed these silent consonants when they are not pronounced, so we now write:

  • afetar, afetou
  • ação, fato (BP) / facto (EP is still accepted), ótimo

In this case, afetar / afetou is the modern spelling. You may still see afectou in older texts.


How does pulmão become pulmões in the plural?

Pulmão (lung) ends in -ão, and many nouns in -ão form the plural in -ões:

  • pulmão → pulmões (lung → lungs)
  • coração → corações (heart → hearts)
  • campeão → campeões (champion → champions)

There are other patterns for -ão nouns (-ãos, -ães), but pulmão → pulmões is one of the common ones. So os pulmões = the lungs.


Why is it os pulmões dela and not seus pulmões?

Both structures exist, but they differ in clarity and style:

  • os pulmões dela = her lungs
  • os seus pulmões = her/his/their lungs (can be ambiguous)

In Portuguese, seu / sua / seus / suas can refer to him, her, you (formal), or even them, depending on context. To avoid ambiguity, speakers often prefer:

  • dele = of him / his
  • dela = of her / her
  • deles = of them (masc./mixed) / their
  • delas = of them (fem.) / their

So os pulmões dela clearly says her lungs, referring back to a avó. Os seus pulmões could be misread as Pedro’s lungs or even someone else’s.


Why is it dela and not de ela?

Dela is a single word pronoun meaning of her / her.

Portuguese has special possessive forms that merge the preposition de with a 3rd‑person pronoun:

  • dele = de + ele → of him / his
  • dela = de + ela → of her / her
  • deles = de + eles → of them / their
  • delas = de + elas → of them / their

You don’t normally say de ela in standard modern Portuguese; you use dela instead. So:

  • os pulmões dela = her lungs.

Could we leave out dela and just say porque o vírus afetou os pulmões?

Grammatically, you could omit dela, but you would lose important information.

  • …afetou os pulmões dela. → clearly: affected her lungs.
  • …afetou os pulmões. → just affected the lungs (which lungs? whose lungs?).

Because we already mentioned Pedro (male) and a avó (female), adding dela makes it crystal clear that these are the grandmother’s lungs, not Pedro’s or someone else’s. In everyday speech, people usually keep dele / dela precisely to avoid that ambiguity.


Is this word order fixed, or could we rewrite the sentence in another way?

The word order is natural, but you do have alternatives. For example:

  • No hospital, a avó do Pedro recebeu oxigénio porque os pulmões dela foram afetados pelo vírus.
    (passive form, slightly more formal)

  • O vírus afetou os pulmões da avó do Pedro e, no hospital, ela recebeu oxigénio.
    (different focus: first the virus, then the treatment)

Portuguese is relatively flexible with word order as long as you keep:

  • subject–verb agreement
  • correct use of prepositions and articles
  • pronouns in acceptable positions

The original sentence is a very standard, neutral way to express this idea.