又 vs 再 a grammatical question

[歐博思]

I have been reading this recently:

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CBMQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fling.nthu.edu.tw%2Ffaculty%2Fthlin%2Fpdf%2Fyou_and_zai.pdf&rct=j&q=grammatical%20analysis%20of%20you%20and%20zai%20in%20mandarin%20chinese&ei=_RGrTbDGKI6avAOSq5WOCg&usg=AFQjCNGN3xYwQMlUaBLcFCDVIA9w0sXSMA&cad=rja

They claim that past events can use 再 and future events can sometimes use 又, but this is slightly irrelevant to my question below.

My question is as such: How would using either 又 or 再 in the following sentences change meaning?

"Could you again bring me a serving of potatoes?" (asking 服务员 about hot pot ingredients)

1)麻烦你再来一份土豆

vs

2)麻烦你又来一份土豆 ----- is using 又 here just plain wrong?

vs

3)又一次麻烦你再来一份土豆 ----- English "could I trouble you once more to bring me another bowl of potatoes?"

I had just asked for 服务员 to bring another bowl of noodles, but I wanted to emphasize troubling her again to bring another bowl of potatoes. Since I had already ordered a bowl of potatoes I feel that #3 sentence's 再 is ok, but what if I wanted to order something new that I didn't already order? Such as 鸡肉。 Could I say:

4) 又一次麻烦你来一份鸡肉.

I didn't write down a 再 in front of 来 because it is the first time to order chicken, so the only repetition in my sentence is the repeating of me once again asking for her service.

[Chinadoog]

麻烦你又来一份土豆 - 这个时候不能用‘又’

[Tiana]

1)麻烦你再来一份土豆 : ok

2)麻烦你又来一份土豆 : x

3)又一次麻烦你再来一份土豆: x

4)又一次麻烦你来一份鸡肉: x

I think you can't use 又 in this context for future events.

[歐博思]

For some reason I feel it would be a bit unnatural, but could you say:

 

再麻烦你再来一份土豆？ Double 再 to express the action of troubling them to bring another again, say for instance if your table mates were not in agreement about the number of potato plates, and when the waiter arrived with the new potatoes, you suddenly asked for "another another"?

[Altair]

Thanks for the original link to 'Again' and 'Again': A Grammatical Analysis of You and Zai in Mandarin Chinese.  Another interesting study is: Schematic meaning and pragmatic inference: the Mandarin adverbs hai, you and zai.

 

The first link had several sentences that struck me as strange, either on their own or as translations of the English given.  Could someone comment on their acceptability?  (I have transcribed them into characters to make them easier to read.  The originals are in unaccented pinyin, so I am making educated guesses as to the correct characters.)

 

1a. 晓明前天给小华一百块,昨天再给他两百。

'Xiaoming gave Xiaohua one hundred dollars the day before yesterday, and [he] gave him two hundred (more) again yesterday.'

 

I would have translated this as:

 

1b. 小明前天给了小华一百块,昨天又给了他两百。

 

Are both versions correct?  If so, what is the difference?

 

2a (Xiaoming went to Taipei the day before yesterday for some work.  But the work wasn't finished.  So--)

晓明昨天再去台北，把工作做完。

'Xiaoming went to Taipei again yesterday, to finish up the work.'

 

Can you also say:

 

2b. 晓明昨天又去台北，把工作做完。

 

 

3a.(Xiaoming bought a book the day before yesterday--)

晓明昨天再买两本书。

'Xiaoming bought two books again yesterday.'

 

To my ear, the English does not fit the situation, since it implies two books were bought on both occasions.  I would instead say: "Xiaoming bought another two books yesterday."  Is the Chinese okay?

 

Can I also say,

 

3b. 晓明昨天又买了两本书。

 

If I can, how many books am I saying were bought?  1 + 2 or 2 + 2 or either?

[Michaelyus]

You are aware that 再 does not take perfective 了.

 

Regarding example 1, the use of 再 points to imperfective aspect (and so there is an absence of 了 in both clauses). Hence there is an almost causal connection between the first action and the second (e.g. as if to say the deal was to give NT$300 in total). The version with 又 + 了 does not hint at such a connection. Whether 1b. actually disallows that connection, that's another problem (I would tend to think that it does, in the absence of further context; but it perhaps forms an implication or a judgement call on it).

 

 

In example 2, I think the difference of "attitude" is clearer. The evaluative colouring that comes with 又 is evident here, compared with the more matter-of-fact continuation of an implied action with 再 in the same position.

 

In 3a. your intuition about the English has some truth in it. It's a well-known fact that 再 may often be translated as "another". Whether "again" covers the whole object or not can vary in English too though: "He again bought two books" has the whole-action-with-objects-repeated implication a lot stronger than "He bought two books again".

 

Regarding 3b. - isn't that almost the same sentence as on page 6 of that article? I'd interpret it as "...bought two books again", as in ? + 2.

