Hi,
In regard to No. 10, would it be that if we mometarily delete the second sentence for the purpose of clearly elaborating on my question, will my case make sense?
Maps show the main features of an area and the ways that relate one area to another. (Delete the second sentence.) Of course distances on the map are much shorter than distances on the real world.
My question/argument is "Can an argument be made that since we defined generally what maps are, can we take it for grant that any map that will be mentioned in the latter sentences can take on the article 'the'?"
As to the question of why the noun "way" take on the article "the" and the noun "distances" does not, If I may answer that, I would laid out my personal explanation like this:
Maps show the main feature of an area, and the ways that relate one are to another.
(HERE, the following clause is very solid in terms of mentioning the ways and focusing on the ways; the whole sentence is talking about the maps and giving out the definition as to what they are.)
Of course, distances on the map are much shorter that distances in the real world.
(HERE, the forces that grasping the content is rather loose. It is "distance of a or the map" and distance in the real world, not referring to any identifiable or specific distance on any particular map but the distance in general.)