You worked on a specific thing and it has turned into something else; you want to name both the thing and the new identity it became.
序 · The move
1Name the actor, then 把 + the definite object that gets converted.Is this a specific, known thing going in?
2Verb + 成, fused.Does the act produce a new identity, not just a finished state?
3After 成, the noun naming what it turned into.Is the word after 成 the thing it became, not a quality like clean or done?
4Confirm the direction: the object before the verb is the start, the noun after 成 is the end.Run it forward — start → end. Swapped, would it still be true?
例 · Examples
1請你把英文take the English (the definite object, fronted)翻translate — the act worked on it成turned into; what follows is the new identity中文Chinese — what the English becomes。
A plain result complement (洗好, 喝完) leaves the object the same thing in a finished state — clean dishes, an empty cup. 成 + a noun says the object is now a different thing: 把冰變成水, the ice is gone and water stands there. One finishes the object; this one converts it into something named after 成.
V到 + a place sends the object somewhere and it comes to rest there — same object, new location. V成 + a noun changes what the object is, not where it sits. One moves the thing; this one transforms it.
成為／變成
Bare 成為/變成 (他成為老師) reports a subject arriving at a new state on its own. 把…V成… inserts an actor who does it to a fronted object: someone converts X into Y, not X turning by itself.
把英文翻中文。 → 把英文翻成中文。 (the verb needs 成 to name the conversion)
把英文翻成乾淨。 → 把英文翻成中文。 (after 成 sits a noun it became, not a quality word)
把中文翻成英文。 (when you meant English→Chinese) → 把英文翻成中文。 (the start goes before the verb, the end after 成 — direction is fixed)
English 'turn X into Y' / 'translate X into Y' carries the conversion inside one verb plus 'into'; learners either drop 成 entirely or treat the order loosely, and may put the new identity before the verb where the source belongs.