Ken Loo has written some interesting observations on the differences between writing in Japanese and writing in English. (He's turned comments off in his newly designed blog, Notes of Doubt, so I'll comment here.)

I agree with Ken Loo that the standard for written English emphasizes active voice (A does B), concrete adjectives and adverbs, and a focus on the subject, not the writer. This is the English of reports, instruction manuals, and newspaper articles. Creative writing (fiction and poetry), however, tends to bend these rules in order to be "artistic."

I worked as a technical writer for more than 15 years, so I was obsessed with objectivity in my writing. To keep the focus is on the subject matter, not the writer, a technical writer must write so that the reader never "hears" the writer's voice. (That is, the reader should not know what the writer's opinions or feelings are on the subject.)

Writing blogs is change for me. I've had to develop my voice, to make my writing more personal--as Ken Loo says "closer to the heart". Learning to write in Japanese is twice the struggle. Rather than write "A does B", I have to translate, not just my words, but my whole way of thinking, my whole way of expressing an idea. So "A does B" becomes "As for A, B has been done."

English is all about actors (nouns) and actions (verbs). Be direct. Be specific. Be concrete. As for Japanese, it is all about states of being and becoming と思います。

PS. That reminds me of the saying, "Music is not the notes, but the spaces between the notes." If languages were music, then English is focused on the notes, on what is said. Japanese is focused on the space between the notes, on the silences, on what is left unsaid.

PPS. My communication style tends to be direct and to the point. When I visited my family, I noticed that most of them preferred indirect forms of expression, softened by "I feel" and "I think". They thought I was too brusque and aggressive. I thought they were too indecisive and afraid to express themselves.