No, it means what I said above.Doesn't sentence no. 2 (in the thread question) mean that she hit at a distance. That is, she threw the knife at him?
Well, actually, no it doesn't. Have you heard of knife-throwers? A good knife-thrower could hit a person with a knife from many metres away. You have the meanings back to front.Sentence no. 1.clearly means that she actually stabbed him. That is, she hit him with a knife when she was (spatially) very close to him.
"They were having a fight, and he was hitting at the other guy with a piece of wood." It may be a little odd, but it tends to imply that he might be missing some/most of the time. "To hit out at" is another possible phrase, although that is usually used for verbal attacks."Hit at" someone seems odd to me.
True, and a strike is a strike. But you can strike at a baseball without striking it. Hence, while "hit at" might sound a bit unusual, at least to me it has a function.A hit is a hit.