On 7/28/2016 3:10 PM, Alan Anderson wrote:
ja' André Müller:
No one has ever said anything about {-chuqmoH} or {-'eghmoH} because it was clear to everyone how they worked and it was probably never an issue to anyone. ja' SuStel: Ha! Ha-ha-ha! That's a good one.
No way is that the reason. No one ever tries to use them together, or if they do, they're told it's ungrammatical, or questionable. ja' André: Who tells them? You? ;) No, not him. In fact, SuStel regularly reminds people that they *should* use {-'eghmoH} when putting an imperative prefix on a verb expressing a state or quality.
Yes, let's limit this to *-chuq,* which has different rules than *-'egh.* Clearly I can't produce a survey of the list's history, looking for objections to *-chuq* and *-moH* together, but I would point out that the original poster was confused at seeing *muvchuqmoH* take an object despite the rules in TKD. He could only cite a /feeling/ that it was wrong. Where did this feeling come from? -- SuStel http://trimboli.name