Puerum piget verborum iratorum quae heri sorori dixit.

Because piget is being used as an impersonal verb.

With impersonal verbs like piget, Latin often does not make the person who feels the emotion the grammatical subject. Instead:

• the person affected goes in the accusative
• the thing causing the feeling goes in the genitive

So:

• puerum piget = it disgusts/regrets the boy, or more naturally, the boy regrets
• puerum is therefore accusative, not nominative

This is one of the classic constructions learners have to get used to, because English says the boy regrets, but Latin says something more like it causes regret to the boy.

Here piget means something like:

• it makes someone feel regret
• someone is sorry for
• someone regrets

Its basic sense can include disgust, annoyance, or regret, depending on context. In this sentence, because the object is angry words he said to his sister, the natural meaning is regret or being sorry for.

So the sentence means that the boy is sorry about those angry words.

Because with piget, the cause of the feeling is commonly put in the genitive.

So:

• puerum piget verborum iratorum = the boy regrets the angry words

But literally it is more like:

• the boy feels regret because of the angry words

Here:

• verborum = of words
• iratorum = angry, agreeing with verborum

This genitive construction is normal with piget and some similar impersonal verbs.

Because words is not the direct object of dixit in the main clause. It belongs to the construction with piget.

In English we say:

• The boy regrets the angry words

so the angry words looks like a direct object.

But in Latin, after piget, the thing regretted is often expressed in the genitive, not the accusative.

So Latin uses:

• verborum iratorum = of angry words

not an accusative like verba irata in the main clause.

Quae is a relative pronoun, meaning which or that.

It refers back to verborum iratorum:

• verborum iratorum quae heri sorori dixit = the angry words which he said to his sister yesterday

So quae introduces the relative clause that further describes which words are meant.

Because a relative pronoun agrees with its antecedent in gender and number, but its case depends on its role inside the relative clause.

Its antecedent is verborum iratorum:

• verba is neuter plural
• so the relative pronoun must also be neuter plural

Inside the relative clause, quae ... dixit, the pronoun is the thing that he said, so it functions as the object of dixit.

That means it should be accusative plural. For a neuter plural relative pronoun, nominative and accusative are both quae.

So:

• gender/number: from verba → neuter plural
• case: from its job in the clause → accusative
• result: quae

It is not quorum, because quorum would be genitive plural, and that is not its function inside the relative clause.

Because relative pronouns do not have to match the antecedent in case.

They match in:

• gender
• number

But their case comes from their own role in the relative clause.

So even though:

• verborum is genitive plural
• quae is accusative plural

they still refer to the same thing, because both are neuter plural, and the meaning clearly connects them.

This is a very common feature of Latin relative clauses.

Because dico takes a dative for the person to whom something is said.

So:

• sorori = to his sister
• quae heri sorori dixit = which he said to his sister yesterday

This is exactly the normal construction of dico:

• something said = accusative or relative pronoun as object
• person addressed = dative

Latin often leaves out possessive words like his, her, or their when the meaning is obvious from context.

So sorori can naturally mean:

• to his sister

even without suae.

If Latin added suae, it could make the possession more explicit, but it is often unnecessary. The sentence already strongly suggests that it is the boy’s sister.

The subject is understood, not stated explicitly.

Dixit means he said or she said, depending on context. Here the most natural subject is the boy, since he is the person being discussed in the main clause.

So the sentence is understood as:

• the boy regrets the angry words which he said to his sister yesterday

Latin often omits subject pronouns when the verb ending and context make the subject clear.

Dixit is perfect tense because it refers to a completed action in the past:

• he said

The adverb heri (yesterday) also points to a completed past event.

So the sequence is:

• yesterday, he said those angry words
• now, he regrets them

That makes the perfect tense very natural here.

Heri means yesterday.

It modifies dixit, not piget. So it tells us when he said the words, not when he feels regret.

Thus:

• quae heri sorori dixit = which he said to his sister yesterday

Grammatically, iratorum agrees with verborum, so it describes the words as angry.

In English, though, we usually understand that as:

• angry words
• words spoken in anger

Latin adjectives often work this way. The phrase does not mean the words literally had emotions; it means they were the kind of words produced by anger.

Latin word order is much more flexible than English word order because Latin uses endings to show grammatical relationships.

So Latin can say:

• Puerum piget verborum iratorum quae heri sorori dixit

without needing a rigid English-style order.

A learner can unpack it by looking at endings:

• puerum = accusative, person affected
• piget = impersonal verb
• verborum iratorum = genitive, cause of regret
• quae = relative pronoun referring to the words
• sorori = dative, person addressed
• dixit = he said

Latin word order often places important or closely connected ideas together, but it does not depend on word order as heavily as English does.

You can translate it very literally, but it will sound unnatural in English.

A very literal version would be something like:

• The boy it-regrets of angry words which yesterday to-his-sister he-said

A better semi-literal version is:

• The boy feels regret because of the angry words which he said to his sister yesterday

And the natural English translation is:

• The boy regrets the angry words he said to his sister yesterday

So yes, a literal translation can help you see the structure, but it should not be your final English version.

Very often, yes. In classical Latin, piget commonly appears as an impersonal verb with:

• accusative of the person affected
• genitive of the cause

For example, patterns like:

• me piget = I regret / I am sorry
• eum facti piget = he regrets the deed

So this sentence is following a standard Latin pattern.

The sentence breaks down like this:

• Puerum piget = the boy regrets / the boy is sorry
• verborum iratorum = for the angry words
• quae heri sorori dixit = which he said to his sister yesterday

So the overall structure is:

• [person affected in accusative] + piget + [cause in genitive] + relative clause

That pattern is the key to understanding the sentence.