Well, that's my point really. Why look elsewhere? The evidence is in the puddin', sort to speak. Given that a 'native speaker' has already in fact used it attributively as well as predicatively (ahem, two positions) tells us it's productive--it's not a one time thing.Originally Posted by Taka
Of course, grammatically, it's odd, but that's just because it's new. No matter its position, pre-nominal or post-nominal, it's adjectival in function. It describes, like this,
X became excited
an excited X
The awkward part, well, it's like when you buy a new pair of shoes. They feel awkward for the first couple of days until that is you get used to the 'feel' of them. No matter how awkward they feel, after some use, you won't 'feel' the difference. In other words, if something's new, it's going to feel awkward at first.
Communicatively, though, it's pretty expressive, don't you think? If you and I can make out the meaning, then the speaker has done his/her job quite well.
Look elsewhere in the grammar:
1. John became excited. (OK) Predicatively
2. It was an excited conversation. (OK) Attributively
Notice 'excited' in 1. and 2. have two different meanings. Also note, 'excited' is verbal in nature. It comes from a verb, so it behaves best with other verbs (i.e. predicatively), like 'became excited, got excited'.
3. John got excited. (OK) *3. and 4. have different meanings.
4. The game got excited. (OK)
Let's look at the other position.
5. He is an excited guy. (Not OK)
6. An excited game is what we don't need. (OK)
Why is 5. not OK and 6. OK? Does it have to do with animacy? Hmm.
Well, I don't believe it does because we can replace it with a surface-synonym, like this,
7. He's an over-excited kind of a guy. (OK)
8. An over-excited game. (OK)
9. He gets over-excited. (OK) Two verbals
10. The game gets over-excited. (OK) Two verbs
Aha! We've the key. It's omission. 8) The word over-excited is the missing link. :D I believe the speaker is using 'excited' in place of over-excited.
All the best,