He came to see you.

When someone visits, the secretary approaches his boss, saying (1)"He came to see you"
How about saying (2)"He has come to see you"?-- OK, feel free!

Is there any difference of nuances between (1) and (2)?-- Just the usual between simple past and present perfect (q.v. in our FAQs Forum).
Does (b) imply that he has been being expected to come?- It could in context

Thanks a lot, Mister Micawber!!

Clive1. Can the visitor hear the secretary's words to the boss?
2. Can the boss see the visitor while the secretary is speaking?

Thanks so much, Clive!!

About your question....
1. Yes
2. No.

I am wondering what your answer will be....

Thanks Clive!!

I wanted to know what the difference between "He came to see you" and "He has come to see you" is.

Can there be any situation that natives feel the difference betwen the two, imagining that the situation is between a boss and his secretary?

Hi,

I wanted to know what the difference between "He came to see you" and "He has come to see you" is.

Can there be any situation that natives feel the difference betwen the two, imagining that the situation is between a boss and his secretary?

You mean that you want to ignore the issues of politeness that

Oh, thanks a lot, Clive!!

I don't really know what are involved in this.

I just want to know how the natives feel the difference.

I know that grammatically both are possible.

But, I am not sure how the natives receive the two different expressions.

Your explanation, He came to see you. Describes a past event. Sounds l

Hi,

But I guess the natives would use "He came to see you", when the visitor(he) is still in the office waiting for the boss(you).
No, we wouldn't.
Typical expressions are
eg This gentleman is here to see you. (if the visitor can hear)
eg

I see.... I see...

I think I;v got it...

And also, "Referring to me as 'he' when I can hear is considered rude" is what I've never seen in a grammar book.

Thanks so much, Clive!!