Bare Nouns

A Comparative
Approach
Melisa Rinaldi
Queen Mary, University of London

Romania Nova VIII – Buenos Aires, Argentina

 Introduction
• This contribution discusses bare singular nouns in argument
position from a cross-linguistic perspective.

• The languages analysed (Rioplatense Spanish, Greek, Norwegian,

Brazilian Portuguese and Persian) have in common the fact that they
all use bare singular nouns even when they have an indefinite
determiner as part of their functional array.

• Some of these nominals have been previously analysed as being

NPs that undergo some kind of pseudo noun incorporation (PNI),
but I argue that they are not bare NPs and that they project up to
DP.
1) a) Tengo casa en Mar del Plata (Spanish)
have.1SG house in Mar del Plata
“I have a house in Mar del Plata”

b) Eho aderfi sto Londino (Greek)

have.1SG sister in.the London
“I have a sister in London”

c) Per har fin bil (Norwegian)

Per has nice car
“Per has a nice car” (Borthen 2003)

d) Eu tenho melancia na geladeira (BrP)

I have watermelon in.the fridge
“I have a watermelon/watermelons in the fridge”

e) Man novah nevesthah (Persian)

I letter wrote
“I wrote a letter/letters”
 Generalization
• I argue that these languages can be divided into two groups depending
on the position and interpretation possibilities of BSN:

Group 1: Object Position only

Rioplatense Spanish, Greek and Norwegian
In those languages where bare singulars cannot get a generic
interpretation in subject position, these nominals are restricted to object
position and are interpreted as weak singular indefinites. Bare singulars in
this group are licensed by a specific group of verbs (HAVE-predicates
(Borthen 2003)).

Group 2: Subject and Object Position

Brazilian Portuguese and Persian
In those languages where bare singulars can get a generic interpretation in
subject position, they will also be able to occur in object position, in
which case they will be interpreted as indefinites and number neutral.
 Brazilian Portuguese overview
• Crucially, BrP bare singulars are not restricted to a specific set of
verbs.

• It is precisely because of this lack of restriction on their

appearance that BrP bare singulars have not been analysed as an
instance of incorporation (cf. Carlson 2006).

• I argue that a similar (non-incorporating) proposal can be made

for Group 1 languages (Rioplatense Spanish, Greek and
Norwegian).
Group 1 – Object position only - Overview
• Rioplatense Spanish bare singulars only occur in object position
of a restricted set of verbs.

• Licensing verbs: tener ‘have’, poseer ‘possess’, a few intensional

verbs (such as necesitar ‘need’, buscar ‘look for’), which still
entail a relation “that could be expressed via a verb of having in
the relevant possible world” (Espinal and McNally 2001, p99 for
Continental Spanish) and a few extensional verbs that also
express either a possessive or locative relation, such as ponerse
‘put on’, usar ‘use/wear’, llevar ‘carry/wear’ and encontrar
‘find’
Group 1 bare singulars are really singular!

• Previous proposals treat bare singulars as number neutral.

Dobrovie-Sorin, Bleam and Espinal (2006), Espinal and McNally
(2001), for instance, treat bare singulars in Continental Spanish,
Catalan and Romanian as number neutral NPs.

• Similar claims have been made for other languages too (Farkas
and deSwart (2003) for Hungarian and Dayal (2003) for Hindi).

• However, Lazaridou-Chatzigoga (2011) and Borthen (2003)

argue that bare singulars in Greek and Norwegian, respectively,
are truly singular – a position also taken by Dayal (2011) in her
analysis of Hindi bare singulars.
Group 1 bare singulars are really singular!

• I argue that Rioplatense Spanish bare singulars are truly singular.

Tests for number marking and number neutrality:

• possibilities for felicitous continuations
• discourse anaphora
• ability to trigger telicity
Group 1 bare singulars are really singular!

