Videos
What is the difference between an abbreviation and a contraction?
What are contractions (words)?
What is the difference between a contraction and a portmanteau?
No, you're, i.e. you are (present tense) is different from you were (past tense).
There isn't a common shortening, but it only saves a letter or two!
Contractions are generally flexible enough to transfer to other bases without much confusion:
They're / We're / You're
They've / We've / You've
They'd / We'd / You'd
You can also stack them if you are feeling edgy (and with mixed success):
You shouldn't've
But other than "'d" there isn't a case for adding extra words that fit the truncated part. Just because "were" matches the syntax for "'re" doesn't mean you can drop it into the contraction:
They're going to live here but now they're not
We're going to the show but they sold out
You're my best friend but now you're my enemy
These sentences just don't parse well due to the same word being used for two different meanings without anything but context to distinguish them. The biggest problem is that the context for each is more or less the same:
You were going to live here / You are going to live here
We were going to the show / We are going to the show
You were my best friend / You were my best friend
The could/would problem is similar:
We'd have eaten pizza
But the advantage here is that either one gets close to the intended meaning. Switching between "were" and "are" is too drastic of a change and too hard to see without clarification.
There is no very specific definition of what "proper contraction" means. From some people's point of view, it is most "proper" to avoid contractions altogether—despite the fact that contractions sound natural in many contexts in English.
Instead of talking about what is proper or not, what I can say for sure is that "Loving you's no hassle" is not an impossible type of contraction. It is a type of contraction that can definitely be heard from proficient English speakers. So I don't think that you need to avoid using it.
The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language (Rodney Huddleston and Geoffrey K. Pullum, 2002) gives the following linguistic description of the relevant context:
The clitic ['s] may attach to the last word of the subject, which does not have to be an NP.
("Chapter 18: Inflectional Morphology and Related Matters", §6.2. Clitic versions of auxiliary verbs, page 1616)
(The subject of your sentence is Loving you.)
Yes, and it's been done. A quick Google of 'lyrics "loving you's"' shows:
- "Loving You's A Dirty Job (But Somebody's Gotta Do It)", on Bonnie Tyler's 1986 album "Secret Dreams and Forbidden Fire"
- Don Williams's "Loving You's Like Coming Home", I believe from 1990.
I do see cases of these written with "is" spelled out, and in some cases with the apostrophe just missing, but it appears the contracted form is how these were originally published.
There is no difference in meaning although there are a few differences in usages. Here, there is virtually no difference:
You are flying to Belgium tomorrow.
You're flying to Belgium tomorrow.
However, there are places where the two are not interchangeable. For example, this particular contraction cannot be used at the end of a sentence, or as a standalone sentence:
Who is flying to Belgium tomorrow?
CORRECT ANSWER: You are, Tim.
INCORRECT ANSWER: You're, Tim.
The same principles hold true for the other related contractions:
I'm ➝ I am
He's ➝ He is
They're ➝ They are
We're ➝ We are
You are and You're are the same. You're is the contraction of You are.
dictionary.com
However, in formal writing it is more appropriate to use "You are" as opposed to "You're".