Sorry, I missed the point of the question. Anyway, here's a discussion of what you were actually asking about:
And here are some examples (one US, one UK) where the definite article is used:
For what it's worth, I live in the US and "play the violin" and "play violin" sound almost 100% interchangeable to me.
Thanks, this is very interesting. I like how your first link makes the distinction, the "the"-less version referring more to a role, for example, in an orchestra. I had that kind of feeling, too.
Anyway, my personal theory on all this (US English) is that the language in the US has been, and is, influenced by so many other languages that it absorbs many of their structures and techniques that, honestly, make more sense sometimes. Or ones that make things simpler, or fill a void.
Just think of all the nationalities that have ever arrived in the US with little or no knowledge of English. Of course, people pick up the words first, then start using them according to the logic of their own native languages. And some of these features end up in the mainstream of the language, because they make it simpler. And all it takes is a generation or two, and our children and grandchildren may end up saying "it sounds perfectly natural to me".
So that's why US English has
", right?", ", no?" - for "isn't it?" "haven't they?" and many others
"talk with" - besides "talk to"
"speak with" - besides "speak to"
"meet with" - besides "meet"
"play piano" - for "play the piano"
And many many others.
Some of these feel weird or incorrect today, but just wait.
English already has some of what we call "preverbs" here.
Should I continue?
And I see compound words on the rise.
Don't say you have not been warned. Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but one day you may just
"ingo into a bank and stand there (dare I say therestand) to the counter ..."
And no one will even blink an eye.
We do occasionally blink an eye, the same as you blink at things like fényképezik. I have what is probably an irrational hatred of the recent use of "impact" as a verb, when "affect" was perfectly good. De a nyelv szüntelenül halad tovább, mit sem gondolva azzal, hogy én egyetértek-e vagy nem.
There are a couple of suffixes that turn nouns into verbs. Here it's -l/-ol/-el/-öl which you also have in táncol - to dance (from tánc - dance), harcol - to fight (from harc - fight), érdekel - to be interested (from érdek - interest), or gépel - to type (on a typewriter or keyboard), which derives from gép - machine; írógép - typewriter.
Another popular suffix is -z/-oz/-ez/-öz. You can find it in fényképez - to take a picture (from fénykép - photograph), magyaráz - to explain (or rather "to Hungarify it", from magyar - Hungarian), or tükröz - to reflect (from tükör - mirror).
And then there are the tons of reflexive and intrasitive verbs made with suffixes like -edik, -ezik, -kedik, -kezik and all variants thereof: zongorázik - to play piano (from zongora - piano), futballozik/focizik - to play football (from futball/foci - football), létezik - to exist (from lét - existence), or panaszkodik - to complain (from panasz - complaint).
There are a couple of ways to make verbs from nouns (not to mention making them from adjectives or even from other verbs), but it's different for every verb and I don't think there's much of a helpful pattern there. But at least they're not hard to recognise.