I do see patterns in languages, it's just that the patterns are hidden below arbitrary nonsensical syntax that has to be relearned every single time I switch language. Some syntax, like Python's, is easier to remember and guess than other syntax. I conclude that Python's syntax is good and Haskell/J's syntax is bad.
Basically, I want the languages I use and have to constantly relearn to have a syntax that is quick to pick up after having partly forgotten it for the nth time. That requires memorable and guessable names and keywords.
I'd recommend reading Iverson's "Notation as a Tool of Thought" (http://www.jsoftware.com/papers/tot.htm) . Operator looks for APL - and then for J - were modelled after mathematical notation, which had to be extended somewhat towards computations. But can you imagine writing on a whiteboard, say, "samples_transposed" instead of A'?
You definitely can use words instead of many symbols in J. I highly doubt though you want to do that for the core language. Much more productive - IMO - is to learn the vocabulary - which is very finite. Yes, I know it's a great show stopper for those considering learning J.
And here is a bit more involved explanation of what those words mean: http://www.jsoftware.com/jwiki/HenryRich?action=AttachFile&d...
If there is one thing I learned as a polyglot it's that language usage patterns differ and trying to use one language as if it was another is counterproductive. My advice is to learn more and practice more - at some point you'll start seeing higher-level patterns in language design and will be able to cope with many, now unfamiliar, features and design decisions.