If there's a good reason for the difference, by all means, go for it. But if there isn't, please reconsider.
So that leaves little room for alternative language paradigms then. If you want dictionaries to look like JS or Python then what are languages like Lisp and APL to do, not use coherent syntax. Or what about just making different use of the limited number of symbols on the keyboard to make the use more consistent?
Id rather have a more consistent language or one that introduced new concepts than one familiar in syntax just for the sake of being familiar.
It's reminiscent of this: https://xkcd.com/927/
Edit: further to your point, I agree that my gripes are merely about an up-front cost, whereas consistency can be helpful throughout your use of a language.
Edit again: I essentially seek consistency within and among languages. I don't mean to state one should come at the cost of the other at all times.
Yes, but what about the benefits from the regularity and uniformity?
If you're a programmer now, you're a secondary audience to the masses of people who will program in the future. If the language is going to have the most impact, what they prefer supersedes what you (and I) prefer.
> If there's a good reason for the difference, by all means, go for it.
Of course and agreed. Nothing should exist without reason. Antoine de Saint Exupery etc.