• The possibilities for felicitous continuations show sensitivity to

number:

4) a) Tengo casa en Mar del Plata. #Una cerca del casino y otra
cerca del cementerio.
“I have (a) house in Mar del Plata. #One near the casino
and another one near the cemetery.”

b) Tengo (unas) casas en Mar del Plata. Una cerca del casino y
otra cerca del cementerio.
“I have (some) houses in Mar del Plata. One near the
casino and another one near the cemetery.”
 Group 1 bare singulars are really singular!

• The pronoun that refers back to the bare singular has to be singular,
unlike the truly number neutral cases like BrP and Persian, where both
singular and plural pronouns are attested:

5) a) Ya tengo profesor para este curso. Lo/*Los contraté ayer.

already have.1SG teacher for this course. him/*them hired yesterday

b) Ya tengo profesores para este curso. *Lo/los contraté ayer.

already have.1SG teachers for this course. *him/them hired yesterday
Group 1 bare singulars are really singular!
• Number neutral nominals allow both pronominal resumptions:

6) Eu tenho melancia na geladeira. Comprei ela/elas ontem

I have watermelon in.the fridge. Bought.1SG it/them yesterday
“I have a watermelon/watermelons in the fridge. I bought it/them
yesterday”

7) Mæn sib khær.id.æm. kheily khoshmæzeh æst / æstand

I apple bought.1sg very tasty is.pres.3sg / is.pres.3PL
‘I bought apple. It is tasty / They are tasty.’
(Persian – example from Modarresi 2014, not her judgements)
Group 1 bare singulars are really singular!

• If we create a context in which the nominal is meant to refer to

plural objects, a bare singular in infelicitous. If we talk about Joe
Darger, the somewhat famous polygamist in Utah who has 3
wives, the following sentence is not felicitous:

8) #Joe Darger tiene esposa

Joe Darger has wife
“#Joe Darger has a wife”

• With both bare singulars and singular indefinites, the implication

is that one atomic individual is being described. By contrast, if a
bare plural is used, then the reading makes reference to non-
atomic individuals. Given that bare singulars can only denote in
the singular, I maintain that they are not number neutral
 Group 1 bare singulars are really singular!

• Bare singulars in Rioplatense Spanish can occur with the temporal

adjunct en “in”, which is only admitted by telic predicates (the
judgements below are different for Continental Spanish, though):

9) a) Ella buscó departamento en una semana / durante una semana

she looked.for apartment in a week during a week
‘She looked for an apartment in a week (and found it) / during a week’

b) Ella buscó un departamento en una semana / durante una semana

she looked.for an apartment in a week during a week
‘She looked for an apartment in a week (and found it) / during a week’

c) Ella buscó departamentos #en una semana / durante una semana

she looked.for apartments in a week during a week
‘She looked for apartments #in a week (and found it) / during a week’
Group 1 bare singulars are really singular!
10) Encontré taxi en un minuto
found.1SG taxi in one minute
“I found a taxi in one minute”

• The reason why this test is relevant is that telicity provides

evidence that there is a quantity structure present in the nominal
projection. Structures that fail to induce telicity, such as weak
determinerless plurals and mass nominals, lack a quantity phrase
(Borer 2005):

11) Mary ate cookies (*in five minutes) /

Mary drank juice (*in one hour)
Group 1 bare singulars are really singular!

• The fact that Rioplatense Spanish bare singulars can induce

telicity shows that they cannot be bare NPs and that they are
specified for number.
• Number neutral bare singulars, like BrP and Persian, fail to
induce telicity, as expected:

12) *Eu comi maçã em dois minutos (BP)

I ate apple in two minutes
Intended: ‘I ate an apple in two minutes’

13) Oo bæraye do sa’æt ketab khoond / *dar do sa’æt

he/she for two hours book read.3SG in two hours
‘He/she read books for two hours / *in two hours
(Persian – example from Modarresi 2014)
Group 1 bare singulars are really singular!
• It is also interesting to note that Rioplatense Spanish spoken in
Uruguay also allows bare singulars after creation verbs (see Oggiani
2015) – this is the same set of verbs that license bare singulars in
Greek and Norwegian:

16) Manuel escribe monografía, que trata de los afrouruguayos

“Manuel writes (a) monograph, which is about Afrouruguayans”

17) En invierno escribo tesis y termino un trabajo

“In winter, I write (a) thesis and finish a job”

18) En dos semanas publica artículo y llama a la editorial

“In two weeks he/she publishes (an) article and calls the
publishing house”
(examples taken from Oggiani 2015)
Group 1 bare singulars are really singular!