 

Page 22 of the paper contrasts 晓明又吃五个苹果了 with 晓明又吃了五个苹果. The former, with its sentence-final 了, has the completion of the whole event with the objects repeated, while the latter with its perfective verb particle 了 leaves the implication open.

[Altair]

Thanks for the reply.

I did indeed assume that 再 was incompatible with perfective meanings. I think my difficulty is that the English translations seem to call for a perfective understanding. In other words, the two don't seem to match.

The Chinese also seems strange on its own. To me it seems to mean: "Xiaoming, giving Xiaoming $100 the day before yesterday, was giving him an additional $200 yesterday." But I am not sure what that actually means. The two clauses don't relate well.

You mention a possible causal connection. How would you translate that? "Xiaoming was to give Xiaohua $100 the day before yesterday and an additional $209 yesterday"?

2a. seemed more reasonable. It seems to me that the use of 再 may be necessary to exclude the purpose clause from the scope of the repetition.

[Michaelyus]

1a. 晓明前天给小华一百块，昨天再给他两百。

'Xiaoming gave Xiaohua one hundred dollars the day before yesterday, and [he] gave him another two hundred yesterday.'

 

The use of 再 in such cases will certainly produce a reading that relies on some sort of context. "Another" in English, just as "additional" as above, does the same thing.

 

(What I'm unsure about is the syntactic properties of the two, but that's really another question).

[melodyhuang1]

this is a good question! En......in China, sometimes, 又=再 it means once more.

but it can't replace each other in a sentence (sometimes) Chinese is broad and profound.

 

the situation of 又=再，pls see below:

我上一次去了北京，这一次我又去了，（或，我再去一次北京）

I went to Beijing last time, and this time I went to Beijing once again.

 

the situation of 又≠再,pls see below: is the order sequence.

我先去北京，再去西安。

I will go  to Beijing first, and then is Xian.

 

I am Chinese, nice to meet you here.

[Michaelyus]

I found a semantic-level trans-lingual analysis too: Tovena & Donazzan (2008) On Ways of Repeating (or PDF version). It is proposed that 再 does not require a the time of speaking to be identified (再's asserted event must follow reference time, but is unordered with respect to utterance time). From this they seem to derive the incremental property of 再, as stated above, and provide an explanation for why some events do not take 再 (homogeneous predicates). The paper goes onto delimit related properties of 再 (especially in comparison with Italian anche, which covers English "also" as well as "again").

 

Another interesting 又/再 distinction I found in another article by the same authors (mais cet article est en français): Donazzan, Schwer, Tovena (2010) Les adverbes zài du chinois mandarin et encore dans le système temporel de Reichenbach. Seriously technical, but this is an interesting point:

担心，你又要把书弄掉了！is grammatical, while *担心，你要再把书弄掉了！is not. They put this down to the fundamentally [+virtual] property (could one say irrealis?) that 再 has. 

[歐博思]

 

"You are aware that 再 does not take perfective 了."

 

"Regarding example 1, the use of 再 points to imperfective aspect..."

(example 1 referred in the quote is Post #5 Sentence 1a)

 

 

1）

#65 from here:

小明喝了两杯牛奶

Xiaoming  drink-PERFTV two-glass milk

 

（然后）再吃五个苹果

and-then again  eat-PERFTV five-CL apples        <--------------------------- Granted, no 了, but still marked as perfective. Even has a quantity of apples. 'Playing the tape' to ensure the action covered five apples would not need a 了 here???

 

总共花了五百块

altogether spend-PERFTV five-hundred  dollar

 

 

2）

Following my first observation in this post above -- my own combination of #64 and 65 from the same link:

 

1a.

小明喝了两杯牛奶

又吃五个苹果

总共花了五百块

 

1b.

小明喝了两杯牛奶

又吃了五个苹果

总共花了五百块

 

2a.

小明喝了两杯牛奶

（然后）再吃五个苹果

总共花了五百块

 

2b.

小明喝了两杯牛奶

（然后）再吃了五个苹果

总共花了五百块

 

What would be the differences between these 4 sentences?

[flowertea]

Between 4 sentences above, 1b is correct, 小明喝了两杯牛奶,又吃了五个苹果,总共花了五百块。and the others are not right.

 

As for the tenses, 再 is usually used in the future tense, and 又 can be used both. But the means are not very the same when 再 and 又 are used in the future tense. They emphasize different aspects in the future tense.

小明明天又要来了。(It means he often comes; it’s a regular thing. It emphasizes a kind of repetition.)

小明明天会再来。(It doesn’t mean he often comes definitely. It only means he will come again. He may comes often or may not. For instance, he just comes here to look for someone the first time, but that person is not in, so he will come again next day.)

 

What is the function of  又 in a future tense? 

