arrive: IN a city or AT a city (2025)

C

chinada

Member

Chinese-Mandarin

  • Apr 1, 2013
  • #1

Hello every one
I am a new member and glad to find this place to get help in English learning.

Here is my first question:

When referring to a city, I always used "IN", as in this example: I arrived IN New York City.
But recently, I came across sentences using "AT" in place of "IN" such as I arrived AT New York City.

I assumed they were both correct. However, I would like to know: are there differences between these ways of referring to a city?
Or is it that the former("IN") is more North American and the latter ("AT") more British?( The latter I read in some Hong Kong stock exchange prospectus documents.)

Or does it have to do with the size of the city:using AT with a smaller city and IN with a bigger one?
Or anything else

Hopefully I explained my question in an understandable way.

Thanks in advance!

  • T

    Thomas Tompion

    Member Emeritus

    Southern England

    English - England

    • Apr 1, 2013
    • #2

    Hello Chinada,

    I speak British English (BE).

    I think the choice is determined by several factors:

    I'd say arrived in if I had arrived well within the city frontiers, and arrived at if the city was one of several staging posts on my journey, particularly if I was in a train or some form of public transport.

    In most circumstances I'd probably use a formula like to get to.

    I think the size does have an influence on the choice. I'd be more likely to say arrived at for a village than for a large city.

    C

    chinada

    Member

    Chinese-Mandarin

    • Apr 1, 2013
    • #3

    Thank you Thomas!

    Your answer cleared several points regarding this question:
    1."I'd say arrived in if I had arrived well within the city frontiers", yes, that fits the basic meaning of "in".
    2."arrived at if the city was one of several staging posts on my journey, particularly if I was in a train or some form of public transport." Actually, I have read many times when the writer used "arrived at" a city and from the context, the person in question was at the airport.

    So, maybe we can picture the scenario in our mind by how you contact with the city:
    If you are surrounded by the city, then use IN.
    If you are at some point on the circumference of the city(such as airport, train station, etc,), in a manner of speech, then use AT.

    Thank you again!

    E

    Elwintee

    Senior Member

    London England

    England English

    • Apr 1, 2013
    • #4

    An additional thought: an inanimate object, such as a helicopter or train, would only arrive 'at' a city, even if the helipad of rail station was in the heart of the city. I don't know the reason for this.

    P

    Pitt

    Senior Member

    Germany

    German

    • Apr 1, 2013
    • #5

    I have taken these examples from a grammar:

    We say arrive in a town or country:
    They arrived in London / in Spain a week ago.

    For other places (buildings etc.) or events, we say arrive at:
    When did you arrive at the hotel / at the airport / at the party?

    Last edited:

    Loob

    Senior Member

    English UK

    • Apr 1, 2013
    • #6

    Hello chinada - welcome to the forums!

    If you put arrive in at into the search box at the top of the page, you'll find there have been several previous threads about this.

    I think the general answer is that if you're thinking of a location as a point, you use "at"; if you're thinking of it as an area, you use "in".

    C

    chinada

    Member

    Chinese-Mandarin

    • Apr 2, 2013
    • #7

    Thank you very much!
    Yes, I have checked the previous threads on the topic, very helpful as well。

    Roymalika

    Senior Member

    Punjabi

    • Nov 3, 2021
    • #8

    Thomas Tompion said:

    I'd say arrived in if I had arrived well within the city frontiers, and arrived at if the city was one of several staging posts on my journey, particularly if I was in a train or some form of public transport.

    Hi Thomas Tompion,

    Can you please have a look at this situation?

    Let's say I am traveling to Islamabad from Faisalabad. I am in a train. When the train comes to Lahore (Lahore is between Islamabad and Faisalabad), my friend texts me and asks, "Where have you reached?" I say: I have arrived at Lahore.
    Here, Lahore is obviously not my destination; it is one of the staging points.

    Can I ask whether "arrived at" is correct/idiomatic here, please?

    Wordy McWordface

    Senior Member

    SSBE (Standard Southern British English)

    • Nov 3, 2021
    • #9

    Yes, it is idiomatic. If you say you've arrived at Lahore or simply "We're at Lahore", this means that you are at the railway station - a point along the way. It doesn't refer to the city itself.

    Last edited:

    You must log in or register to reply here.

    arrive: IN a city or AT a city (2025)

    References

    Top Articles
    Latest Posts
    Recommended Articles
    Article information

    Author: Fr. Dewey Fisher

    Last Updated:

    Views: 5707

    Rating: 4.1 / 5 (42 voted)

    Reviews: 81% of readers found this page helpful

    Author information

    Name: Fr. Dewey Fisher

    Birthday: 1993-03-26

    Address: 917 Hyun Views, Rogahnmouth, KY 91013-8827

    Phone: +5938540192553

    Job: Administration Developer

    Hobby: Embroidery, Horseback riding, Juggling, Urban exploration, Skiing, Cycling, Handball

    Introduction: My name is Fr. Dewey Fisher, I am a powerful, open, faithful, combative, spotless, faithful, fair person who loves writing and wants to share my knowledge and understanding with you.