# data[].attributes.body
Pour travailler toutes les compétences !

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
english "learn english" "english lessons" "english tips" "english teacher"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Share your videos with friends, family, and the world

# data[].attributes.headline
Article pour vous entraîner à la traduction (choisir un passage de 8-10 lignes)

# data[].attributes.subject
Article pour vous entraîner à la traduction (choisir un passage de 8-10 lignes)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Shelby family is fictional, but a real street gang operated in Birmingham at the turn of the 20th century

smithsonianmag.com

British screenwriter Steven Knight took inspiration from his father's stories of "incredibly well dressed," "incredibly powerful" gangsters active in turn-of-the-century England when he invented the Shelby clan-the family of razor blade-wielding mobsters at the heart of his BBC drama " Peaky Blinders." But it turns out that the Birmingham gang that lends the series its name actually existed, albeit in a different form than the family-centered criminal enterprise.

The real-life Peaky Blinders weren't quite as successful as the rags-to-riches Shelbys, whose criminal network evolves from a small local faction to a multi-country powerhouse over the course of the show's five seasons. Still, the two share a number of core similarities: namely, savvy fashion sense, a brutal disregard for the law and a member base made up largely of young working-class men. These youths, hardened by the economic deprivation rampant in industrial England, created what Historic U.K. 's Jessica Brain deems a "violent, criminal and organized" subculture.

As historian Carl Chinn, author of The Real Peaky Blinders, tells the Birmingham Mail's Zoe Chamberlain, the main difference between the fictionalized Peaky Blinders and their historical counterparts is timing. Although the television drama is set during the 1920s and '30s, the actual Birmingham group rose to prominence closer to the 1890s.

And while Machiavellian anti-hero Tommy Shelby, his shellstruck brother Arthur and their band of enforcers derive the name "Peaky Blinders" from the razor blade-lined peaked caps worn by members of the gang, it's unlikely the actual gangsters hid razors-then considered a luxury item-inside of their hats. (According to Chinn, the Shelby men use their covert weapons to "[slash] across the foreheads of their opponents, causing blood to pour down into their eyes and blind them.") Instead, Brain writes for Historic U.K., the real Peaky Blinders likely owe their title to the distinctive peak of their caps, or perhaps the fact that they used the hats to hide their faces from victims. It's also possible the nickname stems from the local slang term "blinder," which was used to describe "particularly striking" individuals.

Arthur Matthison, a paint and varnish manufacturer who witnessed the gang's antics firsthand, later described the archetypal Peaky Blinder as someone who "took pride in his personal appearance and dressed the part with skill." He wore bell-bottomed trousers, hob-nailed boots, a colorful scarf and a peaked hat with a long elongated brim; his hair, Matthison adds, was "prison cropped all over his head, except for a quiff in front which was grown long and plastered down obliquely on his forehead." Gang members' girlfriends, meanwhile, donned a " lavish display of pearls" and gaudy silk handkerchiefs draped over their throats, according to Philip Gooderson's The Gangs of Birmingham.

The Peaky Blinders' dapper appearance belied their brutal treatment of rival gang members, police and the general public. Per a July 21, 1898, letter sent to the Birmingham Daily Mail by an anonymous "workman," "No matter what part of the city one walks, gangs of 'peaky blinders' are to be seen, who ofttimes think nothing of grossly insulting passers by, be it a man, woman or child."

Days before the concerned workman penned this missive, a street brawl between Blinders and the police resulted in one constable's death. As Andrew Davies reports for History Extra, officer George Snipe was patrolling Birmingham's city center when he and a colleague encountered six or seven gang members who had been "drinking all the day, and fighting all the evening." Snipe arrested 23-year-old William Colerain for using lewd language, but the detainee's friends quickly came to his rescue. During the clash that followed, one of the young men threw a brick at Snipe's head with such force that he fractured the skull in two places. The constable died early the next morning. His killer, 19-year-old George "Cloggy Williams," was found guilty of manslaughter and sentenced to a lifetime of penal servitude-a fate the Birmingham Daily Post said should serve as a warning to "every rowdy in Birmingham."