• The interpretation of the nominals in 16-18 is not number

neutral, but singular in number.

• These facts (possibilities for felicitous continuations, telicity,

singular anaphora, etc) suggest that bare singulars are not that
bare and that they should project at least up to #P.
Can bare singulars be argumental #Ps?
• I am assuming the articulated nominal functional structure proposed in
Borer (2005) [ DP [ #P [ ClP [ NP ] ] ] ], where NP is unmarked for
either count or mass; ClP is responsible for dividing structure and #P
introduces the count system. Being mass or count is a characteristic of
functional projections and not an inherent property of lexical items.

• Given this, it is evident that Rioplatense Spanish bare singulars need to

be embedded in a classifier phrase, as this would mean that ‘stuff ’ can
be portioned out before interacting with the count system. Moreover, a
#P must be projected to allow for a quantity reading and a telic
interpretation.

• The question that we are left with is whether there should be a null D
on top of #P.
Can bare singulars be argumental #Ps?
• The idea that there are arguments that are smaller than DP is not
new. Several authors (Dobrovie Sorin, Bleam and Espinal (2006),
Pereltsvaig (2006), Li (1996, 1998), Huang, Li and Li (2009) put
forth proposals of #P as arguments.

• Li (1996, 1998)’s examples:

19) a) That bed sleeps three small children.

b) This big sofa seated five adults yesterday
c) That hotel suite accommodated 100 guests
Can bare singulars be argumental #Ps?
• Certain characteristics that these argumental #P have are:

1. They cannot be referential

2. They cannot get a specific interpretation
3. They cannot get a partitive interpretation
4. They only get narrow scope
5. They cannot control PRO
6. They cannot serve as antecedents of reflexives/reciprocals
7. They do not trigger agreement on the predicate

(based on Pereltsvaig 2006 and Li 1996, 1998)

Can bare singulars be argumental #Ps?
• Bare singulars in Rioplatense Spanish only comply with just a
few, namely the obligatory narrow scope and their non-specific,
non-partitive interpretation.

• The fact that they cannot get a partitive interpretation follows

from the fact that they cannot be specific, and this, in turn, can
also be accommodated in a DP analysis of the construction.

• However, it is difficult to account for their referential properties,

PRO control and their ability to act as antecedents of reflexives
with a #P (or even NP) analysis.
 Group 1 bare singulars are full DPs!
• They can serve as antecedents to personal pronouns:

20) Encontré casa y ya la compré (Spanish)

found.1SG house and already it bought.1SG
‘I found a house and I’ve already bought it’

21) Psahno idravriklo. Ton xriazome to sintomotero (Greek)

look.for.1SG plumber him need.1SG the soonest
‘I’m looking for a plumber. I need him as soon as possible’

22) Jeg ønsker meg sykkel til jul. Den skal være blå (Norwegian)
I want REFL bike to Christmas it shall be blue
‘I want a bike for Christmas. It must be blue’
(example 22 from Borthen 2003)
 Group 1 bare singulars are full DPs!
• This behaviour is different from nominals that are known to be
bare NPs and that are non-referential, like the NPs in
compounds:

23) Ayer vi al papaimovil en el centro. #Éli es argentino.

“Yesterday I saw the popemobile downtown. #He is Argentinian”
 Group 1 bare singulars are full DPs!
• Bare singulars are also different from predicate nominals (both
bare and with an article), which are known to be non-referential,
property-denoting expressions.

