Point at or to?

0 As far as I know, either - but I'd be more likely to use 'at'. 0-

0 Pieanne, I think I'd be inclined to point 'to' an advantage, and point 'to' or 'at' an object. 02br
02br
00Can you rephrase the sentence at all to "point out" an advantage, i.e. to identify it? 0-

0Still better, I can do without it! 05002br
00Thanks anyway! 010id1

0 Please don't mistake me. 02br
02br
00Why don't you post these types of posts in 'General Grammar' section. I think this section is devoted to 'vocabulary' related questions. But your question seems quite related to grammatical usage. 02br
02br
00I again repeat: Don't mistake me...... 0-

0 Pieanne, you can freely use point to (Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary: point to sth: to suggest that sth is likely, to indicate sth. 02br
00Point at: 1) to direct people's attention to sth, 2)to indicate position, direction, time, level, etc. on a device, 3) to aim or direct sth: point a gun at sb 0-

0 As a considerable generalization, I'd suggest one helpful approach is thinking in terms of physical and nonphysical: 02br
02br
00point at (or) point to - use both versions for physical things, things you can use your finger to indicate 02br
02br
00point to - use for abstract, nonphysical things (like an advantage) 02br
02br
00Best wis

0 Thanks to you all! 0-

This is incorrect. 'To' indicates movement while 'at' does not. Usage has to do with your intended meaning, not whether something is physical or not.

Point to the dessert you would like.
He is pointing at the dessert that he would like.

Both physical. Meaning varies according to movement.

I agree with what you said about movement and non-movement. However I take issue with the idea that usage may not have anything to do with whether something is physical or not. Sometimes it does.

Good.