ᑲᓇᐙᐸᒻ…
2s → 1s ᑲᓇᐙᐸᒻᐦ
2s → 1p ᑲᓇᐙᐸᒥᓈᓐᐦ
2s → 3s ᑲᓇᐙᐸᒻ
2s → 3p ᑲᓇᐙᐸᒥᒡ
2s → 4 ᑲᓇᐙᐸᒫᒻᐦ
21 → 3s ᑲᓇᐙᐸᒫᑖᐤ
21 → 3p ᑲᓇᐙᐸᒫᑖᓂᒡ
21 → 4 ᑲᓇᐙᐸᒫᒫᑖᓐᐦ2p → 1s ᑲᓇᐙᐸᒥᒄ
2p → 1p ᑲᓇᐙᐸᒥᓈᓐᐦ
2p → 3s ᑲᓇᐙᐸᒫᐦᒄ
2p → 3p ᑲᓇᐙᐸᒫᐦᑯᒡ
2p → 4 ᑲᓇᐙᐸᒫᒫᐦᒄ
ᓈᑦ…
2s → 1s ᓈᔑᐦ
2s → 1p ᓈᔑᓈᓐᐦ
2s → 3s ᓈᔥ
2s → 3p ᓈᔑᒡ
2s → 4 ᓈᑖᒻᐦ
21 → 3s ᓈᑖᑖᐤ
21 → 3p ᓈᑖᑖᓂᒡ
21 → 4 ᓈᑖᒫᑖᓐᐦ2p → 1s ᓈᔑᒄ
2p → 1p ᓈᔑᓈᓐᐦ
2p → 3s ᓈᑖᐦᒄ
2p → 3p ᓈᑖᐦᑯᒡ
2p → 4 ᓈᑖᒫᐦᒄ
ᐐᒋᐦ…
2s → 1s ᐐᒋᐦᐃᐦ
2s → 1p ᐐᒋᐦᐃᓈᓐᐦ
2s → 3s ᐐᒋᐦᐃ
2s → 3p ᐐᒋᐦᐃᒡ
2s → 4 ᐐᒋᐦᐋᒻᐦ
21 → 3s ᐐᒋᐦᐋᑖᐤ
21 → 3p ᐐᒋᐦᐋᑖᓂᒡ
21 → 4 ᐐᒋᐦᐋᒫᑖᓐᐦ2p → 1s ᐐᒋᐦᐃᒄ
2p → 1p ᐐᒋᐦᐃᓈᓐᐦ
2p → 3s ᐐᒋᐦᐋᐦᒄ
2p → 3p ᐐᒋᐦᐋᐦᑯᒡ
2p → 4 ᐐᒋᐦᐋᒫᐦᒄ
Note: There is no distinction between the 2s → 1p and 2p → 1p imperative forms in any dialect of Cree. Additionally, the 21 → 3p and 21 → 4 forms in Southern East Cree dialects require …ᐋᑖᐌᓐ… while speakers of the Waswanipi dialect make use of …ᐋᑖᓐ… instead. This feature is shared with the Atikamekw and Moose Cree dialects. Lastly, most Cree dialects require that …ᐃᒻ… be inserted before the imperative inflexion in order to refer to an obviative object. The Waswanipi dialect, on the other hand, requires that …ᐋᒻ… be inserted. This, along with the preceding observation, can be attributed to the influence of the neighbouring Anishinâbemowin dialect.
Kepin's Cree Language Blog 