The Duke House Analysis Free Sample

In the turn of the twentieth century, American architects were trying out new and innovative architectural designs. They were both wealthy and daring with the work they did such that they came up with the beautiful works that adorn American landscapes and especially some landmark city scape. The James B. Duke House is one such endeavor that was the product of a wealthy owner and a brilliant architect.

James Buchanan Duke, one of the founders and was the president of American Tobacco Company, and his wife Nanaline, were the original owners of the house situated on 1 East 78th Street, Northeast corner at Fifth Avenue. After he bought the original house which was known as the Henry H. Cook mansion, he demolished it in order to build the house he desired. The house still stands and was donated to the New York University’s Institution of Fine Arts in the 1950s. In January this year, the Institute of fine arts celebrated the house’s one hundredth anniversary. The house was designed in 1909 by the architect Horace Trumbauer who was a well renowned for his works for example Eleanor Elkins Widener mansion, Edward C. Knight mansion and James E. Watson mansion. He was mainly known for designing residential mansions for the affluent.

The Duke house situated in the Millionaire’s Row is a brilliant example of a detached mansion in New York City. The super-rich men of the turn of the century New York commonly known as the Robber Barons, many of them like the affluent owner of this mansion had town houses that they used for their entertainment needs and as such these houses both showed a wealth in architectural design as well as interior embellishments. The New York Millionaire’s’ Row is a fine example of affluence and still shows this characteristics to date.

Its architectural design is based on orthodox French architecture and it bears a stunning similarity to the 18th century Hôtel Labottière and another very elegant and very graceful townhouse, the Commonwealth Fund, at 1 East 75th Street. It has a protrusive middle entry way with sculptural aggrandizement especially on the roof which is bordered with more ascetic wings. These wings make the entrance, clear by its own moderation, all the more effective. The frontage is simple and its unusual windows located on its two floors are one of its principals. The windows have overstated and level panels between them with a horizontal piece in the form of a profound stringcourse separating the two floors. In addition to this, its sides are grey and rustic establishing a bay at the second floor. Columns adorn both the entrance and the above decorations create a monument of the New York cityscape.

It was constructed of extraordinarily fine limestone and of architectural brilliance is that it appears to be two storied but hidden from sight is the attic. It is characterized with ceilings of generous proportions. The walls are characterized with large windows that adorn the house giving it its elegance. In addition to the simple design of the windows, a wide range of architectural additions for example balustrades, iron guards on windows, impeccable paneling, the plain elegance and the roof cornice all emphasize the elegance that went into the building.

This building and many more like it that were built for the wealthy at this post-civil war period were a fine example of the American dream. The family of James Duke, his wife and their daughter were a family not predominantly wealthy. James Duke was born in a lowly North Carolina farm where he horned tobacco preservation skills and was instrumental in starting the cigarette industry. The mansion in the city was a way to showcase his finesse and also a testament of his achievements.


Boyer, Christine. Manhattan Manners: Architec- ture and Style, 1850-1900. New York: Rizzoli Inter- national Publications, 1985.

Dolkart, Andrew. Touring The Upper East Side, Walks in Five Historic Districts. New York Landmarks Conservancy, 1995.

Kathrens, Michael. American Splendor: The Residential Architecture of Horace Trumbauer. New York: Acanthus Press, 2002.

Researching Of Three Circles Of English

There is a well-known model in which three circles of the English language spread: the inner circle, the outer ring, and the expanding circle. Countries of the inner circle are the states in which English is the official and native language for the vast majority of the population. However, even today, in the UK and the USA, there are fewer and fewer native English speakers due to an increase in the number of immigrants. For them, English remains their second language, and these users are not the ones who set the language standard. The outer circle includes countries that used to be under British rule. In these regions, English has historically performed and continues to be the second official language such as India, Singapore, the Philippines, and Tanzania. 30-40 years ago, in these countries, the representatives of the middle class were practically bilingual, and today, this position has been largely lost. But in the third circle countries, the English language study is going at an accelerated pace. A whole industry of teaching English has emerged, which is a path to the world of business, science, innovative technologies, and politics.

