We covered this before. But I’ll leave the “personally” alone since I did it before. But really... what is “bad English?” Bad- in a non moral context is of poor quality- so... English of poor quality...? But what does that mean? For example- it is generally considered more proper in formal English that one say “poor English...” now- it is perfectly grammatically acceptable to say “bad English...” but it is not strictly formal. There isn’t a really hard rule on that- just as there isn’t such a hard rule on “personally..” but that’s the point. Using “poor” tends to sound softer- a teacher is more likely to tell a child they did “poorly” than they did “bad” on a test for example. That goes to composition. “Bad English” can follow all the “rules” of English but still lack quality.
I mean- that’s what poetry is isn’t it? It’s the art of choosing words that have the quality one desires from their message. Literature is much the same- read my shit comments. You think I’d write a poem or a novel like this? But then there is intent yes? If you wrote a scientific guide book the way you wrote a detective noir fiction book- we’d probably consider it a poor book- and likewise a fantasy novel written like a stereo manual would probably be poorly received right?
So one of the keys to “good English” would be that it is understandable right? “yeet” May be the best word to concisely convey both an action and the emotion you want in a sentence- but try that on most people over 35 who don’t frequent meme sites and see if they get it. They would call that “bad English” whereas a peer would consider it perfectly good no? So being able to be understood is quality, what we say is quality too no? One can eloquently say fuck all of value can’t they? (Maybe again- use some of my posts as an example there.) So understanding it, having it be something worth understanding, and the composition and how we FEEL about that are all factors in “good” vs “bad” English right?
To me- “bad English” comes across as poor English. It’s informal to a degree I don’t find proper. But- there’s nothing technically wrong with it- so it is all relative. The “for me” and “personally” are redundant- or so or seems. In our “concise communications” class we could cut one (the personally-) for length- BUT... here’s the thing... it isn’t redundant.
“Personally” has several uses in English. Statements like “I, personally... xyz..” are legal constructs of English- but not REQUIRED by English. So it is a bit of fluff you COULD cut in theory- but no rules say you MUST. When we say: “personally” it gives the clear understanding that we are speaking from personal experience or first hand as opposed to second hand or in opinion based on conjuncture.
“Personally, bad English is a turn of for me...”
We are saying that when we encounter bad English, personally, it turns us off. Without the “For me” we are saying that in our personal opinion- bad English is a turn off. We haven’t specified the modifier there- we have said we feel- but not who we feel it for. Ourselves is implied- but not explicit. If we leave of personally- we are saying “bad English is a turn off for me...” as in ALL bad English- or the abstract as opposed to that when we ourselves encounter bad English it is a turn off.
Personally, I find the sentence clunky and don’t consider it a good example of the use of English- obviously others agree. But- no rules were explicitly broken and we all pretty clearly understood the meaning- so.... “bad English” is often in the eye of the beholder.
We are saying that when we encounter bad English, personally, it turns us off. Without the “For me” we are saying that in our personal opinion- bad English is a turn off. We haven’t specified the modifier there- we have said we feel- but not who we feel it for. Ourselves is implied- but not explicit. If we leave of personally- we are saying “bad English is a turn off for me...” as in ALL bad English- or the abstract as opposed to that when we ourselves encounter bad English it is a turn off.