striked again

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "striked again" is not correct in written English.
The correct form is "struck again." You can use it when referring to an event or action that has happened once more, typically in a negative or impactful context. Example: "The team was disappointed when they found out that the opposing player had struck again, scoring another goal."

⚠ May contain grammatical issues

Human-verified similar examples from authoritative sources

Similar Expressions

60 human-written examples

He struck again.

The Guardian

Rego looks stricken again.

Independent

* Fanny strikes again!

Independent

Then cancer struck again.

The New York Times

Globalism strikes again!

The New York Times

Disaster will strike again.

The New York Times

The VSPs strike again.

The New York Times

The Curse had struck again.

Independent

The fungus has struck again.

The New York Times - Arts

Now it has struck again.

The New York Times

A pike struck again.

The New York Times - Sports

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

Always use "struck again" instead of "striked again". "Striked" is not a recognized past participle of "strike".

Common error

Avoid using "striked" as the past participle of "strike". The correct form is "struck". For example, say "The team struck again" not "The team striked again".

Linguistic Context

The phrase "striked again" is intended to convey the idea of a repeated action. However, the use of "striked" is grammatically incorrect. The correct past participle of "strike" is "struck". Ludwig AI confirms this grammatical error.

Expression frequency: Missing

Frequent in

Science

0%

News & Media

0%

Formal & Business

0%

Less common in

Science

0%

News & Media

0%

Formal & Business

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, the phrase "striked again" is grammatically incorrect. The correct past participle of the verb "strike" is "struck", so the correct phrase is "struck again". As Ludwig AI confirms, "striked" is not a recognized form. Therefore, it is important to avoid using "striked again" in writing or speech. Instead, use "struck again" or other alternatives such as "hit again" or "attacked again" to accurately convey the intended meaning.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

Struck again

Uses the correct past participle form of the verb "strike".

Hit again

Replaces "strike" with "hit", conveying a similar meaning of impact or occurrence.

Attacked again

Emphasizes an aggressive or harmful recurrence.

Occurred again

Focuses on the repetition of an event or situation.

Happened again

A general way to express the recurrence of something.

Repeated itself

Indicates that a pattern or situation has recurred.

Reappeared

Highlights the return or recurrence of something that was previously absent.

Resurfaced

Suggests something that was hidden or forgotten has returned.

Returned

Simple and direct way to indicate something has come back or happened again.

Emerged once more

A more formal way of saying something has appeared again.

FAQs

What is the correct form, "striked again" or "struck again"?

The correct form is "struck again". "Striked" is not a valid past participle of the verb "strike".

Can I use "striked again" in any context?

No, "striked again" is grammatically incorrect and should not be used in any context. Use "struck again" instead.

What are some alternatives to saying "striked again"?

Since "striked again" is incorrect, use alternatives like "struck again", "hit again", or "attacked again".

Is "striked again" ever considered acceptable in informal language?

No, "striked again" is not considered acceptable even in informal language. It's always best to use the correct form, "struck again".