+0
In the Murder of Roger Ackroyd is a line:

-Here are some visitors come to see you.

I think WHO ARE is not omittable:

We cannot, or should not, say

-There are three people come from China.

because if WHO ARE is omitted, idiomatically there should be adverbs:

eg There are three people JUST come from China.

eg Here is a pretty ugly boy RECENTLY come into his mother's estate.

Do you agree?
1 2
Comments  
"Here are some visitors come to see you" is allowable in my opinion, but it is a somewhat unusual style, and is not idiomatic in modern conversational English (certainly not in my speech, anyway). Remember that this is from a book written nearly 100 years ago.

"Here are some visitors who are come to see you" sounds less correct to me, not more so. The normal form is "Here are some visitors who have come to see you".
GPYThe normal form is "Here are some visitors who have come to see you".
Actually, though I was focusing on the topic of the question and the difference between "are come" and "have come", a simpler and even more common way of saying this would be just "Here are some visitors to see you".
Try out our live chat room.
Thank you, GPY.

Has the following sentence the same mistake as the one in question?:

-I shall not dream of asking him who it was arrived at his house early this morning.
Well, the original sentence did not actually contain a mistake ... as I said, it's allowable. The new sentence with "who it was arrived" is also acceptable, but grammatically it's a slightly different case because "come" is a past participle but "arrived" is ordinary past tense:

Here are some visitors come to see you. -> Here are some visitors who have come to see you.
I shall not dream of asking him who it was arrived... -> I shall not dream of asking him who it was who arrived...
GPYI shall not dream of asking him who it was arrived... -> I shall not dream of asking him who it was who arrived...
Am I the one who is confused ?Emotion: thinking I think both versions have issues syntactically as well as grammatically.
Students: Are you brave enough to let our tutors analyse your pronunciation?
grammarfreak I think both versions have issues syntactically as well as grammatically.
Specifically what do you think is wrong?
Are you really ok with this? It sounded really awkward to my ear, much less made sense. Maybe my brain wave is different?

I shall not dream of asking him who it was arrived... -> I shall not dream of asking him who it was who arrived...
Well, I believe it is correct English...

The direct question asked would be "Who was it who arrived at your house early this morning?" In reported speech this changes to, for example, "I asked him who it was who arrived at his house...", which with a bit more verbiage becomes the quoted sentence:

I shall not dream of asking him who it was who arrived at his house early this morning.

Then the relative pronoun (second "who") can be dropped (at least in some people's speech patterns), as in, for example:

I don't know what it was that made that noise -> I don't know what it was made that noise
Teachers: We supply a list of EFL job vacancies
Show more