vidit enim se stantem in quadam regula lignea

[massimo.p]

Below is a quote from St. Augustine Confessions book 3 chapter 11, relating a dream that his mother had:
"vidit enim se stantem in quadam regula lignea et venientem ad se iuvenem splendidum hilarem atque arridentem sibi, cum illa esset maerens et maerore confecta. qui cum causas ab ea quaesisset maestitiae suae cotidianarumque lacrimarum (docendi, ut adsolet, non discendi gratia), atque illa respondisset perditionem meam se plangere, iussisse illum, quo secura esset, atque admonuisse, ut adtenderet et videret, ubi esset illa, ibi esse et me."

My attempted translation:
"She saw herself standing upon a certain wooden rule and coming towards her a splendid and joyful young man, smiling upon her, while she was morning and consumed with sorrow. When he had sought from her the causes of her sadness and daily tears (for the sake of teaching, as is the custom, not for the sake of learning), she had responded that she mourned my (Augustine's) perdition...

It's at this point of the translation that I become a bit confounded. I cannot for the life of me figure out how to translate the perfect active infinitives in the clauses that follow. Most translations simply render these as simple past tense; e.g. "jussisse" as "then he ordered her..."

What use of the perfect active infinitive allows for this kind of translation? Also, how is "illum" being translated here? Is this some form of indirect discourse? If it is, I do not recognize it as such.

Can anyone help me out with this?

 

[Dantius]

Yeah, it's indirect discourse. It's loosely dependent on vidit in the previous sentence.

 

[Pacifica]

Note that it is important for the coherence of the sentence to translate the atque before illa respondisset. Illa respondisset... is part of the cum clause, and is linked to the first, quaesisset part by atque. Your translation, by failing to include an "and", sounds as if "she had responded" etc. were a main clause.

 

[massimo.p]

Pacifica: I'm sorry I missed your post.

Your point is well taken; but it is "she" who is responding to "his" inquiry. "She," in this case Augustine's mother, is answering the man in her dream (the inquirer); but the content of her reply is Augustine himself, who happens to be narrating the entire dream. Moreover, I confess that I still do not quite understand the use of "jussisse" and "admonuissse" as indirect discourse, especially as nearly every translation that I consulted rendered it "he ordered and admonished" not "THAT he ordered and admonished."

On the other hand, "THAT she cried for my perdition" renders what I understand to be indirect discourse. Dantius' explanation did not register with me.

Is it as Dantius said, that "vidit" introduces and governs the entire telling of the dream, rendering all verbs thereafter not in the subjunctive form as accusative subject infinitives?