fabula syrae pygmalion

[Sofronios]

still struggling with orberg material
now I have reach the chapter that can be read in conjuction with fabula syriae
just reading the first of the stories made me realize about another level of latin
the first story about Pygmalion
line 3-4 Feminas verō, quas superbas esse putabat, nullas amabat
to blame on my own mistake that I despise grammar oriented textbook, that I am unsure how to dissect this sentence.
but He did not love any woman that He thought magnificent.

line 21 Cuius signi amore captus, Pygmalion misserimus factus erat et nocte pessime dormiebat; dolebat enim signum, quamquam vera atque pulcherrima puella esse videbatur, non vivere, neque sibi respondere amorem suum fatenti.
why the genitive singular of qui at the start of sentence?
even in English I cant picture this usage (English not my native language as you people might already see)
whose after being captive by the love of the statue, Pygmalion became so miserable, and could not sleep very well at night, because he carried sadness in regard of the statue, even though it seemed to be the most beautiful girl, was in fact neither alive, nor able to answer him confessing his love.

alas my translation! am I doing it right?

[Hylander]

Feminas verō, quas superbas esse putabat, nullas amabat

The punctuation suggests that this is probably general, not particular. "He loved no women, whom he thought were haughty/arrogant." In other words, he thought all women were haughty and loved none of them. But your reading is not impossible, I think, and of course the ancient Romans didn't use punctuation: in ancient texts, punctuation has been added by modern editors. But if it were "He loved no women whom he thought were haughty", in other words, he loved only those women whom he thought were not haughty, it would probably be something like nullas vero feminas amabat quas superbas esse putabat.

Cuius signi amore captus,

Cuius here is a relative adjective modifying signi. It's a relative pronoun/adjective that is used instead of a demonstrative (here the demonstrative would be huius) to connect with the previous sentence, which mentioned the statue (I assume). It's as if the new sentence were a relative clause tacked onto the previous sentence. This is a very common connective device in Latin.

Allen & Greenough sec. 308(f):

f. A relative pronoun (or adverb) often stands at the beginning of an independent sentence or clause, serving to connect it with the sentence or clause that precedes:—

“Caesar statuit exspectandam classem; quae ubi convēnit ” (B. G. 3.14) , Cæsar decided that he must wait for the fleet; and when this had come together, etc.
quae quī audiēbant, and those who heard this (which things).
quae cum ita sint, and since this is so.


“ quōrum quod simile factum ” (Cat. 4.13) , what deed of theirs like this?
quō cum vēnisset, and when he had come there (whither when he had come).

[*] Note.--This arrangement is common even when another relative or an interrogative follows. The relative may usually be translated by an English demonstrative, with or without and.

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/tex ... 99.04.0001

pulcherrima -- here, "very beautiful" rather than "the most beautiful".

dolebat enim signum, . . . non vivere, neque sibi respondere amorem suum fatenti. -- "he was sad that the statue was not alive and did not respond to him . . . "

[Sofronios]

thx you for the explanation