• A pronoun can be used to refer to a predicate nominal, though,

but when that happens, the pronoun used is always the default
one, i.e., the singular neuter form lo (Longobardi 2008):

24) Mi hermano es abogado y mi primo también lo es.

my brother is lawyer.MASC and my cousin also it.SG.NEUT is
“My brother is a lawyer and mi cousin is too.”
 Group 1 bare singulars are full DPs!
• This is the case even if the predicate nominal is feminine or plural:

25) Mi hermana es abogada y mi prima también lo/*la es

my sister is lawyer.FEM and my cousin.FEM also it.SG.NEUT/ it.SG.FEM is

26) Mis hermanos son cantantes y mis primas también lo/*los/*las son.
my brothers are singers and my cousins.FEM also it.NEUT/PL.MASC/PL.FEM
 Group 1 bare singulars are full DPs!
• The facts above contrast sharply with individual-denoting
expressions. In the case of argumental bare singulars, the
anaphoric pronoun used has to agree in number and gender with
the nominal. In the case of (20) above (repeated below), the clitic
la is feminine and singular, just like the bare singular casa is. Using
the default clitic leads to ungrammaticality:

27) a) Encontré casa y ya la compré

found.1SG house and already it.FEM bought.1SG
“I found a house and I’ve already bought it”

b) *Encontré casa y ya lo compré

found.1SG house and already it.NEUT bought.1SG
“I found a house and I’ve already bought it”
 Group 1 bare singulars are full DPs!
• This also contrasts with the behaviour of argumental #Ps, which
are non-referential:

28) En esta cama entran 4 personas. #Son ésas que están paradas ahí.
in this bed fit.PL 4 people. are.3PL those that are standing there
“This bed sleeps 4 people. #They are the ones standing over there”
 Group 1 bare singulars are full DPs!
• Bare singulars can control an implicit subject, just like full DPs:

29) Busco niñera responsable para PRO cuidar a mis hijos (Spanish)
look.for nanny responsible to PRO look.after to my kids
‘I’m looking for a responsible nanny to look after my kids’

30) Epsakse gouvernada gia PRO na prosechi ta pedia tis (Greek)

looked.for.3SG nanny for PRO to look.after.SUBJ the children her
‘She looked for a nanny to look after her children’

31) Peter bygget hytten for PRO å være der i sommerferien (Norwegian)
Peter built cottage for PRO to be there in summer.vacation
‘Peter built a cottage to be there during his summer holidays’
 Group 1 bare singulars are full DPs!
• They can bind a reflexive:

32) Busco novio que se bañe todos los días

look.for.1SG boyfriend that SE showers all the days
“I’m looking for a boyfriend that showers every day”

The impossibility of binding a reciprocal follows from the bare

nominal’s number specification. Reciprocals need a plural
antecedent and bare singulars are singular. This is further evidence
that they cannot be analysed as number neutral. Languages with
number neutral bare singulars, like BrP, admit both reflexives and
reciprocals, as expected:
 Group 1 bare singulars are full DPs!
33) Eu vi aluno se elogiando
I saw student SE praising
“I saw a student/students praising himself/themselves/each
other”
(example from Marcelo Ferreira)
 Group 1 bare singulars are full DPs!
• Bare singulars can host a non-restrictive relative clause:

34) Encontré departamento, que voy a reciclar pronto, para poder

venderlo.
“I found (an) apartment, which I will refurbish soon, to be able
to sell it”.

