Lyle Fletcher (personal communication, 5 January 2008) suggests that this sentence should read “do ye suppose that I know of these things of myself ”—in other words, with two of ’s. Although awkward sounding, such multiple use of of in this kind of expression can be found elsewhere in the text:
There are quite a few additional cases where the reflexive pronoun is preceded by of, but in all these cases there is no of before the direct object (if it occurs):
In fact, the example in Alma 38:6 suggests that Alma 5:45 could have originally read with no of before these things but with an of before myself (thus “do ye suppose that I know not these things of myself ”).
Of course, there are also cases where reflexive pronouns occur as intensifiers with the verb know, and in these cases there is no of (and, of course, the meaning is different):
Note that in Alma 5:45 the reflexive myself can be interpreted as a normal intensifier, as if the text read “do ye suppose that I myself know not of these things”. Since this intensifier interpretation will work, the critical text will retain the earliest reading here in Alma 5:45, without of before myself.
Summary: Maintain in Alma 5:45 the reflexive pronoun myself without any immediately preceding of; here myself can be interpreted as an intensifier.
Alma 7:11 [7:12], page 1719, line –9
Throughout this write-up for Alma 7:12, the verse is consistently but incorrectly referred to as Alma 7:11 (including twice on the next page). For each case in this write-up, Alma 7:11 should be specified as Alma 7:12.
Alma 8:6, page 1735, line –5
Here the text should read that scribe 2 of 𝓟 accidentally misread the first h in Ammonihah as a d, not the other way around.