Cant understand this relative clause


There is this little article that im using to study japanese and one of its
passages says:

>
> 国立感染症研究所によると、約3000の病院で6月25日までの1週間にヘルパンギーナがうつったことがわかった人は、1つの病院に平均で5.79人いました。今までの10年でいちばん多くなりました。

I cant grammatically understand this part:

> ヘルパンギーナがうつったことがわかった人

I understand that all of it is a relative clause modifying 人. I dont
understand the grammatical role of ヘルパンギーナがうつったこと.

Is it actually the subject ? How would you write it in a non-relative-clause
form?

I'd appreciate it if anyone could give me a grammatical analysis of this
specific part.




Before 人 was taken out to be modified by the rest of it, the original sentence
would have looked like:

> ヘルパンギーナが **人に** うつったことがわかった。  
>  Herpangina was found to have transmitted (itself) **to people**.  
>  ( _lit._ The fact that herpangina transmitted (itself) to people was
> found.)

(I couldn't find a good intransitive verb that would retain the subject-verb-
destination relationship between ヘルパンギーナ, うつる and 人 and still convey the
meaning more or less accurately.)

This became:

> ヘルパンギーナがうつったことがわかった **人**  
>  the **people** herpangina was found to have transmitted (itself) **to**

The particle に got lost in the process.




> ヘルパンギーナがうつったことがわかった人

The form of this sentence is:

[Rel clause] + 人

In the relative clause: ヘルパンギーナがうつったことがわかった

こと is the subject which is modified by another relative clause.

分かる in this context means "to be known".

So ヘルパンギーナがうつったことがわかった人 means (considering context)

Literally:

> The people for whom it (the fact they contracted herpangina) is known.

Idiomatically:

> The known people who contracted herpangina

Consider that this clause is the topic of the sentence (marked by は) and as
such it can be interpreted widely depending on what follows. So it could be
the number of people, the place where they got infected, an average, etc. In
your case,

> ヘルパンギーナがうつったことがわかった人は、1つの病院に平均で5.79人いました

> The average of known people who contracted herpangina per hospital was 5.79.

  * The literally translation may have surpassed my knowledge of English grammar. If so, leave me a comment.