David Cross, a historian at the West Midslands Police Museum, tells BBC News ' Michael Bradley that the Peaky Blinders targeted victims indiscriminately, choosing "anybody who looked vulnerable." He says, "Anything that could be taken, they would take it."

On March 23, 1890, for example, a group led by Thomas Mucklow attacked the younger George Eastwood after seeing him order a non-alcoholic ginger beer at the local pub. The outnumbered victim suffered "serious bodily contusions," a skull fracture and multiple lacerations on his scalp. He spent more than three weeks in the hospital and had to undergo a "trepanning" operation in which doctors drilled a hole into his head. The Daily Post dubbed the incident a "murderous assault," and the London Daily News identified the perpetrators as members of the "Small Heath Peaky Blinders." According to Chinn, this mention represents the earliest known written reference to the gang.

Unlike their fictional counterparts, the real Blinders were far from criminal masterminds: Police mugshots of Harry Fowler, Ernest Bayles, Stephen McHickie and Thomas Gilbert detail minor offenses including "shop-breaking," "bike theft" and acting under "false pretences." Per the West Midlands Police Museum, which holds a collection of some 6,000 Victorian and Edwardian mugshots, Fowler-arrested in 1904-later fought in World War I. He spent 12 hours buried alive by a mortar bombardment and emerged from the battle with serious injuries. After the war, historian Corinne Brazier reveals, the severely injured Fowler made a living by selling postcards of himself dressed as a female nurse.

The Peaky Blinders dominated Birmingham until the dawn of World War I-a timeline reversed in the BBC drama, which finds Tommy, Arthur and John Shelby building their criminal enterprise after returning from the war. (All five seasons of show are now streaming on Netflix.) In truth, a rival gang called the Birmingham Boys assumed control of the region during the 1920s. Led by Billy Kimber, a gangster Chinn describes as a "very intelligent man with a fighting ability, a magnetic personality and a shrewd [awareness] of the importance of an alliance with London," the group wielded influence until the 1930s, when another gang headed by Charles Sabini usurped its place in the English Midlands. Fictionalized versions of both rival gangs appear in "Peaky Blinders," providing foils to Tommy's Shelby Company Limited.

As Knight tells History Extra's Jonathan Wright, one of the tales that inspired the show centers on his father's childhood encounter with a group of local gangsters. Sent to deliver a message, the young boy found eight well-dressed men sitting around a table covered in money. Each wore a peaked cap and had a gun tucked inside their pocket.

"Just that image-smoke, booze and these immaculately dressed men in this slum in Birmingham-I thought, that's the mythology, that's the story, and that's the first image I started to work with," Knight says.

Writing in The Real Peaky Blinders, Chinn similarly emphasizes the gang's intangible allure.

He concludes, "The ill-fame of the Peaky Blinders and their lurid name infused as it was with violence and gangsterism ensured that they would not be forgotten."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
smithsonianmag.com British screenwriter Steven Knight took inspiration from his father's stories of "incredibly well dressed," "incredibly powerful" gangsters active in turn-of-the-century England when he invented the Shelby clan-the family of razor blade-wielding mobsters at the heart of his BBC drama " Peaky Blinders."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
When does a historical retelling go too far? How responsible is it to take creative license with real-life events? Is it better, safer, to tackle distant historical subjects that can't engage with your version of history? What about when still-living subjects of biopics and docudramas argue that by regurgitating their pasts, you're making things worse for them in the present?

These complicated questions, and what feels like increasing hostility surrounding them, have coalesced around a predictable target: the newest season of Netflix's The Crown. While earlier seasons of the show won the British royal family's interest, the latest seasons - which deal with Charles and Diana's troubled relationship and the ongoing fallout - have increasingly alienated them, and garnered support from royal allies who say the show is damaging the monarchy.

