When to use "at" or "with?"?

In my opinion both are correct. But, I am not an expert.

One is angry “with” a person.

One is angry “at” a situation or impersonal object.

I agree with @thorninmud !

You can also be angry “at” an action.

One is more common than the other, but both do seem to be used.

“At” appears to be more commonly associated with a situation or action, as @filmfann points out, while “with” appears to be more commonly associated with a person.

Click me!

I’m with @thorninmud on this one.

A good way to determine things like this is to replace the word. For example, instead of “angry”, say “wroth”.

I am wroth with you.
I am wroth at you.

The first sounds much better. In fact, stop saying “angry” altogether. “Wroth” is such a great word.

To be angry at someone seems to me as though you’re demonstrating anger in front of that person. It’s very active. I think to be angry with someone, it could be passive; you can be quietly seething about her but not in front of her.

@Seek_Kolinahr – that’s gonna be my word of the day! Imagine all the people I can confuse with that word…..

I feel it slihtly different from explained above. I was taught that one can be angry at persons as well.

My understanding is that being angry with someone implies a state in ones relationship towards a person, while being angry at someone indicates an acute display of anger.

If your angry with someone, that doesn’t necessrily mean you display anger at that moment, your relationship is hurt though. When you’re angry at someone, you do show anger at that moment, but your relationship may not be influenced.

How about about?