Which preposition is considered to be natural in the following context?
The books arrived TO you.
or
The books arrived AT you.
My choice was the preposition 'to' in this context, but my corrector is now marking it as an error and suggesting me to replace it with 'at', and I'm not sure about it.
The verb arrive means to reach a place at the end of a journey. Since it focuses on the end of the motion, not the whole motion from beginning to end, it doesn't work with "to [a destination]" as a modifier, the way you can say "go to your house", "walk to your house", "drive to your house", etc.
And since arrive suggests coming to a stop, the preposition at indicates the place or time where the journey ended. So, arrive at works by analogy with "I'll meet you at the park" (see this answer for more), "I'll meet you at 10:00", "This bus stops at Cuyahoga Street", etc., not by analogy with at for the target of a moving object, as in "Don't throw stones at a window" or "Watch out, the bus is coming right at you!"
When you say at with an object or person, like "a window" or "you", it sounds like you mean the target of motion—like throwing, suggesting a collision. So, you can't say "The books arrived at you." You have to rephrase so that the object of at is more clearly a place, like any of these:
The books arrived at your house.
The books arrived at your address.
The books arrived at your office.
The books arrived at your window. [This sounds natural because "your window" can also be understood as a place. This sentence suggests that the books were placed neatly in front of your window, or were handed to someone who received them through your window.]
The books arrived at your place.
The last one, "your place", is informal.
Neither.
You cannot arrive at or to a person, only at a location. You can arrive at my house, but not at me. To indicates direction, so you can travel to the station before you arrive at the station.
Colloquially, people say 'when you get to me', but arrive is more formal.
The preposition 'at' can be used for direction in the form 'throw a ball at me' (in my direction, with the intention of hitting me), vs 'throw a ball to me' (in my direction, with the intention of my catching it).
I would go with:
Your books arrived.
If you really want something close to your construction, then NotThatGuy's suggestion of "for" does work:
The books arrived for you.
Neither. Arrive usually takes a place, not a person as its object.
The most natural expression would be
The books reach you.
If you want to use arrive, you could say
The books arrive with you.
But note that if you do so, with you is not a complement of arrive in the way that at the office or in London would be: arrive is being used intransitively, and with you is an adjunct, that gives optional additional information in the same way as on Tuesday in The books arrive on Tuesday.
Arrive means reaching a destination place, and at reinforces that to mean a certain 'place'. Another definition of at indicates an implied action, like "He threw the package at you." which can be confusing. It would be ok to say "The book arrived at my house" or just "The book arrived."
To would be slightly better I think because its target can be a person, place, or thing. It also better matches the normal usage as in "I sent a book to you" and "The book was delivered to you." You wouldn't say "I sent a book at you". But again arrive implies a place, not a person.
A better word to use would be 'receive' which is meant for people to have things given to them or presented to them, as in "You received the book."
