[tarkin2]

One simpler explanation: in forth you are forced to keep the stack, and modifications to the stack, in your short term memory, albeit only really three numbers in most cases. Whereas with C et al you simply look down the page at the variables, far less taxing on your short term memory.

Well-written and designed high-level forth words often transcend that and tend to be, quite literally, readable however, in a way that is incredibly rare to see in C et al. Of course the argument is that other programmers shouldn't be expected to see the problem in the way the original problem solver did.

[rpcope1]

This is probably why you see things like locals get used a lot as modern Forth programs grow. It doesn't have to be brutal early days Chuck Moore genius programs, but I guess you start getting away from the original ethos.

[tarkin2]

I think even with locals you're still mentally dealing with a few items on the stack in each word usually. But, yes, locals do help you from passing around items from word to word: you see the usage of the local far easier than you see the location of the stack elements.