in prepositional phrases that refer to traveling to places where a change in social behaviors is required.[citation needed] Hence the pattern "Mary had a little lamb. ... It followed her to school one day" (rather than "to the school") is standard, as is "I'll see you in court" (rather than "in the court"). American English has fewer of these than does the language of Britain. Such phrases as "went to hospital" or "went to university" (but not "went to college") seem to Americans to be missing something. Most English speakers say "in town" but "in the city". These phrases are a matter of custom rather than following clear rule.
In fact, there is continuing debate over the use and semantics of NPs with articles. It is more customary to consider the article as 'not used' rather than 'omitted' in these cases, as claiming that something is 'omitted' is to make wider claims about the grammatical system that are far from easy to substantiate. The reason for not using an article is not so much that a change of behaviour is required, as claimed above, but more that the NP under the scope of the article is referred to as an institution as opposed to a particular place. "I'll see you in court" for a court case as opposed to "I'll see you in the court" because this is where we are meeting next. Also, I study "at university" (institution), but left my jacket "in the university" (location). Exceptions, as usual, seem to be the rule, as e.g. "I went to the police station" is used in both senses.
bigjuicy
I used to have respect for you (this is not about MS paint brawl) but you faggot Norte motherfucker fuck bloods bitch I see that gay-ass red rag on you! FUCK YOU! NORTE-K BITCH! SURTHRECE FOR LIFE BITCH!