Translation:I believe that she came to see me.
Sia is the auxiliary verb - the third person subjunctive conjugation of "essere".
"essere venut(o/a/i/e)" basically means "to have come".
If this sentence was, for example, the simple "she came" it would translate to "è venuta" but since we need to use the subjunctive tense instead of essere becoming "è" it becomes "sia".
Yes, vedermi is the unemphatic form. Vedere me is the emphatic form. It allows combinations with other words.
- vedermi → vedere me
- vederti → vedere te
- vederlo/la → vedere lui/lei/quello/quella...
- vederci → vedere noi / vedere te e me...
- vedervi → vedere voi / vedere te e lui... vedere voi e lei...
- vederli/le → vedere loro/quello/quelle/essi...
Note that in translating the subject of sia, there are various options because the 1st, 2nd and 3rd person are all sia in the singular.
However, the meaning excludes the 1st person. The second person is virtually always supplemented with the pronoun tu in the subjunctive and is thus unlikely. It must thus be third person. It cannot be "he", because of the feminine agreement. If it were a polite Lei form, then the pronoun would probably have been included, but it is a possibility. The only remaining possibility is "she" -- or at a stretch "it", if some non-human expressed with a feminine noun might have "come to see me".
So, the best translation is "she came", but a deferential and feminine "you came" is possible.
I don't believe that this is the correct translation....it doesn't contain the expression or the meaning of the conjunctive sentence...it should be as a sense of belief that the person was to come and see me...could be that English just doesn't have the option of correctly explaining such a concept...
It can be conveyed simply by stressing the word "me" with the voice. In Italian this is done also, but the pronoun has to change form to allow it.
One can also rephrase it as:
- "I believe that it was I whom she came to see."
- "I believe that it was me that she came to see."
- "I believe that I'm the one she came to see."
......was to come and see me.... is like supposed to come and see me.. ..that is a conditional thought if am correctly getting your point. Will it be true to think that there is some or complete overlap between subjunctive and conditional in the domain of expressing non factual( meaning non indicative)?