Does you variant contain the “is what it is” expression below?
It’s (a lot of) nonsense is what it is.
I’d say it’s generally redundant.
It’s sort of akin to the ubiquitous (down here anyway) “at” in “Where are you at?”
“It’s nonsense” (IMO) gets the point across just fine, as does “Where are you?”
Though in its defense, I suppose “is what it is” does add a bit of emphasis in this case.
But does it occur in your variant?
How about "That’s ridiculous, it is! Would you call such a tag redundant?
No – I don’t hear things like “that’s ridiculous, it is!”
I would refer to the “it is” as being redundant… but understandably used, I suppose, to add conviction.
These days there are new and (just as unnecessary, in many cases) add-ons:
“That’s ridiculous, like totally!”
It’s generally unnecessary to add things like that, IMO… but certainly not illegal.
What do you mean by “unnecessary”?
In “I love you, like totally!”, does “like totally” represent a meaningful piece of that sentence?
Or would “I love you!” generally suffice?
Would “totally” also be unecessary here, IYO?
I love you totally.
And deeply here?
I love you deeply.
I love you, like deeply.
He loved here, and deeply.
Or would “I love you!” generally suffice?
If you’re talking about syntax and semantics, maybe, but if you talk about semantics and pragmatics…
Regarding the latter pairing, you’d have to know a lot about the context to decide what was or was not necessary. As well as literal/basic meaning, you may need to consider communicative meaning, Prez.