Though to keep all the properties and kinds intact, you’d probably need to separate things a bit:
A banana is a yellow fruit. A lemon is a yellow fruit.
An apple is a red fruit. A cherry is a red fruit.
There is a wicker basket in the kitchen. In it are the banana and the apple.
There is an iron basket in the kitchen. In it are the lemon and the cherry.
This does assume that only one of each fruit exists; things get a bit more complicated otherwise.
Oddly, this does allow basket to be understood as part of the basket’s name, without the explicit Understand – perhaps only because it has no name of its own at all? (Perhaps this is what you were seeing over here as well.)
The extension to allow more than one anonymous fruit is fairly straightforward too:
A banana is a kind of fruit. A banana is usually yellow [but could be green].
A lemon is a kind of fruit. A lemon is usually yellow.
An apple is a kind of fruit. An apple is usually red.
A cherry is a kind of fruit. A cherry is usually red.
There is a wicker basket in the kitchen. In it are a banana and an apple.
There is an iron basket in the kitchen. In it are a lemon and two cherries.
(I’m impressed that Inform figured out the plural of cherry on its own. Though it’s less correct about the plural of fruit, since English is weird like that.)
Of course, anonymous objects can’t be referred to in other rules (other than in very limited ways), so it’s usually better to give them names – which in turn means that you’ll need that explicit Understand again. Otherwise while you can say something like this:
In the wicker basket in the kitchen is a lemon.
This will create another wicker basket (containing only a lemon) – it will not add a lemon to the existing wicker basket.