4

Possible Duplicate:
“Angry with” vs. “angry at” vs. “angry on”

Can the preposition at in the following sentence be replaced by with?

I'm mad at you.

In my mother tongue we say that we are mad with someone, not at.

Community
  • 1
utxeee
  • 2,415
  • 2
    Off topic: when we fix the formatting/title/spelling/punctuation/tags in your post, please take note and format your future posts accordingly. Thank you. – RegDwigнt Jul 19 '12 at 12:53
  • Ok, my bad. I will take it in my future posts :D – utxeee Jul 19 '12 at 13:39
  • Mad is a hard word anyway, since it has different meanings in British English and American English. – Marcus_33 Jul 19 '12 at 13:48
  • It has both senses in American English, but it's most likely to mean angry unless it comes with a polar adverb like absolutely. In the angry sense, it uses at for the person and about for the reason. Mad with, on the other hand, can only be used for the reason, and the meaning is insane, not angry. Mad with desire is fine, but not *mad with Bill. – John Lawler Jul 19 '12 at 14:17
  • I think this question should be reopened. In British English "mad with somebody" is just fine. – Alex B. Jul 19 '12 at 17:23
  • 1
    The cited question is NOT a duplicate of this one. This question asks about use of the word "mad". The supposed duplicate asks about use of the word "angry". Just because they have similar meanings doesn't mean they are used the same way in a sentence -- and in this case they most definitely are not. – Jay Jun 21 '18 at 21:38

1 Answers1

4

In English you are "mad at" a person, institution, etc. You wouldn't say you are "mad with" them.

Inconsistently, you are "angry with" a person, not "angry at" them.

Jay
  • 36,223