“To be mad at somebody” vs. “to be mad with somebody” [duplicate]

Question

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.

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.
Mad is a hard word anyway, since it has different meanings in British English and American English.
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.
I think this question should be reopened. In British English "mad with somebody" is just fine.

Jay · Accepted Answer · 2012-07-19 15:17:45Z

up vote 1 down vote accepted

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.

answered Jul 19 '12 at 15:17

Jay
19.4k1344

marked as duplicate by Matt Эллен, JSBձոգչ, Andrew Leach, Daniel δ, Mark Beadles Jul 19 '12 at 16:47