The implications for the show, the royal family, and for the culture at large all point toward a view of fiction that refuses to allow it to stand on its own terms as a creative work. So what does it mean when, instead of trying to separate reality from fiction, we blame fiction itself for creating harm in the real world?

The Crown's relationship to the truth isn't as contentious as you might think

Like all docudramas and biopics, Netflix's messiest prestige drama enjoys a fraught relationship to reality. For four seasons, the show alternately courted and criticized the real British royal family. While some royals (including the late Queen Elizabeth, if rumor is to be believed) tuned in enthusiastically, others (reportedly including King Charles) criticized the show's accuracy. With the release of season five, which delves into the scandals that plagued Charles and Diana in the 1990s, the monarchy's concern over fallout has sharpened into controversy.

Cries for Netflix to issue some sort of disclaimer that the show is fictional have dominated headlines here and across the pond, with figures like Dame Judi Dench (who has portrayed Queen Victoria - twice! - and Queen Elizabeth I on screen) and former prime minister John Major (a major figure in The Crown's current season) castigating the show for its fictional liberties and asking the streamer to clarify that it is a work of fiction. The royal family has stayed silent; though individual family members, including Prince Harry, have commented on the record about watching previous seasons, the silence from the monarchy while the debate rages around them over season five has been resounding.

Netflix has so far declined to add a clarification to the show credits, although it did add a disclaimer to the YouTube description of its season five trailer: "Inspired by real events, this fictional dramatisation tells the story of Queen Elizabeth II and the political and personal events that shaped her reign."

At least one actor has gone to bat for the show's right to be un-disclaimed: Claudia Harrison, who plays Princess Anne this season, told the Guardian that the idea was condescending. "To think people are genuinely sitting down thinking this is a documentary and that everything they see is fact, I feel uncomfortable with that," she said. "Patronise an audience at your peril."

Where The Crown gets slippery is actually in how historically accurate it frequently is, particularly when it comes to events that the real royals would prefer no one rehash.

Season two shocked audiences by exploring multiple family members' connections to the Nazis. Season four depicted the institutionalization of five young women from the Bowes-Lyon family with developmental disabilities, after which two of them - the Queen Mother's nieces - were falsely declared dead. Much of the time, The Crown insists on letting you know that what's on screen really did happen; for example, it ended the Bowes-Lyon episode with real photos of the abandoned, institutionalized women.

It's not that The Crown is largely false, but rather that it's usually pretty on the money. As the Washington Post put it when fact-checking the Duke of Windsor's relationship with Hitler, the history is "not totally as depicted, but darn near close." Because it's so often right, the show's fictional liberties merge seamlessly with the truth and make it easy to take the whole series as gospel.

Among the biggest charges critics have laid against the production throughout its most recent two seasons is that showrunner Peter Morgan presents the affair between Charles and Camilla Parker-Bowles as something that did not fully end prior to Charles dating Diana, thus dooming an unwitting Diana to a disastrous marriage from the start. King Charles has denied that he was initially unfaithful, though others claim that he and Camilla rekindled and maintained their relationship just a few years into Camilla's marriage to Andrew Parker-Bowles, well before he met Diana. In The Windsor Knot: Charles, Camilla and the Legacy of Diana, author Christopher Wilson recounts numerous instances throughout the late '70s and early '80s in which Charles and Camilla were openly flirtatious during the early parts of Charles's first marriage; indeed, Camilla and Andrew were present for Diana's "Balmoral test" - the weekend trip in which she first met the royal family.

"There was virtually nothing she could do," Wilson wrote of Diana. "Camilla appeared to be holding the reins and Charles was content with that. 'Diana had to swallow her feelings,' said a friend at the time. 'She had to bide her time - she wasn't even his fiancée yet.'"

