在日常生活中如何表達對現在的看到的情況，聽到的內容來進行推測，如何表達對已經，現在，將來發生的事情進行推測。動詞+는 것 같다這個語法表示「根據看到或聽到的情況推測某事正在發生或是事實」，中文可譯為「看起來……」、「好像……」、「似乎……」，這個用法是韓語中最常用表達推測，不僅出現在日常對話，也常見於新聞、觀察敘述、作文與 TOPIK II 考題中。
語法結構
結構
使用時機
中文意思
動詞 + 는 것 같다
針對現在進行的狀態推測
看起來……、好像……
動詞 + (으)ㄴ 것 같다
針對已發生的事推測
好像已經……
動詞 + (으)ㄹ 것 같다
針對未來的事做預測
好像會……
使用要點
要點
說明
表非確認性的判斷
說話人根據所見所感推測某事，但不保證完全正確
可用於動詞、形容詞、名詞이다
結構類似，但變化略有差異（本文重點放在動詞）
敬語常見形式：「것 같아요」
禮貌、柔和的推測語氣，口語書面皆通用
寫作時可靈活表達「看法」與「不確定態度」
是 TOPIK II 作文中模糊推測表述的常見語法
例句
밖에 비가 오는 것 같아요. 外面好像在下雨。
지금 친구가 도서관에 있는 것 같아요. 朋友現在好像在圖書館。
그 사람은 나를 좋아하는 것 같아요. 那個人好像喜歡我。
학샌들이 시험을 준비하는 것 같아요.學生們看起來正在準備考試。（過去式：는 것 같다 → 는 것 같았어요）
Until recently many astronomers believed that asteroids travel about the solar system unaccompanied by satellites. These astronomers assumed this because they considered asteroid-satellite systems inherently unstable. Theoreticians could have told them otherwise: even minuscule bodies in the solar system can theoretically have satellites, as long as everything is in proper scale. If a bowling ball were orbiting about the Sun in the asteroid belt, it could have a pebble orbiting it as far away as a few hundred radii (or about 50 meters) without losing the pebble to the Sun’s gravitational pull.
第一段的前兩句非常明顯地展現出作者的語氣—帶有批判性回顧的立場。
Until recently many astronomers believed… These astronomers assumed this because…
Observations now suggest that asteroid satellites may exist not only in theory but also in reality Several astronomers have noticed, while watching asteroids pass briefly in front of stars, that something besides the known asteroid sometimes blocks out the star as well. Is that something a satellite?
第一段還停留在「理論上說得通」，而這一段開始進入「眼睛看到了什麼」。這個從 theory → observation 的邏輯轉折，是所有自然科學文章中最關鍵的「信度構建軌跡」。
The most convincing such report concerns the asteroid Herculina, which was due to pass in front of a star in 1978. Astronomers waiting for the predicted event found not just one occultation, or eclipse, of the star, but two distinct drops in brightness. One was the predicted occultation, exactly on time. The other, lasting about five seconds, preceded the predicted event by about two minutes. The presence of a secondary body near Herculina thus seemed strongly indicated. To cause the secondary occultation, an unseen satellite would have to be about 45 kilometers in diameter, a quarter of the size of Herculina, and at a distance of 990 kilometers from the asteroid at the time. These values are within theoretical bounds, and such an asteroid-satellite pair could be stable.
這一段是整篇文章中觀測邏輯的核心內容，也是第一個讓理論與實際觀測結果出現吻合的重要時刻。
The most convincing such report concerns the asteroid Herculina…
這段也代表了理論與觀測的首次交匯——前面段落說理論上 asteroid 可以有衛星，而這段告訴你：「我們觀測到的數據，剛好也落在理論能接受的範圍內」。這種相互吻合，是科學論證中最強的說服力來源。
With the Herculina event, apparent secondary occultations became “respectable”—and more commonly reported. In fact, so common did reports of secondary events become that they are now simply too numerous for all of them to be accurate. Even if every asteroid has as many satellites as can be fitted around it without an undue number of collisions, only one in every hundred primary occultations would be accompanied by a secondary event (one in every thousand if asteroidal satellite systems resembled those of the planets).
Even if every asteroid has as many satellites as can be fitted around it without an undue number of collisions…
這是虛擬條件句（even if），表示「即便我們做出最樂觀的假設……」。其後接續：
…only one in every hundred primary occultations would be accompanied by a secondary event (one in every thousand if asteroidal satellite systems resembled those of the planets).
Yet even astronomers who find the case for asteroid satellites unconvincing at present say they would change their minds if a photoelectric record were made of a well-behaved secondary event. By “well-behaved” they mean that during occultation the observed brightness must drop sharply as the star winks out and must rise sharply as it reappears from behind the obstructing object, but the brightness during the secondary occultation must drop to that of the asteroid, no higher and no lower. This would make it extremely unlikely that an airplane or a glitch in the instruments was masquerading as an occulting body.
Yet even astronomers who find the case for asteroid satellites unconvincing at present say they would change their minds if a photoelectric record were made of a well-behaved secondary event.
這句話中的 “the case for…” 是學術寫作中常見的結構，意指「支持某一主張的理據總和」。也就是說，即使目前仍有天文學家覺得「支持小行星衛星存在」的證據不夠充分，他們也願意在面對更強證據時修正看法。
所謂更強的證據，是什麼？
By ‘well-behaved’ they mean that during occultation…
這裡的 well-behaved 看似輕鬆，其實是數據與理論高度吻合的術語。它的標準是雙重的：
星光在被遮蔽時亮度要快速下降，像星星「眨眼」一樣；
在遮蔽過程中，亮度要降到與小行星一致的水平，不多也不少。
這樣的亮度曲線才足以排除其他可能的誤判來源，例如：
This would make it extremely unlikely that an airplane or a glitch in the instruments was masquerading as an occulting body.
