The original sentence is incorrect.Can anyone please tell me the correct usage? One dictionary says 再 is for future or considered action. 对 不 起 请 说 再 一 次?
Gosh... is "又再" something that's rejected categorically, or only under specific circumstances?
Would the following examples be considered right or wrong?
The rule can be much more complicate than this. I think we have enough threads for 又/再 issue. Like this one:that's true 又 is to used to describe something happened again in the past.
And 再 is for furture and is always used to request people to do something again.
等他回来我又要做一次 ==> 又 "returning back to a previous state" + 要做一次 "the mental state of wanting to do something once")。等他回来我又要做一次。
再试(了一次) tried it once more, or 再试(了幾次) tried it several times more我试了试，不行；再试，还是不行。
又＋没/不 not returning back to a previous condition, state, or experience (e.g., 他又不吃了 = 又 + 不吃 "a condition of refusing to eat").Negation 又＋没/不
再＋没/不 not continuing a condition or state. 没/不 negates the condition (e.g., 再不聽话 = 再 + 不聽话).Negation 再＋没/不, 没/不＋再
I did a bit search. 又再 is used by some people. There are also people who think it is wrong. I didn't find a reliable source formally say this is right or wrong.
I'm not sure it is a simple repetition/redundancy/emphasis/etc. I think it is probably related to dialectical/regional usages.
To me, 又再 is always wrong (to the level of being incomprehensible). I wouldn't say this even by mistake.
I take back my words. 又再 is not "always" wrong. 此后又再辗转相传、先嫁一夫后又再嫁一夫、又(再行)、又(再次)、又(再看一看)、又(再三)、又(再度)、又(再一次) etc are definitely correct. Basically, if the pause is between 又 and 再 (and 再 comes together with the following word) and 再 is explicitly stressed, it can sound correct. What I wouldn't accept was to consider 又再 as a word consisting of two synonyms (which may not be what you guys meant).