On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 11:04 AM, <berenger.morel@neutralite.org
<mailto:berenger.morel@neutralite.org>> wrote:
Le 09.10.2013 15:39, Richard Owlett a écrit :
The lesson learned? That whether or not something is a
dependency is
in eyes of beholder. LOL
I apologize, but I have no idea about what does means "eye of
the beholder".
It's a shortened reference to a common phrase in the United
States - "Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder".
What one person might find ugly, another person might find
beautiful. The beauty of the object is dependent on who is
beholding the object and what value that beholder places on the
object.
The typical scenario might be a party, whereat a man introduces
his fiance to his friends. After the engaged couple walk away,
the friends whisper to one another, "Wow, she was ugly!", "Yeah,
but he seems to really be mad in love with her.", followed by "I
guess it's true what they say, 'Beauty is in the eyes of the
beholder'."
Of course, a third friend, who like the engaged man also finds
the fiance attractive, might add, "And boy, would I like to be
holding her!"
In Richard's case above, he's modifying the phrase to mean that
what one person sees ("beholds") as a dependency might not be
seen ("beheld") by another person as a dependency.
--
Kent