4 ms·

“To our surprise” and “surprisingly” do not mean the same thing. “Surprisingly” means that something is objectively surprising, or that a “reasonable man” would

“To our surprise” and “surprisingly” do not mean the same thing. “Surprisingly” means that something is objectively surprising, or that a “reasonable man” would be surprised by it. “Surprisingly, hot water freezes faster than cold water.” That is pretty objectively surprising. “To our surprise” means only that you were surprised by it. It’s more humble because it allows for a reader to be smarter/wiser and not be surprised. “I thought Frodo was going to die at the end of the Return of the King, but to my surprise he did not.” “Surprisingly” wouldn’t be correct here since not everyone would have made that prediction.

lmeyerov 6y ago
Good distinction. As a scientist, 'to our surprise' is exceptionally surprising! We are already domain experts on the research edge for whatever topic, and writing to our peers. What we know is already not obvious to non-experts. For something to be surprising to the domain experts too, that's where the novelty points start, and why we are taking time to write/read. So, clever!
cgriswald 6y ago
I’m struggling with the concept of objective surprise. Surprise is a subjective experience usually brought about by events differing from expectation, but the experience is entirely subjective. So my guess is that you mean the fact of results differing from expectation. There can be a difference between results and consensus expectation, but there can also be a difference between results and personal expectation (e.g., results do not support hypothesis). In the absence of explicitly calling out who holds the expectation, there is either context that makes it clear (e.g., the audience is experts in the field and the expectations are widely held) or the use is referring to the author’s own surprise. Simply claiming they are not equivalent is not correct. They are equivalent in the absence of context. It is only when context is considered (and just being a scholarly article isn’t necessarily enough context) that they might be considered non-equivalent.
brianpan 6y ago
Scientific experiments also try to prove surprising results. "We believed this surprising thing might be true. To our surprise, nothing unusual happened." What's generally surprising is not the same as what is surprising given the researchers' prior expectations. (What is surprising also changes over time, as a result of those experiments!)
viciousvoxel 6y ago
I realize you were just using the Mpemba effect as an illustrative example, but thought it was worth mentioning that it has actually been disproved. https://www.nature.com/articles/srep37665 https://www.nature.com/articles/srep37665
- spoonjim 6y ago
  Huh, interesting. How about “Surprisingly, Gwen Stefani is older than Ted Cruz.”
  - viciousvoxel 6y ago
    Wow. That is surprising.

lmeyerov 6y ago

Good distinction. As a scientist, 'to our surprise' is exceptionally surprising! We are already domain experts on the research edge for whatever topic, and writing to our peers. What we know is already not obvious to non-experts. For something to be surprising to the domain experts too, that's where the novelty points start, and why we are taking time to write/read. So, clever!

cgriswald 6y ago

I’m struggling with the concept of objective surprise. Surprise is a subjective experience usually brought about by events differing from expectation, but the experience is entirely subjective. So my guess is that you mean the fact of results differing from expectation. There can be a difference between results and consensus expectation, but there can also be a difference between results and personal expectation (e.g., results do not support hypothesis). In the absence of explicitly calling out who holds the expectation, there is either context that makes it clear (e.g., the audience is experts in the field and the expectations are widely held) or the use is referring to the author’s own surprise. Simply claiming they are not equivalent is not correct. They are equivalent in the absence of context. It is only when context is considered (and just being a scholarly article isn’t necessarily enough context) that they might be considered non-equivalent.

brianpan 6y ago

Scientific experiments also try to prove surprising results. "We believed this surprising thing might be true. To our surprise, nothing unusual happened." What's generally surprising is not the same as what is surprising given the researchers' prior expectations. (What is surprising also changes over time, as a result of those experiments!)

viciousvoxel 6y ago

I realize you were just using the Mpemba effect as an illustrative example, but thought it was worth mentioning that it has actually been disproved. https://www.nature.com/articles/srep37665 https://www.nature.com/articles/srep37665

spoonjim 6y ago
Huh, interesting. How about “Surprisingly, Gwen Stefani is older than Ted Cruz.”
- viciousvoxel 6y ago
  Wow. That is surprising.