中国人都是好样的

没人提到consider as和consider to be嘛
Considered To Be
Put most simply, “to be” is a verb used to describe the status, traits, or characteristics of something. It is a highly irregular verb, meaning it has many different forms. “Am,” “is,” “are,” “was,” and “were” are all forms of the “to be” verb.
If you say, “Lucy is considered to be an excellent chef,” you are saying that Lucy is thought of as a good chef. “To be” here is describing a trait that Lucy is thought to have.
A key feature of the “considered to be” phrase is that the description it gives may or may not be factually correct. In the above example, we don’t know whether or not Lucy is an excellent chef; we only know that people think she is an excellent chef.

Considered As
“As” can be used in many different ways. It has two primary meanings relevant to “considered as:”
To compare two things that are considered to be the same or similar
To consider something in a specific form, context, or relationship
If you say, “Lucy is considered as excellent a chef as her mentor,” you are saying that Lucy’s cooking skills are on the same level as her mentor.
If you say, “Lucy is being considered as an excellent chef,” you are saying that people are considering labeling Lucy as an excellent chef.

0 0 回复 2022-10-12 08:40:19

1076107rcav

(A) The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region can, in part, be explained as

This answer is INCORRECT because it's saying that the similarity of Thule artifacts IS a rapid movement of people from one end of North American to another, which doesn't really make logical sense. It should say that the similarity is CAUSED BY a rapid movement of people. It's also not clear that this is only ONE explanation of many - it just says that this partly explains the similarity of artifacts.

(B) Thule artifacts being remarkably similar throughout a vast region, one explanation is

This is INCORRECT because it's unclear what the subject of the sentence is. The phrase "Thule artifacts being remarkably similar throughout a vast region" needs a verb directly after it to work because it is acting like a subject here. "One explanation" is also acting as the subject. We can't have two subjects that are just stacked on top of each other like this, with nothing connecting them.

(C) That Thule artifacts are remarkably similar throughout a vast region is, in part, explainable as

This is INCORRECT for the same reason as option A. If you read carefully, it says that the phenomenon of similar artifacts IS the movement of people, not that it was CAUSED BY a sudden movement of people. This doesn't make logical sense, so let's toss this option aside.

(D) One explanation for the remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region is that there was

This is CORRECT because it conveys the proper meaning (the movement of people is one explanation for finding similar artifacts in several places), and this is absolutely clear to readers. This isn't to say this option is perfectly grammatically correct - many of you took issue with the phrase "is that there was" being overly wordy. However, this is the best answer because it conveys its meaning the clearest - even if you could argue that you could cut a few words out.

1 0 回复 2022-08-31 10:21:01

小良冠二郎

CD网：我觉得as一般都有“作为…”“是…”“等于…”的意涵，两边应该是对等关系。你可以说：“水门事件is explained by 尼克松阵营 as a 世纪大阴谋” 因为水门事件可以和世纪大阴谋对等。但similarity 和 movement是因果关系，不是对等关系，就不能这么用。

0 0 回复 2022-06-12 00:32:15

MonicaCC

A. similarity 不能解释为movement,主干逻辑语义错
BE涉及being的用法。being+n./adj./prep短都是非正式表达，不可取。being+done可能是对的，动词被动语态的现在分词形式，强调动作的持续或反复。
C和A一样，逻辑语义错了。
lesson learn：一定要把题读全，即划线及非划线部分同等重要。

1 0 回复 2022-06-05 15:35:54

ziqi

这个题是be explained as用错了。可以说similarity 被movement解释，但是不能说similarity 被解释成为movement---两者应该是movement导致similarity的关系，而不是movement就是similarity的关系。

0 0 回复 2022-04-18 10:41:37

有名字

这个史前古文物的显著的相似性贯穿了一个广阔的地区，部分地，可以被解释为一个很快的从某一个北美边缘到另一个的人类移动。
A 相似性被解释为移动，逻辑不对
B being remarkably similar表达冗余
C 错误同A 还是把相似性解释成移动了
D 有种存在这样一个移动所以可以作为相似性的解释这种意思
E this不可以单独出现，being 冗余

0 0 回复 2022-01-12 17:41:14

355266qgmd

这个解释也太绝了，as和by的区分这么细！

0 0 回复 2021-11-14 22:51:23

Crystal8

复制：
A. similarity 不能解释为movement,主干逻辑语义错
B. being在这里作状语，冗余 错
C. 和A一样，主干逻辑语义错 similarity不能explained as a movement, 改成explained by a movement可能不会错
D.there be在这里没错，缺了它逻辑就错，zora课上讲过，similarity不是movement，但是可以说similarity是因为有movement.
E.独立主格, 这里恰好前句是主系表结构，理解为修饰主句主语similarity,所以错，同AC

1 0 回复 2021-11-03 08:29:47

169572ljdl

这个题是be explained as用错了。可以说similarity 被movement解释，但是不能说similarity 被解释成为movement---两者应该是movement导致similarity的关系，而不是movement就是similarity的关系。

4 0 回复 2021-10-30 10:13:30

175290pte

哪个读的顺嘴就选哪个

1 2 回复 2021-10-02 20:26:57