This season also depicts Prince Philip having an unconfirmed emotional affair, which he describes to Elizabeth as "spiritual companionship" in the show. Other alleged fudging of facts are more anodyne: timelines can be compressed, some lesser family members are not dealt with, Charles and Di are given a fictional meet-cute - all normal parts of translating a historical narrative into a work of art.

The Crown is doing what every work of historical fiction does: striving for accuracy while allowing itself some creative license. The Crown enjoys a good deal of autonomy; the royal family did not cooperate in the show's production, and key scenes taking place in the royal properties are all filmed elsewhere. What's ironic is that despite that separation, The Crown 's relationship to the crown IRL kneecaps season five. Which brings us to the most revealing conflict of all: Camillagate.

Its Camillagate episode might just be The Crown at its wussiest

Episode five, "The Way Ahead," deals with one of the more infamous moments in recent British monarchy history: the leaked private conversation between Charles and Camilla known as "Camillagate," or sometimes "Tampongate." Throughout the show, The Crown has depicted Charles as a jerk who left Diana to discover his ongoing affair on her own and made no serious effort to commit to her, then demonized her for being unable to navigate her way around his infidelity.

If ever there were an opportunity to zoom out and explore the cultural reception to this dysfunctional marriage and the journalistic frenzy to devour the monarchy because of it, it's the moment when an amateur radio scanner inadvertently captures - and a tabloid then leaks - audio of Charles half-jokingly telling Camilla (over the phone while her husband and children are in the next room) that he wants to live inside her trousers, before joking about being reincarnated as a tampon.

We see almost none of the subsequent tabloid frenzy onscreen, and besides a long shot of her holding her head in her hands, we are barely party to Diana's reaction. The show chooses this crucial point to back away from its "Charles is a jerk" characterization, instead spending the episode's second half showing what a good leader the future king is and how he rallied from the scandal by focusing on community outreach and educational development for working-class children. Although he founded the Prince's Trust 17 years before Camillagate, the episode presents it as the solution to the prince's publicity problem. The episode ends, after a montage showing the fictional Charles helping countless happy children, with closing titles informing us that "The Prince's Trust has assisted one million young people to fulfill their potential and returned nearly £1.4 billion in value to society."

We might explain the oddity of this framing as a choice born from pure sympathy - after all, what happened to Charles and Camilla was a horrible privacy violation. The Crown showrunner Peter Morgan has made no secret of his own overriding compassion for the royals, though he's claimed to have "sympathy and criticism in equal measure" for Charles himself. But on the balance, the show's handling of this event seems sympathetic to a fault, especially considering that a few months prior to Camillagate, Diana's own privacy was seriously violated. This occurred with "Squidgygate," in which Diana's phone was almost certainly tapped by the British secret service, and conversations were recorded and then leaked to the airwaves for radio scanners to find.

Though her conversation - in which she flirted with a lover, lightly shaded the royals, and spoke of being suicidal due to Charles's treatment of her - wasn't as damning as Charles's own conversation, the scandal was very real. Its omission from The Crown as a precursor to Camillagate not only seems overly biased, but serves as a kind of gaslighting of Diana. Later episodes paint her conviction that her phone is bugged as growing paranoia that makes her vulnerable to being manipulated, rather than the experience of someone who was indeed living under constant unwanted surveillance.

These choices seem designed to placate the real royal family, to the show's detriment. It's unclear why that shift might be occurring now, five seasons into a show that rarely pulls its punches. Perhaps, Morgan - whose previous work includes 2006's acclaimed film , which follows Queen Elizabeth after Diana's death - has gotten more fond of his subjects with time. "I came at it as completely anti-monarchist and I've turned around utterly," he told the Radio Times in 2017. "I'm a royalist now."

It could also be that he agrees with The Crown 's critics that any dramatization of the scandal-laden incidents that plague the monarchy's more recent history should be done with heightened sensitivity. In fact, if the show were less indebted to its real-life moorings, it might have told a more accurate version of this part of the story - or at least one more aligned with its typical clear-eyed storytelling.