Simply speaking, it means some things haven’t happened yet, but someone already has a plan or makes a decision. Or some things will happen definitely as a regular thing. It also sounds like it’s time to do something again. The basic common used pattern is 又要/该...了。

Eg: (1)晓明明天又要来了。Xiaoming will come again tomorrow. (It means he often comes, it’s a regular thing.)  (2)可能又要下雨了。Perhaps it is going to be raining again. (It means it always rains here, it’s a regular thing.) (3) 又该吃药了。It’s time to take medicine again.

 

Therefore, the sentence "你又要把书弄掉了"  is with the pattern of 又要/该...了 and means that person always "把书弄掉", and*担心，你要再把书弄掉了！is not proper.

 

And about some sentences in the another post, I have the following suggestions.

晓明昨天再去台北，把工作做完。×

为了把工作做完，晓明昨天又去了台北. ok

(Xiaoming went to Taibei yesterday again to finish his work.)

晓明昨天又去了台北，把工作做完了。ok

(Xiaoming went to Taibei yesterday again and finished his work. ) 

为了把工作做完，晓明要再去一次台北。ok

(Xiaoming is going to Taibei again to finish his work.)

 

[歐博思]

Flowertea, what do you think about post #5's 1a and 1b? 

 

 

 

1a. 晓明前天给小华一百块,昨天再给他两百。

'Xiaoming gave Xiaohua one hundred dollars the day before yesterday, and [he] gave him two hundred (more) again yesterday.'

 

I would have translated this as:

 

1b. 小明前天给了小华一百块,昨天又给了他两百。

 

Are both versions correct?  If so, what is the difference?

[melodyhuang1]

flowertea: Fabulous!

[Michaelyus]

 

（然后）再吃五个苹果

and-then again  eat-PERFTV five-CL apples        <--------------------------- Granted, no 了, but still marked as perfective. Even has a quantity of apples. 'Playing the tape' to ensure the action covered five apples would not need a 了 here???

 

Hmmm... interesting. It still holds that perfective 了 is excluded from the verb though where 再 is. I have to say, I'm not too sure whether 再 excludes all perfective readings (probably not ...?). 

 

Having a specific quantity of five apples - that is quite commonplace with 再, as it can also be translated "another".

 

As explained in the paper, what 再 is repeating can vary. Here, the previous action does not include eating five apples and specifically five apples; it doesn't even include eating. The "repeated" action is drinking milk, which has morphed into eating apples after being "repeated". 

 

Here, the nuance of connection as a running thread is retained. In contrast, the 又吃了 of 64) in that paper to my ears makes any connection result-focused, as opposed to "cause"-focused. 

 

Also interestingly, I'd translate this into English with "also" instead of "again". English "again" requires the action at the very least to be repeated, whereas in Chinese only the general "idea" is necessary for 再/又. Contrast this with 小明喝了两杯牛奶，也吃了五个苹果... I'd not allow 才觉得饱 in this case. But with 总共花了五百块, I think it'd be OK. 

 

 

We're moving into very deep waters here, aren't we? Such 再/又 distinctions seem to be very subtle; I'm glad you asked this question!

 

 

[flowertea]

Thank all of you.

 

欧博思，about post #5's

1a 晓明前天给小华一百块,昨天再给他两百。- wrong.    

1b 小明前天给了小华一百块,昨天又给了他两百。- correct.

 

And the followings are the ones I didn’t discuss yesterday.

Also in the post #5

3a 晓明昨天再买两本书。- wrong

3b 晓明昨天又买了两本书。- correct (The background is that Xiaoming bought a book the day before yesterday.)

Altair asked how many books total. It should be 1+2=3. We say he bought two books again literally, but it means another two books accurately.

 

About post  #6's

晓明又吃五个苹果了 --- wrong

晓明又吃了五个苹果 --- correct

This word order is another thing about “le”. It’s nothing with 又 in this case. If there is a modifier such as number or quantity, we can put “了” at the end of a sentence in the past tense.

晓明买了很多东西。--- correct      晓明买很多东西了。---wrong

 

About post #9

Melody huang1非常高兴您给我的评价！谢谢，您上次发的一个句子我有一点小小的不解。

 “我上一次去了北京，这一次我又去了，（或，我再去一次北京）I went to Beijing last time, and this time I went to Beijing once again.”

I don’t think we can use 再here. If we use 再，it should be like the following:

我上一次去了北京，这次我想/要再去一次。

不知道您是要表达这个意思吗？

[melodyhuang1]

你好，Flowertea~其实上次我已经回了你这个贴子啦，只是不知为何没有显示出来。是的，当初就是急着举例子，结果没有注意到一些细节上的。你的分析没有错。我下次会注意这些小细节的~谢谢分享~

[歐博思]

I appreciate everyone's continued input thus far! There's been some good links and interesting insight. Maybe this could become the 又 vs 再 sticky? 

[melodyhuang1]

Dear 欧博思：

we would like to help you at any time..