Difference between "at" and "in" when specifying location

[Jaguares]

Hi lads, this is something I've never learned properly.

I am used to saying "I am in France.". But somewhere I saw it said "I am at Paris". I would like to know the differences between "in" and "at" in the above two sentences.

 

[TRF_stormer2010]

Well, Conrad. I am probably not the best person to help here seeing as English isn't my 1st language either but the way I've always seen it is that 'in' means you are inside whatever it is you are refering too whether it's a country, city, building all the way down to a box (possibly in tiny pieces to fit better?). 'At' I would use when I am close too, near, approaching or beside the same but not quite 'in' it. I would therefor not use 'at' to refer to Paris if I am actually within the city borders. Not sure if that helps or is even correct but that is my understanding.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

I'm terrible at explaining things, but the way I'd use it would be to say that you're "in" a place, but you're "at" a thing.
So you'd be in London, but you'd be at London Zoo.

I wouldn't have said "I'm at Paris", I'd say "I'm in Paris".
"I'm in Paris today, at the Eiffel Tower".

 

[TRF_stormer2010]

I'm terrible at explaining things, but the way I'd use it would be to say that you're "in" a place, but you're "at" a thing.
So you'd be in London, but you'd be at London Zoo.

I wouldn't have said "I'm at Paris", I'd say "I'm in Paris".
"I'm in Paris today, at the Eiffel Tower".

Great explanation, Olly. Tx, that adds to my own understanding as well!

 

[TRF_heineken]

I'm terrible at explaining things, but the way I'd use it would be to say that you're "in" a place, but you're "at" a thing.
So you'd be in London, but you'd be at London Zoo.

I wouldn't have said "I'm at Paris", I'd say "I'm in Paris".
"I'm in Paris today, at the Eiffel Tower".

unless Paris is a thing...

like Paris Hilton

I'm at Paris...





... Hilton's sex video launch!

 

[goodNumber10]

http://www.helping-you-learn-english.com/the-difference-between-at-and-in.html

 

[Jaguares]

Thanks everyone for their answers. Then, "in" is for places and "at" for things, right?

I'm terrible at explaining things, but the way I'd use it would be to say that you're "in" a place, but you're "at" a thing.
So you'd be in London, but you'd be at London Zoo.

I wouldn't have said "I'm at Paris", I'd say "I'm in Paris".
"I'm in Paris today, at the Eiffel Tower".

 

[The_Wol]

This is the kind of thing that can ruin a friendship at the same time. Say you're at target with a mate and his mother. You lose your mate and he texts you
"where are you mate?"

Correct answer would be: "I'm at your mum in the womens section"

Friendship ruing answer would be "I'm in your mum in the womens section"

You have to be careful with phrasing

 

[jonny24]

This is the kind of thing that can ruin a friendship at the same time. Say you're at target with a mate and his mother. You lose your mate and he texts you
"where are you mate?"

Correct answer would be: "I'm at your mum in the womens section"

Friendship ruing answer would be "I'm in your mum in the womens section"

You have to be careful with phrasing

But he's with your mum, not at her.

However it could make a difference who you're talking to and where they are. "I'm at the stadium" and "I'm in the stadium". You'd say AT to the person who is back home an hour away. But IN to our mate who's just outside the stadium, telling him you're specifically inside the building.

Slighty related... what's with "at the weekend"? It's not a place.

 

[Bluemoon]

Only at the rugby forum would you find grammar lessons in the clubhouse bar.

.... That was right, right?

 

[lucky number 7]

At something
In somewhere.

But I merely speak the bogland bastardization of the Queens tongue.

 

[The_Wol]

But he's with your mum, not at her.

My friends with my mum? What about my dad? When did this happen? That *******!

 

[Tony Manx]

Slighty related... what's with "at the weekend"? It's not a place.

Better than in the weekend or even with the weekend?

 

[Icemn]

unless Paris is a thing...

like Paris Hilton

I'm at Paris...





... Hilton's sex video launch!

no... "in" in that case

 

[Every Time Ref]

Difference between "at" and "in" when specifying location

A bit late to the party here but until very recently I was a full time English as a foreign language teacher so I hope I can help. Olly's explanation is good, I would add what I always used to tell my students:

Imagine the place on a map. Is it a SHAPE, which you can move about inside? (like a city or country) - use "in"

Is it a POINT, which you can describe using co-ordinates? (Like a building or landmark) - use "at"

Of course, as someone said before, sometimes context can change the preposition - as in the stadium example. It's actually a great example, if you're thinking about a whole city then the stadium is a POINT on the map. However, if you are next to the stadium and only the area close to you is important, then it is a SHAPE.

One thing that's important to remember is don't worry too much if you find prepositions difficult. They are very illogical, everyone struggles with them but a mistake doesn't usually change the meaning of a sentence. Feel free to PM me to ask any more questions about this or any other English language question - I don't teach any more, and I really miss it so I'd like to help.

Edit: The original example "at Paris" sounds weird to me. Can you give me the context?

 

[Rich Taff]

To be honest, if you can distinguish between the use of 'of' and 'have', you're going to be better than 90% of the people who claim English as their first language on any forum.

 

[j'nuh]

In addition to what others said, if there aren't any physical dimensions for the place and it is more of an abstract concept, then you would use "at". For example:

"I'm at the Blues match, in the stadium, at the front, in the front row, at the end, in seat 2."

The "match", "front" and "end" are abstract concepts, whereas "stadium", "front row" and "seat 2" are actual physical things.

Likewise, you would say that you are "in" a queue, but if you wanted to specify your location in the queue, you would say something like "I'm at the back of the queue". A queue is an actual thing, the back of a queue is a little more abstract.

 

[Every Time Ref]

To be honest, if you can distinguish between the use of 'of' and 'have', you're going to be better than 90% of the people who claim English as their first language on any forum.

Your wrong, I should of said before - there the same thing