Hi, Paul!  Recently you wrote in a message to Alexander Koryagin:   
      
   ak>  Christie Golden, "Arthas: Rise of the Lich King":   
   ak>  =========Beginning of the citation==============   
   ak>  ...To do so, Illidan would have to kill Tichondrius.   
   ak>  Arthas would be rid of the demon lord, and Illidan   
   ak>  would be rewarded with an artifact to sate his lust   
   ak>  for power. Presumably all had gone according to plan.   
   ak>  =========The end of the citation================   
      
   ak>  "according to plan" - no article before "plan." Is   
   ak>  there an explanation on this account? Or, maybe,   
   ak>  articles are not very unnecessary after all? ;-)   
      
   PQ>  What's an article again?  I've had a sleep since the   
   PQ>  last lesson.  Hang on... I'll check... back again...   
   PQ>  couldn't find it.  Mmm...   
      
      
                 *  Definite article = "the".   
                 *  Indefinite article = "a(n)".   
      
              Although I didn't look very hard because I felt it might make more   
   sense to spell them out... (literally!)... I couldn't find a definition which   
   would be of much use here.  In the traditional eight parts of speech articles   
   are classfied under adjectives, but nowadays some folks prefer to put them in   
   a separate category.  For practical purposes what you need to know is that we   
   have only two articles in English and that native speakers of other languages   
   may have difficulty figuring out where to use articles in English & where not   
   to.  The French use articles where we don't.  The Russians use them even more   
   sparingly than we do, and the rules are different... or so I understand.   
      
              I think we may be dealing with a "stock phrase" or idiom left over   
   from our distant ancestors.  As I said to Alexander earlier, articles seem to   
   be noticeable by their absence in medieval English.  After putting this reply   
   on the back burner for awhile I came up with some more examples:   
      
                 -- on occasion, on schedule, on credit, on demand   
      
                 -- in abeyance, in trouble, in court, in doubt, in luck   
      
                 -- out of bounds, out of luck   
      
                 -- as planned, as expected, as needed   
      
                 -- at sea (or asea), at odds with, at ease, at home   
      
      
              So what on earth does this have to do with "according to plan", you   
   say?  Of course.  English is your native language.  You recognized patterns on   
   your own after hearing countless examples & probably found high school English   
   classes incredibly boring... as I did until I met Miss Langwidge!  Meanwhile I   
   suspect many readers from Z2/Z7 know a prepositional phrase when they see one.   
   To this day I don't know a better way to explain such things.  If you tuned in   
   late, not to worry.  The dictionary is your friend.  It will tell you what you   
   need to know when you're not sure what part of speech a certain word is.  Some   
   dictionaries also include "usage notes", as my GAGE CANADIAN does.  That's one   
   of the reasons I tend to consult it before comparing it to other sources.  :-)   
      
      
      
   PQ>  How many plans are there?  There is only the one plan.   
   PQ>  To say 'the plan' would use a superfluous 'the'.   
      
      
              Ah... but why?  I've heard families with only one car, for example,   
   refer to it as "the car".  Similarly, if we say "the kitchen scissors" or "the   
   pair of reading glasses on my desk" it usually means there is no other item in   
   the household which matches this description.   
      
              I agree that "the" is superfluous in Alexander's example above, but   
   I've also seen it omitted occasionally in job titles such as "President & CEO"   
   or "principal of XYZ School" or "chief cook & bottle washer".  Perhaps you got   
   the right answer for the wrong reason because you hadn't taken the preposition   
   into account.  IMHO your instincts are essentially sound, at any rate....  :-)   
      
      
      
   PQ>  It is also Illidan's plan, obviously.  (Athough I have   
   PQ>  a suspicion you're about to tell me that it is in fact   
   PQ>  John Doe's plan in any case, in which case what I have   
   PQ>  said isn't obvious.  I lose.)  So there is no need for   
   PQ>  an ownership modifier either.   
      
      
              That's my take on it.  Who is Arthas?  It seems he wants to get rid   
   of Tichondrius.  Maybe he said so indirectly... maybe he came up with the plan   
   himself & Illidan is just following orders.  What matters at this point in the   
   story, however, is that Tichondrius now has to fight for his life.  The use of   
   a superfluous "the" would slow the action & quite possibly distract the reader   
   who wants to know about such details as whose idea it was at the outset.  :-))   
      
      
      
      
   --- timEd/386 1.10.y2k+   
    * Origin: Wits' End, Vancouver CANADA (1:153/716)