What are the criteria for allowing repeated bare NPs in coordinate structures?

The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language (Pages 409-410):

8.5 Restricted non-referential interpretations of bare NPs

[...] This time, however, our concern is with bare NPs. We confine our attention to singular count nouns, which normally require a determiner.

(a) Bare role NPs

...

(b) Fixed expressions or frames

...

vi arm in arm, back to back, day after day, mouthful by mouthful, side by side, mile upon mile [repeated nouns]

vii from father to son, from beginning to end, between husband and wife, mother and child [matched nouns]

...

The examples in [vi–vii] are illustrative of a number of expressions involving repetition of the same noun or contrasting nouns; [...]. Similarly, in coordinate structures, bare NPs can optionally be used in repetition: We searched endlessly for a spring or a cave to spend the night, but neither spring nor cave could be found.

I don't think spring and cave are "repeated nouns" in [vi] or "matched nouns" in [vii]. [vi] only discusses "repeated nouns" connected with a preposition. [vii]'s mother and child, the only one without any preposition, is different from neither spring nor cave in that spring and cave cannot be said to be matched nouns like mother and child can.

Although it starts with "Similarly", therefore, the last sentence seems to be discussing a different category from [vi] or [vii]. If so, what exactly does CGEL mean "in coordinate structures, bare NPs can optionally be used in repetition"?

If that statement is to be literally accepted, the following variants of the example sentence should also work:

(1) We searched endlessly for spring or cave to spend the night...

(2) We searched endlessly for spring and cave to spend the night...

(3) ...but spring or cave could not be found.

(4) ...and finally spring and cave could be found.

But none of these works for me. (Please let me know if any of these works for you.)

Therefore, there must be some other implied criteria for allowing repeated bare NPs in coordinate structures.

What are the criteria?

The only criterion I can think of is that the repeated coordinate structure has to be preceded by the coordinating marker such as neither, both and either as in neither spring nor cave. Are there any other criteria?

Solution 1:

Summary

No, the repeated coördinate structure does ɴᴏᴛ have to be preceded by a coördinating marker such as neither, both, or either for bare NPs to be usable.

You just haven’t done so in your examples, but yours are all failing for their own reasons.

Details, Details, and More Details

Their original is the only one that works tolerably well as written. The other three you offer all have problems, but not because of using bare NPs. Here is theirs:

1. We searched endlessly for a spring or a cave to spend the night, but neither spring nor cave could be found.

That phrasing is still more awkward than need be. Have you ever spent the night in a spring? I certainly have not done so.

Possible solutions to this confusion include:

• We searched endlessly for a spring or for a cave to spend the night, but neither spring nor cave could be found. (1a)
• We searched endlessly for a spring or a cave to spend the night in, but neither spring nor cave could be found. (1b)
• We searched endlessly for a spring or a cave in which to spend the night, but neither spring nor cave could be found. (1c)

2. We searched endlessly for a spring or a cave to spend the night, but spring or cave could not be found.

This provokes confusion because we cannot be sure how the negative applies to the two disjoined subjects: does it apply to each one individually or to both as a pair?

To resolve this problem while still using bare NPs, any of these would work:

• ...but no spring or cave could be found. (2a)
• ...but no spring nor cave could be found. (2b)
• ...but spring and cave were not to be found. (2c)
• ...but spring and cave alike were nowhere to be found. (2d)
• ...but spring and cave alike were not to be found. (2e)
• ...but spring and cave alike could not be found. (2f)
• ...but spring and cave alike could be nowhere found. (2g)
• ...but (we) could find neither spring nor cave. (2h)
• ...but (we) found neither spring nor cave. (2i)

Notice how those use bare NPs irrespective of the conjunction used, and also how not one of them has to prefix the pair using both.

3. We searched endlessly for a spring or a cave to spend the night, and finally spring and cave could be found.

4. We searched endlessly for a spring or a cave to spend the night, and finally both spring and cave could be found.

These two share the same two fundamental problems that make them unworkable as written.

• Their first problem is one of semantics, not one of syntax. Endless searches never end in success. A search without end cannot be said to have succeeded in the end. Therefore successful searches must never be called endless ones. Another way of searching endlessly is searching in vain, or searching futilely, or searching fruitlessly. The last of those, which I rather like, leads to the parallel observation that because a fruitless search bears no fruit, any search that does ultimately bear fruit can never be said to have been a fruitless one in the end.

• But their second problem is that when could be found is used in a positive sense, it again provokes confusion. This is because syntactically the negation of the completed action we could not find ɪꜱ ɴᴏᴛ (or should not be) we could find. Rather, it is we did find using a sort of “definite past” construction to guarantee that the action has completed. You need to somehow signal the perfective aspect here, not the imperfective aspect. You might be able to get away with the periphrastic we were able to find, but this remains slightly ambiguous with no ✻did be solution available here because you can’t use did with be in Standard English.

To fix both problems, try combining one of these as the first clause:

• For many hours we searched fruitlessly for a spring or a cave in which to spend the night... (3a)
• For many fruitless hours we searched for a spring or for a cave in which to spend the night... (3b)
• For many fruitless hours we searched for a spring or a cave to spend the night in... (3c)

with one of these as the second clause:

• ...until right before sunset we came upon spring and cave together. (4a)
• ...until we suddenly came upon spring and cave alike just before sunset. (4b)
• ...until right before sunset we came upon spring and cave in the very same place. (4c)
• ...and then just before sunset we finally came upon spring and cave in the very same place. (4d)
• ...and just before sunset we came at last upon spring and cave nestled within a hidden glen. (4e)

Notice how all of those still use bare NPs.

That said, you might perhaps prefer to consider postpositive alike and postpositive together to be “coördinating markers” in much the same way as you have already treated neither, both, and either when those are preposed instead of postposed the way alike and together are in my solutions. And both can also be postposed, making these two equivalent formulations:

• Both Mom and Dad had told me that it was ok.

• Mom and Dad both had told me that it was ok.