Reality couched in fiction can be a tough pill to swallow

The whole controversy begins to make sense if we think less about how the show is telling its story - lose the fact-versus-fiction scorecard - and more about what it's doing. The monarchy's presumed anger isn't actually about the show confusing the public; it's resentment at storytelling that the monarchy itself cannot control.

Such mythmaking prior to the Diana era (created by an adoring public, a largely uncritical press, and often the monarchy itself) served the royals by enabling their lavish lifestyle, the adoration of the public, and the conceit - itself entirely fictional - that the monarchy held together Great Britain and all the members of the Commonwealth. When stories about the royals began to move into the hands of tabloid journalism and fully out of the family's control, storytelling of any kind began to be a suspicious endeavor to the royals. This is an institution that prides itself on being a uniting symbol above all else, as the fictionalized Elizabeth reminds us at the beginning of the season. It was never going to embrace a drama that exposed its human flaws to a whole new generation.

This doesn't fully explain why other people are so upset, however. Why are celebrities like Judi Dench - whose turns as Queen Victoria in two different films were each criticized for being less than historically accurate - suddenly accusing The Crown of being egregiously fictional? Canadian outlet The Star did a lengthy cataloging of complaints about the show from historians, biographers, politicians, and fans - minor quibbles meant to back up a larger complaint that the show's entire existence has "a corrosive effect" on the monarchy, as one historian worried.

What few of these contributions to the discussion seem to want to admit is that as a work of fiction, The Crown is allowed to have a thematic narrative and a point of view about its subjects. It is not required to be a documentary, and in fact, many documentaries also evolve from observed reality to subjective narrative. The boundary between what is real and what is mediated through the imagination always creates dissonance, especially when concerning famous subjects.

The growing pressure on The Crown may be due in part to significant changes to the entertainment landscape. In an age of expanding demand for content, television producers and streamers have latched onto reality as an endless source of intellectual property - especially recent history, with many docudramas appearing so fast (The Dropoutabout Elizabeth Holmes and Theranos, about Adam Neumann and WeWork) that their subjects' stories are still unraveling in real-time. The boom of this kind of work shows no signs of waning; in addition to prestige dramas about bad startup founders, 2022 has seen an onslaught of fictionalized true crime series like The Staircase and . Awards-bait biopics have become so numerous and so critically precious - at last year's Oscars, almost half of the acting nominations went to actors playing real people - that they've almost crossed the line into self-parody:

Oh I genuinely hope that the future of the best actor Oscars has gender blind categories, one with five slots for playing a person who existed, another with five slots for original characters. The impersonation shtick is so tired. https://t.co/rFHVo2cObs
- Matt Zoller Seitz (@mattzollerseitz) February 28, 2022

The sheer number of shows and films based on real-life events has arguably made it easier to interpret such works as literal, even when, as with The Staircase, they're deliberately exploring the line between fact and fiction. Netflix's recent Jeffrey Dahmer drama series drew praise for its faithfulness to its gruesome subject, but also garnered backlash from the families of Dahmer's victims, some of whom argued the series itself was "retraumatizing" in its dredging up of the worst things that have happened to them. It gets harder to make the ethical case for these works when they intersect with, and arguably harm, real people.

Does that mean, however, that there should be an agreed-upon statute of limitations after which it's acceptable to make art about real-life events? Of course not. That is bad for artists, and worse for us as consumers. Consider what we would lose, for example, if shows like The Simpsons or Saturday Night Live aren't allowed to parody decades of pop culture in real time because their subjects object.

Yet we increasingly see arguments that seem to be built around the assumption that fiction is somehow an attack on the real. Just look at Elon Musk's ongoing meltdowns over Twitter impersonators. Musk seems to reject the notion that accounts trading in fictional parody aren't inherently part of Twitter culture, but rather should be cordoned off, clearly identified with the "parody" label, and dealt with as suspicious and innately hostile if they come without that label. Like the monarchy, Musk - royalty of a different sort - is clearly threatened by anyone using the guise of fiction to speak unpleasant truths in reality, and he's lashing out in similar ways.

