In the answer to another question it was discussed what kind of word "los" is in the following sentence:
Etwas ist los.
The poster argued that it is an adjective, that can only be used predictively. Going by the mere structure of the sentence, that makes sense but I don't think it captures the nature of the word.
1) "los" does not work with the other copula "werden"
2) "los" cannot be quantified in any way (*sehr los, *ein bisschen los)
3) The structure effectively only works for a small number of subjects (wenig, viel, etwas, nichts...)
4) "los" has no comparative/superlative
While there are plenty of adjectives that have some shortcomings here and there, I find this to be too big a list of lack for it to be called an adjective. Strictly logically speaking "weg","da", heck even "ein Pferd" would be an adjective, too, then, because they show quite the same qualities as "los"... well, apart from the article of course.
Ich bin weg.
Ich bin da.
Ich bin ein Pferd.
So my question is:
- Does calling it an adjective really do the word justice?
- Is there any "official" source on this?
To make sure:
Things are different for sentences like
Der Hund ist los.
But even though both constructions have the same origin, I think "los sein" has come into it's own and should seen as an intransitive phrasal verb rather than the copula "sein" with a random adjective.