The OP's first question might rely a bit on its surrounding context. His first example:
OP's example #1: His green with envy, David stares into the blue-rimmed eyes of a lemonpeel angelfish.
Suppose it was in a context such as:
His sister's eyes are red with anger. His green with envy, David stares into the blue-rimmed eyes of a lemonpeel angelfish.
.
One problem might be due to the possible ambiguity with the phrase:
His green with envy,
as it could cause problems to a reader.
If we just look at the info --
His sister's eyes are red with anger. His green with envy, -- then the writer might be able to force the interpretation he wanted by using punctuation:
His sister's eyes are red with anger. His, green with envy.
or
His sister's eyes are red with anger; his, green with envy.
which still isn't really that good. ... But that type of solution probably isn't available for the original example due to the structure of the original example, where a comma is already used to separate the leading adjunct "
His green with envy" from the main clause of the sentence. For some bad possies:
His, green with envy, David stares into the blue-rimmed eyes of a lemonpeel angelfish.
His, green with envy; David stares into the blue-rimmed eyes of a lemonpeel angelfish.
.
Involved in that original example might be the issues of: 1. fused head; and 2. ambiguity in personal pronoun forms. (And also the possibility of the author intending to use
zeugma, where he's trying to get that one troublesome phrase to have two different meanings at the same time. Maybe.)
Now suppose I took my example and switched it into 1st person:
A. My sister's eyes are red with anger. Mine green with envy, I stare into the blue-rimmed eyes of a lemonpeel angelfish.
B. My sister's eyes are red with anger. My eyes green with envy, I stare into the blue-rimmed eyes of a lemonpeel angelfish.
Those two 1st person examples seem to be okay (imo). The main difference between the #A and #B examples is that #A uses the
independent genitive form "
mine", while #B uses the
dependent genitive form "
my".
But unfortunately, the masculine personal pronoun
HE has the same shape "
his" for both its independent and dependent genitive forms. That ambiguity probably helps in confusing the reader. Besides that, some readers might be seeing a possibility of interpreting the "
his" in the original example as a possible
fused head: for a fused determiner-head "
his" that has the semantic meaning of "
his eyes".
So, I kinda thought that original example (the OP's first example) to be kinda interesting due to all the issues that it sorta touched upon.