As a result, bare nouns have attracted extensive study in the fields of both semantics and syntax.
Bare plurals are usually restricted to outside predicate positions, though exceptions to this do arise ("the reason is uncommon sentences").
Finally (4) seems to completely resist traditional quantificational analysis, acting on the entire set of objects, not on any individual member.
One explanation put forth by Gregory N. Carlson is the treatment of bare plurals as names of a semantic type called "kinds" that is distinct from typical individuals.
This suffices to explain all of the above sentences except (3), as each are true in a possible world if and only if the ascribed attribute is a property of the kind inputted into the predicate.
In order for the existential readings in sentences like (3) to hold, another semantic object is defined called "stages".
These represent locations in time and space, and are created to reconcile the fact that sentences like (3) only hold true if there exists a specific spatio-temporal place in which the predicate applies.
This analysis excludes bare plurals from the subject and indirect object positions, which is mainly representative of sentences in Spanish and Italian (though further restrictions apply in much the same way indefinite nouns are treated in both languages).
This is noteworthy, as it contrasts with phrases in which a determiner is present, "il vecchio cane" directly translating to "the old dog".
This is taken as evidence that in Italian and Spanish, an overt movement of the noun phrase "John" to the determiner head is undergone.
In Italian or Spanish, if an empty category is not governed in the overt syntax then the sentence will remain ungrammatical.
Bare singulars in English are comparatively rare in respect to other languages, however they exist in constricted constructions.