I agree pointless bickering is unnecessary as a lot of the time it will boil down to personal preference.

However, there are basic principles to design and that includes in language design - KISS is one such example. It all depends on the goal of the language - for some, being ultra succinct can be a goal, for others, familiarity, while others might aim for intuitiveness/feeling ‘natural’.

On top of that you have how syntax looks, and this is very subjective - some people can absolutely love the syntax of a language, while others might think it looks ugly.

In terms of language design, highly intuitive and natural languages are my favourite. Reminds me of the famous line out of Enter the Dragon; the art of fighting without fighting. I like languages which feel effortless… almost as if you’re not programming at all and certainly not having to constantly battle or feel baffled

TBH I find abandoned Quel much more readable, as you can read them top to bottom naturally, which not really is a thing in SQL.

About “easiness” of the language I think that shells are there the one of the most “natural” approaches.

It’s only that though – fascinating / a point of interest. IMO programmers bickering over syntax is quite unproductive.

There surely is some neuro-science truth buried there somewhere. As various poets have said: “the difference between the wrong word and the right word is to be described the effects of lightning compared to being hit by it”.

So probably there is a syntax that helps our brain along with the programming itself. But IMO people overdo the syntax disputes.