Redaction: This statement is a quotation from Benjamin, a source text embedded in Mormon’s abridgment. While we cannot be certain that there is no abridgment of the discourse itself (neither here nor in future examples), it seems reasonable to assume that the embedded discourse tends to remain intact and that Mormon’s interjections will be fairly clearly identified as his own. In this passage, for instance, changes in subject and or verb tense signal a switch to the speaker from Mormon’s source document.
Culture: Verse 4 is directly tied to the conception of language and learning the words of the fathers. In particular, Benjamin highlights the importance of the brass plates but ties the importance of the plates to the importance of learning “language.” Lehi was “taught in the language of the Egyptians[;] therefore he could read these engravings [brass plates].”
Benjamin’s discourse to his sons explains the gravity of learning their contents. To pass this information on, Lehi had to learn the “language of the Egyptians.” What Mormon must have omitted in its abbreviation is that the material preceding Benjamin’s discourse must have constituted a fuller explanation of why it was necessary to learn a particular language to retain literate access to the brass plates and also to the large plates produced by their own ancestor. This instruction comes after nearly four hundred years in the New World and after the Nephites have relocated among a more numerous people who did not speak the same language (Omni 1:17). Therefore, Mormon’s explanation about learning language is necessary background—not a child’s normal learning of his parents’ language but rather a specific educational effort to provide him with command of a language he would not otherwise know.
Concerning the language itself, we need to distinguish “language” from “script.” There is some possibility that the two are not the same—that the language is Hebrew but the script is Egyptian. Of course it is also possible that both language and script are “Egyptian.” The substitution of one script for another to represent a known language is not a particularly difficult task. Both Japanese and Chinese are able to use the same script. Examples of Hebrew language written with Egyptian script are attested. Hamblin cites the example of the Byblos Syllabic texts:
The earliest known example of mixing a Semitic language with modified Egyptian hieroglyphic characters is the Byblos Syllabic inscriptions (eighteenth century B.C.), from the city of Byblos on the Phoenician coast. This script is described as a “syllabary [that] is clearly inspired by the Egyptian hieroglyphic system, and in fact is the most important link known between the hieroglyphs and the Canaanite alphabet.” Interestingly enough, most Byblos Syllabic texts were written on copper plates. Thus, it would not be unreasonable to describe the Byblos Syllabic texts as a Semitic language written on metal plates in “reformed Egyptian characters,” which is precisely what the Book of Mormon describes.
Representing a language with a different script is not difficult. Learning a different language with a different script for that language is much more difficult. I suggest that the emphasis on language was on the language proper and not just the script, so I lean to the explanation that both Egyptian language and script were necessary to read the brass plates. Regardless of the language that Benjamin’s sons were speaking, the written language (and/or script) was different, requiring a focused educational effort. The result of the education was to make them both “men of understanding” and literate in the brass plates and, by extension, the large plates.
Because Lehi and Nephi had to go through the same process of learning the language of the brass plates, presumably this is why Nephi created his plates on that model. Nephi must have not only been familiar with them but attached both emotional and spiritual significance to the language/script itself. Whatever the origin of the language on the brass plates, it was sacralized for him. The experience of obtaining the brass plates had been a watershed event in young Nephi’s life, and it is not unreasonable to suppose that the physical presence of the plates would have had even greater import for him than for Lehi. We may conjecture that, in addition to replicating the medium (metal plates) and the language, Nephi may even have borrowed the physical dimensions of his plates from the brass plates. (See Behind the Text: Chapter 3, “Mormon’s Sources.”)