• Potts (2005) maintains that non-restrictive modifiers can only

associate with referring expressions; that is to say, the anchor of
a non-restrictive clause must be referential. The fact that bare
singulars can license relative clauses is another indication that
they cannot be just bare NPs.
 Group 1 bare singulars are full DPs!
• Bare singulars need not be adjacent to the verb that licenses
them, unlike truly syntactically incorporated nominals:

35) Ella usa siempre pollera corta, incluso en invierno!

she wears always skirt short even in winter
“She always wears a short skirt, even in winter!”
 Group 1 bare singulars are full DPs!
• They need not stay inside the VP; they can be contrastive and
topicalize:

36) CASA necesito, no departamento

house need.1SG, not apartment
“It is a house that a I need, not an apartment”

This is relevant in that pseudo incorporation analysis rely on the

idea that the noun has to stay inside the VP throughout the course
of the derivation.
 Group 1 bare singulars are full DPs!
• Bare singulars in group 1 are real arguments of the verb

• They share a considerable number of properties with weak singular

indefinites:
• They need not be adjacent to the licensing verb
• They can be referential
• They can bind reflexives
• They can control an implicit subject
• They can appear in telic contexts
• They are specified for number
• They only get narrow scope

• Given all of this, they cannot be just NPs. I argue that bare singulars
have a null D that is existentially bound.
 Some final remarks
• Given that bare singulars are full DPs with a null D, an
incorporation/pseudoincorporation account seems untenable.