Perhaps instead of looking at fiction as a threat, we might step back and remind ourselves that art that makes us uncomfortable is a strength, not a weakness. And perhaps, if you're the richest man in the world, or belong to one of the world's most powerful families, art that speaks truth to you is a gift, not an enemy - even if it comes in a very convincing, realistic disguise.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Season five of "The Crown" is somehow both too accurate and too distorted for the royal family's supporters.

# data[].attributes.headline
CO The Real-life History that Inspired GOT

# data[].attributes.subject
CO The Real-life History that Inspired GOT

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Audio - L’Officiel du test Cambridge English Certificate, niveau B2

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.album
L’Officiel du test Cambridge English Certificate, niveau B2

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Audio - L’Officiel du test Cambridge English Certificate, niveau B2

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.album
L’Officiel du test Cambridge English Certificate, niveau B2

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Audio - L’Officiel du test Cambridge English Certificate, niveau B2

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.album
L’Officiel du test Cambridge English Certificate, niveau B2

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Audio - L’Officiel du test Cambridge English Certificate, niveau B2

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.album
L’Officiel du test Cambridge English Certificate, niveau B2

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Practical learning University College Dublin International 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Apprendre l'anglais devient de plus en plus important aujourd'hui dans notre monde globalisé et interconnecté. L'anglais est une des langues les plus parlées au monde et s'est imposée comme la langue internationale des affaires. Voyager, développer sa personnalité, voir des films en VO ou encore augmenter ses perspectives de carrière, il y a pléthore de raisons de se mettre à l'anglais.

S'il y a bien une chose que les étudiants aiment, ce sont des choses gratuites ! Et si vous souhaitez améliorer vos compétences linguistiques en anglais rapidement et facilement, alors YouTube est votre allié de choix. YouTube ne se limite plus aux chats et aux vidéos idiotes. Vous trouverez des milliers de vidéos d'apprentissage de l'anglais sur YouTube, gratuitement.

Pourquoi apprendre l'anglais avec YouTube ?

Les vidéos sont non seulement gratuites, informatives et faciles d'accès, mais elles sont également très amusantes.

Vous améliorez votre prononciation en entendant comment les mots sont réellement prononcés par des personnes réelles - et pas seulement par le bot Google Translate ! Les vidéos améliorent également vos capacités d'écoute et votre compréhension de la manière dont les gens parlent et interagissent, chose que vous ne pouvez pas saisir de manière authentique dans les pages d'un manuel.

L'une des meilleures raisons d'apprendre l'anglais avec YouTube est que la plupart des leçons sont brèves, mais transmettent beaucoup d'informations de manière facile à comprendre. Il n'y a aucune chance que vous perdiez votre concentration. En plongeant dans une courte leçon par jour, vous remarquerez bientôt la différence entre votre capacité à parler anglais.

1. learn english with misterduncan

C'est l'une des chaînes YouTube les plus populaires pour les vidéos d'apprentissage en anglais. C'est facile de voir pourquoi.

Misterduncan est passionné par son sujet. Il est enthousiasmé par l'anglais et vous le ressentez dans ces vidéos bien faites. Il utilise l'humour beaucoup de temps pour vous aider à apprendre. Misterduncan enseigne l'anglais au monde gratuitement et dispose d'une chaîne sur YouTube depuis 2006.

Il existe de nombreuses leçons sur des sujets tels que les sens, l'argot, les nouvelles, la mode et l'argent. Ils sont faciles à regarder et traitent de la façon dont la langue est parlée au lieu de la grammaire.

