point to or point at

[Mike12345]

It is very rude to point at people with chopsticks.
It is very rude to point to people with chopsticks.

Teachers, I think both sentences are right. But I am not sure. Could you please tell me if they are right? Thank you!

 

[GoesStation]

At is right.

 

[Mike12345]

Mr GoesStation, Thank you! But could you please tell me why To is wrong? I think the meaning of point to is the same as point at

 

[andrewg927]

"Point to" implies a direction. E.g., you point someone to that building. Whereas "point at" means a physical gesture which is what you want to use here. It is rude to use your chopsticks to point directly at someone.

 

[emsr2d2]

[STRIKE]Mr[/STRIKE] GoesStation, thank you! But could you please tell me why to is wrong? I think the meaning of point to is the same as point at.

Note my corrections above. We don't use anything before usernames here. Also, by using "Mr", you suggested that you know that GoesStation is male. You might be right but don't assume anything.

 

[Rover_KE]

It is rude to use your chopsticks to point directly at someone.

I have to admit that up to now I took it to mean that someone was being told not to point at a man who was using chopsticks - in much the same way that you'd tell a child not to point at a man with a wooden leg.

 

[jutfrank]

Both point at somebody and point to somebody imply direction, as this is the meaning of point.

But where pointing at somebody is very often used to imply a rude or aggressive gesture, pointing to somebody is not. This is why at fits the sentence much better.

 

[SoothingDave]

The sentence is ambiguous about who has the chopsticks.

 

[andrewg927]

Yes. It is. I guess you can read it either way. What is important is "don't point at people".

 

[GoesStation]

The OP suggested to me that, in the poster's culture, it's rude to use your chopsticks to point at someone.