Is there some poetic license in 止めど or is it following classical grammar?


This line is from the lyrics of a song called TSUNAMI

> 止めど流る清か水よ  
>  消せど燃ゆる魔性の火よ

I had to look up the dictionary to understand what ど does in that line, and
found an entry with this example.

> 呼べど答へず、捜せど見えず

If I understood correctly, 呼べど＝呼んでも and 捜せど＝捜しても; and ど is linked to the
ば-form.

Then shouldn't 止めど流る be 止めれど流る because we say 止めれば, but I'm not sure because
流る and 燃ゆる is already not following modern grammar, and maybe also for 止めど.

Is classical grammar applied to 止めど, or is the author using some poetic
license to match the number of moras?




I would say that this とめど is "grammatically incorrect". Strictly speaking, it
should be とめ **れ** ど, as you suggested. However, since most people are not
good at classical grammar, such mistakes are not uncommon even in lyrics
written by famous artists. They are hardly noticed by ordinary native
speakers.

[This page](http://kotobakai.seesaa.net/article/8180059.html) has an
interesting hypothesis as to why such a mistake occurred in this song:

> 「止めどなく」という言葉があり（止めるところがない）、これと混線したために「止めど流るる」という言葉が使われたのでしょう。

In modern Japanese, we have an i-adjective
[とめどない](https://jisho.org/word/%E6%AD%A2%E3%82%81%E3%81%A9%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84)
("endless"). This is actually a shortened form of とめどころない (どころ = "place") and
has nothing to do with the conjunctive auxiliary ど. However, the existence of
this word may have led him to think that とめど was the correct conjugation of
とめる. Personally, I had to spend quite a few minutes rechecking dictionaries
and grammar rules before concluding that this とめど was a "mistake". It's
because I was somehow more familiar with the とめど sound itself than with とめれど.

Historically, とめる (transitive "to stop") has several classical variants, but
none of them will conjugate to とめど, anyway.

  * とめる (modern, ichidan) → とめれど
  * [とどむ](https://kobun.weblio.jp/content/%E6%AD%A2%E3%82%80) (classic, nidan) → とどむれど
  * [とむ](https://kobun.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%A8%E3%82%80) (classic, nidan) → とむれど

* * *

By the way, this is not the only "mistake" in the lyrics. ながる is a classical
version of the modern ながれる, but when it is used to modify a noun (in this
case, 清か水), we must use its attributive form, which is ながるる. In the next line,
however, he employed another archaic verb
[もゆ](https://kobun.weblio.jp/content/%E7%87%83%E3%82%86) and correctly
conjugated it to もゆる to modify a noun (魔性の火).

This probably means that he _knew_ the basic grammatical rule, but
deliberately ignored it in the first line to fit the metrics of the song. That
is, he wanted the two lines to share the same rhythm:

[code]

    とめど  ながる  さ や かみず  よ 
    けせど  もゆる  ましょうのひ  よ
    
[/code]

While とめどながる might be "wrong" and とめれどながるる might be correct, almost no one
notices or dares to point out minor grammatical problems with archaic
expressions that appear in pop songs.




One of pseudo-forms of verbs is 未然形{みぜんけい}, called Irrealis in Wiktionary,
called _a-_ stem by Frellesvig (2010).

One of finite forms of verbs is 已然形{いぜんけい}, called Realis in Wiktionary,
called **Exclamatory** by Frellesvig (2010), called **Evidential** by Vovin
(2020).

Form with suffix 〜ば added to 未然形{みぜんけい} in Old/Middle/Classical Japanese is
called "Conditional conjunction" in Wiktionary, called **Conditional** by
Frellesvig (2010), called **Conditional Converb** by Vovin (2020).

Form with suffix 〜ば added to 已然形{いぜんけい} in Old/Middle/Classical Japanese is
called "Causal conjunction" in Wiktionary, called **Provisional** by
Frellesvig (2010), called **Conjunctive Converb** by Vovin (2020).

Form with suffix 〜ど added to 已然形{いぜんけい} is called "Contrasting conjunction" in
Wiktionary, called **Concessive** by Frellesvig (2010), called **Concessive
Converb** by Vovin (2020).

Frellesvig (2010, pages 53, 55, 57, 133):

> The following summarizes main functions of each category and gives for
> reference the forms of the verb _sin-_ 'dies'.
>
> ...
>
> Exclamatory ( _sinure_ ) This form is mainly used to form the predicate of
> an exclamative main clause, sometimes on its own, but often in correlation
> with the focus particle _koso_ (see 8.9.2). The exclamatory can also
> function as the predicate in a subordinate clause, often translated with one
> of a number of conjunctional meanings: 'if, when, although, because'.
> Usually it is accompanied by some modal or other particle. It also functions
> as a combining stem, selected by some suffixes, see 3.4.4.
>
> ...
>
> Conditional ( _sinaba_ ) The conditional concludes a conditional subordinate
> clause 'if'.
>
> Provisional ( _sinureba_ ) The provisional concludes a provisional,
> temporal, or causal subordinate clause, most of which can be rendered by
> English 'as'.
>
> Concessive ( _sinuredo_ ) The concessive concludes a concessive subordinate
> clause 'although, even though'; the concessive is often followed by the
> particle _mo_ with no discernible difference in meaning.
>
> ...
>
> 3.7.4 Conjunctional particles
>
> Conjunctional particles follow finite verb forms to form subordinate
> clauses: (...) _**to**_ (a) concessive '(even) if, although' (in this use,
> often followed by _mo_ : _**tomo**_ ; cf. here the etymologically related
> concessive formant _-do(mo)_ ), (b) purposive 'in order to, (so) that';

Vovin (2020, pages 572, 574, 672):