• Incorporation analyses, such as the one proposed by LeBruyn, de

Swart and Zwarts (2014) assume that (1) there are multiple lexical
entries for HAVE-predicates and creation verbs - one entry that
selects an entity denoting expression and another incorporating
one that selects properties (2) bare singulars do not denote
individuals but properties (3) it is not necessary to be an
individual denoting expression (DP) to be an argument.
 Some final remarks
• Given that the Rioplatense Spanish nominals discussed here do
not behave like bare NPs and share lots of properties with weak
singular indefinites, maybe we should adopt an approach where
these nominals are treated like regular objects and assume,
instead, that what is special about the construction are the verbs
themselves (or the structure in which these verbs occur).
 References
• Aguilar-Guevara, A. (2014). Weak Definites – Semantics, Lexicon and Pragmatics. PhD Thesis. Utrecht University.
• Alexandropoulou, S. (2013). The lexical restrictions on verbs with bare nominal complements in Greek and an analysis of such
constructions with have-verbs. MA Thesis. Utrecht Univeristy.
• Alexiadou, A., Haegeman, L. and Stavrou, M. (2007). Noun Phrase in the Generative Perspective. Mouton de Gruyter.
• Alexopoulou, T. and Folli, R. (2010). Indefinite topics and the syntax of nominals in Italian and Greek. Paper presented at the
3rd Mediterranean Syntax Meeting, Athens, Greece.
• Baker, M. (1988). Incorporation: A Theory of Grammatical Function Changing. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
• Baker, M. (1996). The Polysynthesis Parameter. Oxford Studies in Comparative Syntax. Oxford University Press.
• Belyaev, O. (2009). Semantics of Noun Determination in Persian.
• Borer, H. (2005). Structuring Sense, Volume I: In Name Only. Oxford University Press.
• Borik, O., Cyrino, S. and Espinal, M.T. (2012). On Determiners in languages with and without articles. Paper presented at the
Workshop on Languages With and Without Articles, Paris, France.
• Borthen, K. (2003). Norwegian Bare Singulars. PhD thesis. Norwegian University of Science and Technology.
• Bosque, I. (1996). ¿Por qué determinados sustantivos no son sustantivos determinados. Repaso y balance. In Bosque, I. (ed.), El
sustantivo sin determinación. Presencia y ausencia de determinante en la lengua española. Madrid: Visor Libros. 13-119.
• Brugger, G. (1993). Generic Interpretations and Expletive Determiner. University of Venice Working Papers in Linguistics. 3, 1-30.
• Carlson (2006). The meaningful bounds of incorporation. Retrieved 22 Nov 2016 from
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.189.2852&rep=rep1&type=pdf
• Cheng, L. and Sybesma, R. (1999). Bare and Not-So-Bare Nouns and the Structure of NP. Linguistic Inquiry. 30:4, 509-542.
• Chierchia, G. (1998). References to kinds across languages. Natural Language Semantics. 6: 339-405.
• Contreras, H. (1996). Sobre la distribución de los sintagmas nominals no predicativos sin determinante. In Bosque, I. (ed.), El
sustantivo sin determinación. Presencia y ausencia de determinante en la lengua española. Madrid: Visor Libros. 141-168.
• Cyrino, S. and Espinal, M.T. (2015), “Bare nominals in Brazilian Portuguese: more on the DP/NP analysis”. Natural Language
and Linguistic Theory, 33:471-521.
• Dayal, V. (1999). Bare NP’s, Reference to Kinds, and Incorporation. In Proceedings of
• SALT IX, Cornell Working Papers in Linguistics.
• Dayal, V. (2011a). Hindi pseudo-incorporation. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory. 29:1, 123-167.
• Dayal, V. (2011b). Bare NPs. In Maeinborn, von Heusinger and Portner (eds), Semantics: An International Handbook of Natural
Language Meaning, 33:2, 1087-1108.
• Demonte, V. (1988). Algunas propiedades de los predicados secundarios. In Homenaje a Alonso Zamora Vicente. Vol. 1, 385-410.
• de Swart, H. and Zwarts, J. (2009a). Less form – more meaning: Why bare singular nouns are special. Lingua. 119:2, 280-295.
• de Swart, H. and Zwarts, J. (2009b). Nominals with and without an article: distribution, interpretation and variation.
• Dobrovie-Sorin, C., Bleam, T. and Espinal, M.T. (2006). Bare nouns, number and types of incorporation. In S. Vogeleer & Liliane
Tasmovski (eds), Non-definiteness and plurality, Benjamins, Linguisitk Aktuell/Linguistics Today series, 51-81.
• Espinal, M.T. (2009). Bare nominals in Catalan and Spanish. Their structure and meaning. Lingua 120: 984-1009.
• Espinal, M.T. and Mc Nally, L. (2011). Bare nominals and incorporating verbs in Spanish and Catalan. Journal of Linguistics. 47:1,
87-128.
• Farkas, D. and de Swart, H. (2003). The Semantics of Incorporation. California: CSLI Publications.
• Ferreira, M. (2010). The Morpho-Semantics of Number in Brazilian Portuguese Bare Singulars. Journal of Portuguese Linguistics, 9,
95-116
• Freeze, R. (1992). Existentials and other locatives. Language. 68:3, 553-595.
