I can't say why James Gosling et al chose this particular alternative ...
However, using round brackets instead of curly brackets would create a serious ambiguity problem for the Java grammar. Consider the following example:
Object[] tableHeaders = ("Cars");
Do the round brackets denote an array constructor, or are they part of the normal expression expression syntax?
Now it would be possible to come up with some complicated precedence rules to cover this, but that makes life difficult for both programmers and compiler writers.
(At the grammatical level, a Java parser needs to deal with ambiguity in:
VariableInitializer:
ArrayInitializer
Expression
In the example above, ("Cars") matches both the ArrayInitializer and Expression productions ... if you use round brackets for array initializers. Deciding which is correct meaning would require looking at the declared variable type ... followed by context sensitive parsing of the VariableInitializer. Nasty.)
I'd say they made the right choice in not using round brackets for array initializers.
Square brackets won't work either. Consider trying to explain this ...
... = new Object[]["Cars"]; // 1-D array
versus
... = new Object[21][]; // 2-D array
versus
... = new Object[][]; // is that 1-D or 2-D?
Object[] ar=["Cars", "Trucks", "Tacos"];. For first part of your answer "why?" to attract more people to initially develop it who have "C" programming background. I am sure James Gosling was one of them. You can just leave out the further understanding of curly braces in general because compilers parse language based on states.