  For functors $L:\A\to \B$ and $R:\B\to \A$ between any categories $\A$ and
$\B$, a {\em pairing} is defined by maps, natural in $A\in \A$ and $B\in \B$,
$$\xymatrix{\Mor_\B (L(A),B) \ar@<0.5ex>[r]^{\alpha} & \Mor_\A
(A,R(B))\ar@<0.5ex>[l]^{\beta}}.$$
  $(L,R)$ is an {\em adjoint pair} provided $\alpha$ (or $\beta$) is a
bijection. In this case the composition $RL$ defines a monad on the category
$\A$, $LR$ defines a comonad on the category $\B$, and there is a well-known
correspondence between monads (or comonads) and adjoint pairs of functors.
  For various applications it was observed that the conditions for a unit of a
monad was too restrictive and weakening it still allowed for a useful
generalised notion of a monad. This led to the introduction of {\em weak
monads} and {\em weak comonads} and the definitions needed were made without
referring to this kind of adjunction. The motivation for the present paper is
to show that these notions can be naturally derived from pairings of functors
$(L,R,\alpha,\beta)$ with $\alpha = \alpha\dcirc \beta\dcirc \alpha$ and $\beta
= \beta \dcirc\alpha\dcirc\beta$. Following closely the constructions known for
monads (and unital modules) and comonads (and counital comodules), we show that
any weak (co)monad on $\A$ gives rise to a regular pairing between $\A$ and the
category of {\em compatible (co)modules}.