• Ghomeshi, J. (1996) Projection and Inflection – A Study of Persian Phrase Structure. PhD Thesis. University of Toronto.
• Ghomeshi, J. (1997) Non-projecting nouns and the Ezafe construction in Persian. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 15: 729-
788.
• Ghomeshi, J. (2003) Plural Marking, Indefinites and the Noun Phrase. Studia Linguistica, 57: 47-74.
• Ghomeshi, J. (2008) Markedness and Bare Nouns in Persian. In Karimi, S., Samiian, V. and Stilo, D. (eds.) in Aspects of Iranian
Linguistics.Newcastle upon Thyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 85-111.
• Kallulli, D. (1999). The Comparative Syntax of Albanian: On the Contribution of Syntactic Types to Propositional Interpretation.
PhD Thesis. University of Surham.
• Karimi, S. (2003). Object Positions, Specificity and Scrambling. In Karimi, S. (ed.) Word Order and Scrambling. Blackwell Publishing,
91-125
• Lapesa, R. (1996). El sustantivo sin actualizador en español. In Bosque, I. (ed.), El sustantivo sin determinación. Presencia y ausencia de
determinante en la lengua española. Madrid: Visor Libros, 121-140.
• Lazaridou-Chatzigoga, D. (2011). The distribution and interpretation of bare singular count nouns in Greek. Paper presented at
the Workshop on weak referentiality, Utrecht Institute of Linguistics.
• Lazaridou-Chatzigoga, D. and Alexandropoulou, S. (2013). A corpus study of Greek bare singulars: implications for an analysis.
Revista da Abralin, 12:1, 233-251.
• Le Bruyn, B., de Swart, H. and Zwarts, J. (2013). Have, with and without. In Proceedings of SALT, 23: 535-548.
• Longobardi, G. (2001). How comparative is semantics? A unified parametric theory of bare nouns and proper names. Natural
Language Semantics, 9, 335-369.
• Longobardi, G. (2008) Reference to individuals, person, and the variety of mapping parameters. In Muller, H. and Klinge, A.
(eds.) Essays on Nominal Determination. John Benjamins Publishing Company. 189-212
• Massam, D. (2001). Noun Incorporation in Niuean. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory. 19: 1, 153-197.
• Masullo, P. (1992). Incorporation and Case Theory in Spanish: A crosslinguistic perspective. Ph.D. thesis. University of
Washington.
• Masullo, P. (1996). Los sintagmas nominals sin determinante: una propuesta incorporacionista. In Bosque, I. (ed.), El
Sustantivo sin determinación – La ausencia de determinante de la lengua española. Madrid: Visor Libros. 169-200.
• Modarresi, F. (2014) Bare Nouns in Persian: Interpretation, Grammar and Prosody. PhD Thesis. University of Ottawa.
• Müller, A. and Oliveira, F. (2004). Bare Nominals and Number in Brazilian and European Portuguese. Journal of
Portuguese Linguistics. 3: 1, 9-36.
• Munn, A. and Schmitt, C. (1999). Bare nouns and the morphosyntax of number. Retrieved January 20, 2014 from
https://www.msu.edu/~amunn/research/psfiles/lsrl.pdf
• Munn, A. and Schmitt, C. (2005). Number and indefinites. Lingua 115: 821-855.
• Oggiani, C. (2011). On discourse referential properties of bare singulars in Spanish. MA Thesis. Utrecht University.
• Oggiani, C. (2015). Las propiedades referenciales de escuetos contables en posicion de objeto en el español del Uruguay.
Paper presented at VII Encuentro de Gramatica Generativa, 29-31 julio de 2015, Buenos Aires.
• Pease-Gorrisen, M. (1980). The use of the article in Spanish habitual and generic sentences. Lingua, 51: 311-336.
• Pereltsvaig, A. (2006). Small Nominals. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 24: 433-500.
• Pires de Oliveira, R. and Rothstein, S. (2011a). Bare singular noun phrases are mass in Brazilian Portuguese. Lingua, 121:
15, 2153-2175.
• Pires de Oliveira, R. and Rothstein, S. (2011b). Two sorts of bare nouns in Brazilian Portuguese. Revista da Abralin,
Special Issue, 231-266.
• Potts, C. (2005) The Logic of Conventional Implicatures. Oxford University Press.
• Rothstein, S. (2000). Secondary Predication and Aspectual Structure. ZAS Papers in Linguistics. 17: 241-264.
• Schmitt, C. and Munn, A. (1999). Against the Nominal Mapping Parameter: bare nouns in Brazilian Portuguese. In
Tamanji, P., Hirotani, M., Hall, N. (eds.), Proceedings of NELS, 29:1, 339-353
• Sioupi, A. (2001a). The distribution of object bare singulars. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Greek
Linguistics, University Studio Press, 292-299.
• Sioupi, A (2001b). On the semantic nature of bare singular NPs in Greek. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference
on Greek Linguistics, volume II, 231-234.
• Sioupi, A. (2005). Morphological and telicity aspect with accomplishment VPs in Greek. In Hollebrandse, B., van Hout,
A. and Vet, C. (eds.), Crosslinguistic Views on Tense, Aspect and Modality, Cahier Chronos 13, Amsterdam, New York, 131-144.
 Thank you!
Muchas gracias!
Obrigada!

Department of Linguistics
Queen Mary, University of London

m.g.rinaldi@qmul.ac.uk