terrible with/at?

[Tedwonny]

I've heard some teachers say she's terrible with names but some say terrible at...

which's correct?
thanks

[5jj]

I've heard some teachers say "she's terrible with names" but some say "terrible at..."

which's is correct? We don't contract 'is' after 'which'.

Both are acceptable.

[Raymott]

5jj is right, but you can't generalise that beyond names.

I'm terrible at chess/dancing... (Not 'with')
I'm terrible with women/animals... (Not 'at')

[Tedwonny]

thanks

So, it's more like
at + things/activities you're bad at, say I'm terrible at Maths/sports....

with + things/activities is not so direct, say, I'm terrible with names = I'm terrible at memorizing/recalling the names of my students.

Is that right?
thanks

[Raymott]

thanks

So, it's more like
at + things/activities you're bad at, say I'm terrible at Maths/sports....

with + things/activities is not so direct, say, I'm terrible with names = I'm terrible at memorizing/recalling the names of my students.

Is that right?
thanks

Yes.