4 Nephi 1:16 Textual Variants

Royal Skousen
and there were no envyings nor strifes nor tumults nor whoredoms nor [lyeings >% lyeing 1|lyings ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRST] nor murders nor no manner of lasciviousness

Here scribe 2 of 𝓟 initially wrote the plural lyings (spelled as lyeings), then erased the final s. The 1830 edition has the plural lyings. One definitely expects the plural lyings among all the conjoined plural nouns (envyings, strifes, tumults, whoredoms, and murders). Since scribe 2 was not inclined to consciously emend the text, the odds are that the original manuscript read in the singular and that scribe 2 of 𝓟 initially wrote the plural because he expected it. Scribe 2 caught his error immediately and erased the plural s, thus choosing, it would appear, to follow his copytext, 𝓞. If this is the case, it means that the 1830 typesetter also made the change to the plural lyings, perhaps because the singular lying seemed so out of place given the other plural nouns.

This example has already been discussed in some detail under Alma 12:1, 3. In Alma 12:1 we have evidence that scribe 2 of 𝓟 tended to accidentally write the plural s for lying; and in Alma 12:3 we have evidence that the 1830 typesetter was willing to emend the number for lying, although in that case his change was from the plural to the singular (here in 4 Nephi 1:16 he appears to have changed the singular to the plural). As explained under Alma 12:1, 3, usage elsewhere in the text argues for the plural lyings as the reading of the original text here in 4 Nephi 1:16. In other words, during Joseph Smith’s dictation of the text, Oliver Cowdery (the presumed scribe in 𝓞 for 4 Nephi) seems to have neglected to write the plural s for lyings. Elsewhere in 𝓞, Oliver frequently miswrote a singular for an original plural, as in the following examples of errors where the plural is expected and nearby words are in the plural:

In all but one of these cases, Oliver caught his error in 𝓞 (in Alma 45:2 he corrected Reckord to reckords only when he copied the text from 𝓞 into 𝓟). In addition, the example in Alma 30:28 shows that such an error can occur in a conjunctive structure containing a whole series of plural nouns (although in this case Oliver caught his error in 𝓞).

The critical text will therefore accept the 1830 reading, lyings (also scribe 2’s initial reading), as the correct reading in 4 Nephi 1:16. 𝓞 probably read in the singular, as lying (perhaps spelled as lieing by Oliver Cowdery), but this would have been an error for lyings.

Summary: Accept in 4 Nephi 1:16 the plural lyings (the reading of the 1830 edition and the initial reading in 𝓟) since all the other conjuncts are in the plural and usage elsewhere in the text supports the plural in such a context.

Analysis of Textual Variants of the Book of Mormon, Part. 6

References