English as an international language is spreading rapidly across the globe. In this regard, many teachers and even linguists believe that there is no need to force students to imitate the speech patterns of native speakers. In South Africa, it is customary for a particular segment of the population with a high educational level and social status to speak English including elements of the Hausa language. In the countries of the outer circle, attention should be paid to the commercialization of English-language training. The lack of native speakers from first-circle countries forces Chinese families to invite English-speaking governesses from second-circle countries. In the future, their children will be able to get higher education in English and find work in prestigious international companies. At the same time, it is doubtful that native speakers of New English can do this just as quickly. However, for them, the period of language adaptation will be much shorter than for people who do not initially speak the English language. The processes described above are taking place in Asia, Africa, Oceania, and Latin America. Inhabitants of these regions are striving, through mastering the English language, to integrate into a new world of globalization.

The scheme of dividing countries into circles is beneficial for analyzing the English language’s degree of prevalence globally, and not all countries fit into it. In Roman-speaking countries, the French are strictly opposed to the English language invasion, seeking to preserve their language identity. Spaniards, Portuguese, and Italians also prefer to communicate with foreigners in their languages. Political events play an essential role in the popularity or rejection of a particular foreign language. Thus, Belgrade’s bombing did not increase the English language’s popularity in Serbia, especially its American version. Speaking of English as a worldwide contact language, people signify its communicative status as a means of communication in limited areas of social contact. Therefore, the provided model does not consider the political or cultural features which may affect the usage of the English language in some specific regions.

Type Features Examples
Inner circle Countries where people use English as a native language Great Britain, USA
Outer circle States which used to be colonies of Great Britain and have English as the second official language India, New Zealand
Expanding circle Countries where English is considered as a foreign language China, Egypt

Proper Hand Washing Technique Barriers

Hand hygiene is a critical process in ensuring patient safety and quality treatment outcomes in health care facilities. As such, it is necessary for health care facilities to initiate and implement hand hygiene proposals to help in the reduction of infections acquired at the hospital like Catheter-Associated Urinary Tract Infection (CAUTI). While the process of change implementation may offer various challenges, health care workers should stay determined to ensure effective hand hygiene practices. Nonetheless, hand hygiene is a process that applies to both health care professionals and patients. This paper outlines two possible barriers to effective handwashing techniques in preventing CAUTI and gives recommendations to overcome them.

One of the most highlighted barriers to effective hand hygiene is the lack of knowledge and training for hand hygiene measures among health care providers and patients. Studies have also found that lack of efforts has led to disregarding 80% of hand hygiene guidelines provided by the World Health Organization (WHO) (Mearkle, Houghton, Bwonya, & Lindfield, 2016). The second barrier to effective hand hygiene practice is infrastructural deficit, such as insufficient water supply and poor quality of antiseptic soap (Ataiyero, Dyson, & Graham, 2019). Subsequently, the successful implementation of an effective handwashing technique to reduce the rate of CAUTI requires certain recommendations to be considered.

Consequently, to overcome the barriers that have been mentioned, the hospital’s management should hire public health professionals to provide handwashing education to patients and clinicians in the inpatient wards and outpatient. The public health officials will train patients and clinical professionals to wash their hands using soap and running water thoroughly. Additionally, the hospital will also have to ensure the procurement of high-quality antiseptic soaps and increase sanitizers to address the problem of insufficient water supply and poor quality of antiseptic soap. Thus, by adhering to the recommendations, the hospital will be able to implement the change proposal effectively and reduce the rate of CAUTI.

Overall, hand washing is an essential step towards the reduction of hospital-acquired infections like CAUTI. Therefore, health care facilities should ensure the implementation of effective hand hygiene practices. This can be done by addressing barriers such as lack of knowledge and training as well as an infrastructural deficit. Accordingly, the provision of handwashing education and procurement of alternative hand washing detergents, such as sanitizers are recommended to ensure effective implementation of the change proposal.


Ataiyero, Y., Dyson, J., & Graham, M. (2019). Barriers to hand hygiene practices among health care workers in sub-Saharan African countries: A narrative review. American Journal of Infection control, 47(5), 565-573. Web.

Mearkle, R., Houghton, R., Bwonya, D., & Lindfield, R. (2016). Barriers to hand hygiene in ophthalmic outpatients in Uganda: A mixed-methods approach. Journal of Ophthalmic Inflammation and Infection, 6(1), 1-6. Web.