2. BBC Learn English

Voici du contenu développé par l'une des sociétés de radiodiffusion les plus célèbres au monde (la British Broadcasting Corporation) qui propose une série de cours d'anglais gratuits. Ils se présentent sous divers formats, tels que des situations réelles, des dessins animés et des entretiens.

Leurs courtes vidéos contiennent de nombreuses informations expliquées en fonction de situations et de thèmes différents (par exemple, la grammaire, la prononciation, le vocabulaire, la musique et les entretiens). De nouvelles vidéos basées sur un thème spécifique sont publiées tous les jours et un contenu supplémentaire est utile pour vous immerger dans l'anglais de tous les jours.

Des leçons pour perfectionner votre niveau d'apprentissage de l'anglais avec du vocabulaire, de la grammaire et de nouveaux exemples sur la façon de réagir dans différentes situations (par exemple, comment refuser des invitations, montrer son mécontentement). En outre, des croquis sont spécialement conçus pour vous aider à apprendre l'anglais visuellement.

3. Real English

Real English est l'une des meilleures chaînes YouTube pour les débutants en anglais et dispose d'une grande bibliothèque de leçons gratuites. Chacune comprend deux vidéos, l'une avec sous-titres et l'autre sans et une poignée d'exercices.

Il y a des personnages authentiques et des situations réelles, de sorte que vous comprenez vraiment comment les gens parlent vraiment anglais.

4. Rachel's English

Rachel est une experte en prononciation et a une formation en musique classique. Dans chacune de ses vidéos, elle souligne ses connaissances en chant et en prononciation, ce qui est très utile pour expliquer la position de la bouche afin de générer certains sons dans la langue anglaise. Toutes les vidéos ont des sous-titres pour aider les apprenants à suivre les cours de langue. Cette chaîne est idéale si vous souhaitez avoir un accent plus proche des anglophones ainsi que d'affiner votre prononciation. Les vidéos sont classées par thèmes et contiennent des informations pertinentes sur les règles de prononciation.

Vous pourrez également pratiquer des exercices liés à ce qui a été enseigné dans chaque leçon avec Rachel.

5. VOA Learning English

VOA est quelque chose d'un peu différent. La chaîne propose des reportages sous-titrés lus à une vitesse inférieure à la normale. Cela donne au spectateur le temps d'entendre chaque mot clairement. Des journaux télévisés en quelque sorte mais avec une différence de taille. Articulation parfaite et sous titrages participent à une meilleure compréhension de la langue.

6. Britlish

Britlish adopte une approche différente de celle de nombreux autres canaux d'apprentissage des langues. Il se concentre sur l'apprentissage des choses qui font parties de notre environnement et qui nous intéressent. Par exemple, il existe des leçons sur le vocabulaire dont vous aurez besoin dans un aéroport, les bestioles (insectes) et les types d'instruments de musique.

La narration est simple et accompagnée de sous-titres et parfois de scènes fascinantes. Les leçons renvoient toutes à des éléments interactifs de suivi sur le site Web, qui sont également gratuits.

7. Business English Pod

L'anglais utilisé sur le lieu de travail ou dans un contexte commercial peut être très différent de l'anglais informel, mais il est difficile de le pratiquer seul ! C'est pourquoi Business English Pod est si bon. Il contient des vidéos détaillées sur toutes les situations et tous les types de vocabulaire que vous pourriez avoir besoin d'apprendre pour votre travail. C'est une chaîne vraiment incroyable pour les apprenants d'anglais professionnel !

8. Easy English

Cette chaîne est parfaite si vous voulez comprendre comment les Britanniques se parlent vraiment. Easy English fait partie de la chaîne Easy Languages, où les gens dans la rue discutent sous forme d'interviews afin que les étudiants puissent comprendre comment les gens interagissent réellement dans la langue. Le langage utilisé est un anglais simplifié, des interviews sont menés avec des personnes dans les rues du Royaume-Uni sur toutes sortes de sujets. Les vidéos durent généralement entre 3 et 5 minutes et vous donnent un aperçu de la manière dont la langue anglaise est parlée dans la pratique, pas seulement en classe.

