assumed 'to be' and 'as'

Is there any differece in meaning between 'assumed to be' and 'assumed as' and what differs between 'translated as' and 'translated to be'?

Judging by the Google search, I can't determine between two 'assumed ~' and it seems 'translated to be' is wrong.

a bit of explaination of why would be a good help for me
and I'd appreciate it very much.


thank you

"... translated to be ..." isn't wrong it's just something you'd only use in some specific situation. Suppose you have something written in rather complex Classical Greek but you want to produce a version for English-speaking primary school students. You could say "It was translated to be read by children."

I can't think of any difference between "assumed to be" and "assumed as" off hand. I'd use the former ... unless there is some meaning difference after all (which I can't think of at the moment but may come to me some other time) and I want that other meaning.

I think that yes.

Thanks Jim.

What about between (the word '---' is translated to be '///') and (the word '---' is translated as '///') ?
That's what was in my mind when I was asking this question.
It's same to 'assumed ~' problem (assumed to be + noun / assumed as + noun).

Sorry that I wasn't more specific.