This paper investigates bare nominal arguments (determinerless NPs in argument positions) crosslinguistically. It proposes that languages vary in what NPs denote. In some languages like Chinese, NPs are argumental (kinds) and can occur freely without determiners in argument positions. In others, like Romance languages, NPs are predicative, requiring a determiner for argumental use. Germanic and Slavic languages allow both predicative and argumental NPs, blending the characteristics of the previous two types. This leads to a 'Nominal Mapping Parameter' hypothesis, suggesting these languages behave like Romance in some aspects (singular count) and like Chinese in others (mass and plural). The paper explores this through typological and contrastive analyses of bare arguments in English (Germanic) and Italian (Romance). It also considers implications for Universal Grammar and acquisition. The paper outlines three main goals: assessing the debate on bare plurals and mass nouns in English, extending current theories to compare English and Italian, and developing a 'Neocarlsonian' view of kind reference. Carlson (1977) argued that bare plurals refer to kinds, but recent research, influenced by Discourse Representation Theory, challenges this, suggesting ambiguity. The paper argues that semantic variation is empirically supported and theoretically grounded in current theories of Universal Grammar and language learning. It focuses on the syntax and semantics of bare nominal arguments, emphasizing the role of interface conditions in semantic variation.This paper investigates bare nominal arguments (determinerless NPs in argument positions) crosslinguistically. It proposes that languages vary in what NPs denote. In some languages like Chinese, NPs are argumental (kinds) and can occur freely without determiners in argument positions. In others, like Romance languages, NPs are predicative, requiring a determiner for argumental use. Germanic and Slavic languages allow both predicative and argumental NPs, blending the characteristics of the previous two types. This leads to a 'Nominal Mapping Parameter' hypothesis, suggesting these languages behave like Romance in some aspects (singular count) and like Chinese in others (mass and plural). The paper explores this through typological and contrastive analyses of bare arguments in English (Germanic) and Italian (Romance). It also considers implications for Universal Grammar and acquisition. The paper outlines three main goals: assessing the debate on bare plurals and mass nouns in English, extending current theories to compare English and Italian, and developing a 'Neocarlsonian' view of kind reference. Carlson (1977) argued that bare plurals refer to kinds, but recent research, influenced by Discourse Representation Theory, challenges this, suggesting ambiguity. The paper argues that semantic variation is empirically supported and theoretically grounded in current theories of Universal Grammar and language learning. It focuses on the syntax and semantics of bare nominal arguments, emphasizing the role of interface conditions in semantic variation.