[Grammar] No present single 3rd Person+

[Chiyokz]

I cannot understand the expressions:-| below. please teach me:

A, From a novel: " I was simply an intruder come to upset the order".
At least I think, "come" should be "comes". And via search on web, I found,
"A Daniel come to judgement " from Shakespeare's. Any relation? or the way of theses expression is correct? Specially admitted?

B, From NY1 news:
"To ban the caffeinated drinks, that come in tall colorful cans, that many young people like because..."
One antecedent corresponding to multiple relative pronouns ? Is this correct ? Very casual? If correct, very convenient practice.

 

[5jj]

A, From a novel: " I was simply an intruder ( who had) come to upset the order".

B, From NY1 news:
"To ban the caffeinated drinks, that come in tall colorful cans, that many young people like because..."
One antecedent corresponding to multiple relative pronouns?No - see my colour-coding, above. We could go on:

They want to ban the drinks that come in cans that are thrown into bins that are emptied by men that are employed by the local authority ...
.

 

[TheParser]

A, From a novel: " I was simply an intruder ( who had) come to upset the order".

B, From NY1 news:
"To ban the caffeinated drinks, that come in tall colorful cans, that many young people like because..."
One antecedent corresponding to multiple relative pronouns?No - see my colour-coding, above. We could go on:

They want to ban the drinks that come in cans that are thrown into bins that are empted by men that are employed by the local authority ...
.

Teacher Fivejedjon,


I am colorblind and not especially intelligent, so

I do not understand something.

You say that "that comes in colorful cans" modifies "drinks,"

and that "many people like" modifies cans.

But since there are commas around "that come in colorful cans,"

doesn't that mean that relative clause is parenthetical and therefore

can be deleted without destroying the sense of the sentence, which

seems to be:

To ban the caffeinated drinks that many young people like because ....


Thank you for any clarification.

 

[5jj]

I am colorblind and not especially intelligent, so I do not understand something. You say that "that comes in colorful cans" modifies "drinks,"and that "many people like" modifies cans.

But since there are commas around "that come in colorful cans," doesn't that mean that relative clause is parenthetical and therefore can be deleted without destroying the sense of the sentence, which seems to be:
To ban the caffeinated drinks that many young people like because

Hi, oh 'not especially intelligent' Parser. You spotted something that I had not noticed - something that undermines my brilliantly concise (IMO) response. I hate you, sometimes;-).

However - good point, well made.:up:

The original mistake was that the commas should not have been there. If the clause had been intended to be non-defining/parenthetical, then the relative pronoun should have been 'which', not 'that'. If that had been the case, then I would have answered Chiyokz's original question differently.

If we accept that the commas were a mistake (which I should have noticed ), then my response stands.

Thank you for that.

 

[TheParser]

I cannot understand the expressions:-| below. please teach me:

A, From a novel: " I was simply an intruder come to upset the order".
At least I think, "come" should be "comes". And via search on web, I found,
"A Daniel come to judgement " from Shakespeare's. Any relation? or the way of theses expression is correct? Specially admitted?

B, From NY1 news:
"To ban the caffeinated drinks, that come in tall colorful cans, that many young people like because..."
One antecedent corresponding to multiple relative pronouns ? Is this correct ? Very casual? If correct, very convenient practice.

***** NOT A TEACHER *****


I remembered your thread while I was reading an article today about

Mr. James M. Cain, an American author.

Mr. Cain once wrote the following words concerning one of his

novels:

"This book simply says perhaps a dream come true may be the

worst possible thing that can happen."

As Teacher Fivejedjon taught us, I guess that means "a dream [that

has] come true." I cannot explain why, but the way Mr. Cain wrote it

seems more interesting than the usual way, which would sound rather

ordinary and "boring."

 

[Chiyokz]

Thank you for the comments.
As for double "that" and comma, as I wrote, the original is from NY1, so the sentence was first oral and then wrote down by Japanese magazine or NY1 itself, which is not known. The commas were there.

I have seen a few times the sentences which were understandable by considering as multiple relatives against an antecedent. So I wanted to confirm that it is OK especially in very casual sense.
I any case, I understand it not to be standard on the writing.

Thanks, again.

 

[TheParser]

Thank you for the comments.
As for double "that" and comma, as I wrote, the original is from NY1, so the sentence was first oral and then wrote down by Japanese magazine or NY1 itself, which is not known. The commas were there.

I have seen a few times the sentences which were understandable by considering as multiple relatives against an antecedent. So I wanted to confirm that it is OK especially in very casual sense.
I any case, I understand it not to be standard on the writing.

Thanks, again.

***** NOT A TEACHER *****


(1) As Teacher Fivejedjon taught us, the first "that" should be

"which." I guess someone just accidentally made a mistake.

(2) So I guess the "correct" sentence should be written as:

To ban caffeinated drinks, which come in tall colorful glasses, that young people ....

To ban caffeinated drinks (which come in tall colorful glasses) that young people ....

To ban caffeinated drinks -- which come in tall colorful glasses -- that young people....

 

[Chiyokz]

Thank you for the further explanation.

I am very clear now on "come", "which", and "that", and using which/that at the same time complying with standard is very useful.

Thanks again !
from Chiyokz.