9. English Class 101

English Class 101 est l'un des canaux d'apprentissage de l'anglais les plus populaires sur YouTube avec plus de 1,4 million d'abonnés et s'adresse aux apprenants de tous les niveaux. La chaîne affirme que vous parlerez la langue "en quelques minutes" car c'est "le moyen le plus rapide, le plus facile et le plus amusant d'apprendre l'anglais". ! Avec des leçons de conversation, de lecture et d'écriture, la chaîne a littéralement tout ce dont vous avez besoin au même endroit.

10. AnglaisCours club

Cette chaîne YouTube dispose de trois professeurs différents : un français et deux anglophones. Cela leur permet de faire des vidéos à l'intention d'apprenants de différents niveaux - de niveaux débutant à avancé. On retrouve également des vidéos en français avec des exemples en anglais. Autre avantages d'avoir des profs différents est d'entendre différents accents et de ce fait ne pas s'habituer qu'à une seule façon de parler anglais. Grâce aux cours disponibles vous pouvez faire le point sur certaines règles grammaticales de la langue anglaise à l'aide de techniques simples et efficaces. Cela permet d'avoir une meilleure compréhension de la langue.

Des formations sur-mesure efficaces !

Si vous voulez apprendre, progresser ou vous perfectionner en anglais, MyConnecting vous propose une formation anglais hyperpersonnalisée. Vous ne suivez pas juste des modules existants comme cela se fait habituellement. Nos formateurs experts vous concoctent un parcours de formation qui répond précisément à vos besoins, attentes et objectifs. Le parcours de formation est adaptatif et évolutif en prenant en compte la progression de l'apprenant. De plus, notre approche et notre accompagnement humains vous permettent de suivre la formation dans les meilleures dispositions possibles.
>> Pour découvrir nos formations personnalisées, contactez-nous !

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
YouTube : 10 Chaînes Pour Apprendre L'anglais !

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Apprendre l'anglais devient de plus en plus important aujourd'hui dans notre monde globalisé et interconnecté. L'anglais est une des langues les plus parlées au monde et s'est imposée comme la langue internationale des affaires. Voyager, développer sa personnalité, voir des films en VO ou encore augmenter ses perspectives de carrière, il y a pléthore de raisons de se mettre à l'anglais.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Free English Pronunciation Lessons | Oxford Online English

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Learn English with free English pronunciation lessons from Oxford Online English. Video lessons with clear explanations make learning easy!

# data[].attributes.body
Copy your text and practise repeating.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
From Text To Speech - Free online TTS service

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Free web based Text To Speech (TTS) service. Convert online any English text into MP3 audio file.

# data[].attributes.body
Erreurs à ne plus faire !!!!

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.listenaminute.com/
https://learningenglish.voanews.com/z/3619
http://www.bbc.co.uk/learningenglish/english/course/eiam
https://www.bbc.com/news/av/10462520/one-minute-world-news

# data[].attributes.body
http://www.anglais.ac-aix-marseille.fr/Presse.htm

# data[].attributes.body
http://www.pressexplorer.com/presse_anglaise.html

# data[].attributes.headline
Plus d'exercices et de rappels de règles de grammaire

# data[].attributes.subject
Plus d'exercices et de rappels de règles de grammaire

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.anglaisfacile.com/exercices/
Choisir le niveau "Intermediate"
https://www.anglaisfacile.com/free/news/pdf.php
fiches récapitulatives

# data[].attributes.body
Follow the link and choose the topics you want to work on.
https://englishteststore.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=11387&Itemid=380

# data[].attributes.body
Quiz for students https://www.nytimes.com/column/learning-news-quiz

Weekly quiz
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/02/23/briefing/23weeklynewsquiz.html

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.nytimes.com/
https://www.theguardian.com/uk