<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 3/4/2019 9:40 AM, mayqel qunen'oS
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAP7F2cLfq0fjQkZc=hwhWmOREwr5gqXp1mTmtLg4VazrHkkAkg@mail.gmail.com">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">In imperatives, sometimes we see in Ca'NoN {-'eghmoH}, and sometimes
we see {-choH}. For example: {yItam'eghmoH} or {yItamchoH}.
I don't know, if there is a Ca'NoN example of using just the verb,
e.g. {yItam}, but regardless whether there is indeed such a case or
not, I wonder..
Should anyone choose whatever he likes ? Is there something of the
three (-'eghmoH, - choH, or none at all), one should necessarily use
in an imperative ?</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>We see all forms. I don't think Okrand made up his mind about <b>-'egh
+ -moH</b> until KGT, so some earlier words violate it. I also
think <b>'egh + -moH</b> may not apply to every imperative on
every <i>be-</i>verb; it's used for things you have to actively
do yourself, even if that's only a grammatical pretext. I don't
think <b>-choH</b> necessarily negates the need for <b>-'egh</b>
and <b>-moH.</b><br>
</p>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
SuStel
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://trimboli.name">http://trimboli.name</a></pre>
</body>
</html>