This article presents an argument that bare (singular) nouns in Papiamentu include additional silent functional structure, as proposed in Kester and Schmitt (2007). The argument is based on Dutch-Papiamentu code-switched noun phrases and exploits the crucial datum that a Dutch bare noun is grammatical when inserted in a Papiamentu sentence, although bare nouns are ungrammatical in a Dutch unilingual sentence. We propose that this datum can be accounted for if the Dutch bare noun is the complement of a silent Papiamentu category, D or Num. The locus of cross-linguistic variation that yields the (un)acceptability of bare nouns is a property in D or Num.