> 3.2.1.3 Evidential _-ure_ ~ _-e_ ~ _-re_
>
> The evidential suffix’s main allomorph is _-ure_ , which is found after all
> vowel verbs (except strong vowel verbs, where it becomes just _-re_ ), and
> all irregular verbs (except _r_ -irregular verbs). After all consonant verbs
> and _r_ -irregular verbs the allomorph _-ɛ_ ~ _-e_ - is used, according to
> the morphonological rule of _-r-_ loss mentioned in chapter 2, section
> 2.5.4.
>
> ...
>
> The evidential is used by itself as a final form. In most cases it appears
> when the particle _kǝsǝ_ precedes it in the sentence, replacing the final
> predication suffix. (...) Nevertheless, in contrast to Middle Japanese,
> where _koso_ always triggers the change of the final predication form to the
> evidential, there are many cases in Western Old Japanese when the evidential
> can be used as a final predication form without the preceding _kǝsǝ_.
>
> Although it is difficult to say exactly what the evidential form means, I
> believe that used in isolation, its function is close to that of the
> exclamation point in English; in any case, it obviously indicates some kind
> of emphatic statement. The fact that it is used together with _kǝsǝ_ , a
> strong emphatic particle, further supports this proposal. I call it
> evidential because frequently it emphasizes fact(s) that should be evident
> to the speaker or his/her addressee. Otherwise, the evidential is usually
> followed by the conjunctive converb _- mba_ or the concessive converb _-
> ndǝ_/ _- ndǝmǝ_, usages that I survey below in the sections dedicated to
> them.
>
> ...
>
> 3.2.2.1.5 Concessive Converb _- ndǝ[mǝ]_
>
> The concessive converb _- ndǝ[mǝ]_ has just one allomorph, but it has two
> variants: _- ndǝ_ and _- ndǝmǝ_ with no overt functional difference. The
> former appears to be its original form and the latter in all likelihood
> represents historically a combination of _- ndǝ_ with the following emphatic
> particle _mǝ_. The concessive converb _- ndǝ[mǝ]_ always follows the
> evidential form of a verb. In a diachronic perspective this probably means
> that it was once a bound noun that became a converb suffix through the
> process of grammaticalization, although we can no longer recover the exact
> meaning of this bound noun.
>
> ...
>
> The concessive converb _- ndǝ[mǝ]_ is probably the most versatile converb
> since the evidential form it follows immediately can be preceded by more
> suffixes and bound auxiliaries than any other converb. In contrast to the
> conjunctive converb that cannot combine with any evidential forms of mood
> markers and to the conditional converb that can combine only with the
> subjunctive mood suffix, the concessive converb can combine with both
> tentative mood markers, but does not combine with the subjunctive mood
> suffix.
>
> The concessive converb _- ndǝ[mǝ]_ has only one function: introducing a
> concessive clause

* * *

Example of some conjugated forms of 2 verbs in Old Japanese:

  * intransitive consonant-stem (四段) verb 止む{やむ} ("to stop (itself)")
  * transitive weak-vowel-stem (二段) verb 止む{やむ} (which is ancestor of modern transitive strong-vowel-stem (一段) verb 止める{やめる})

| Consonant-stem verb | Weak-vowel-stem verb  
---|---|---  
Stem | yam- | yame-  
終止形 / Terminal / Conclusive | yamu (止む / やむ) (→ modern yamu (止む / やむ)) | yamu
(止む / やむ) (→ modern yameru (止む / やむ))  
連体形 / Attributive / Adnominal | yamu (止む / やむ) (→ modern yamu (止む / やむ)) |
yamuru (止むる / やむる) (→ modern yameru (止む / やむ))  
未然形 / Irrealis / _a-_ stem | yama- (止ま / やま) (→ modern yama- (止ま / やま)) |
yame- (止め / やめ) (→ modern yame- (止め / やめ))  
Conditional | yamamba (止まば / やまば) | yamemba (止めば / やめば)  
已然形 / Realis / Exclamatory | yame (止め / やめ) | yamure (止むれ / やむれ)  
Provisional | yamemba (止めば / やめば) (→ modern yameba (止めば / やめば)) | yamuremba
(止むれば / やむれば) (→ modern yamereba (止めれば / やめれば))  
Concessive | yamendǝ (止めど / やめど) | yamurendǝ (止むれど / やむれど)  
  
In Early Middle Japanese, vowels _(w)o_ and _ǝ_ merged into _o_.

In Late Middle Japanese, 已然形{いぜんけい}/Realis/Exclamatory was lost as
independent, distinct word form, but remained for formation of derived forms
(only _-ba_ / 〜ば in Modern Japanese).

Provisional has taken conditional function.

In Modern Japanese, the only remnant of Concessive ど is in
conjunction/particle けれ **ども** (informal variants: けれど, けども, けど), whose けれ
part is 已然形{いぜんけい}/Realis/Exclamatory of unknown source (see some theories in
Etymology section
[here](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E3%81%91%E3%82%8C%E3%81%A9%E3%82%82)).

* * *

~~That song currently uses 止めど{やめど} form of intransitive verb 止む{やむ}, but for
semantics to make more sense here, it should use 止むれど{やむれど} form of transitive
verb 止む{やむ}.~~

That song currently uses 止めど{とめど}, which is incorrect, as explained in
naruto's answer.

Additionally 流る{ながる}, which is 終止形{しゅうしけい}/Terminal/Conclusive form, should be
changed to 連体形{れんたいけい}/Attributive/Adnominal form 流るる{ながるる}.

* * *

Sources:

Bjarke Frellesvig 2010 "A History of the Japanese Language"

Alexander Vovin 2020 "A Descriptive and Comparative Grammar of Western Old
Japanese"

