Reference for Nedarim 174:3
אמרה קונם תאנה אמר רבא מתני' רבי שמעון היא דאמר עד שיאמר שבועה לכל אחד ואחד
— Is it then written, he shall annul [part] thereof? And R. Akiba?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And how does he dispose of this objection? ');"><sup>5</sup></span> — Annulment is assimilated to confirmation: just as confirmation [denotes a part] thereof, so annulment too [denotes a part] thereof. R. Hiyya b. Abba said in R. Johanan's name: These are the views of R. Ishmael and R. Akiba. But the Sages maintain: Confirmation is assimilated to annulment: just as in the case of annulment, that which he annulled is void, so also in respect to confirmation, that which he confirmed is confirmed.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' On this reading, the Sages regard it as axiomatic that part of a vow can be annulled, and by analogy rule likewise for confirmation. Hence the statement of the Mishnah, that if he annulled the vow in respect of figs it is not annulled, must mean that the vow is not entirely void; the conflict in the Baraitha must also be interpreted on the same lines. But in the Tosefta it appears that if one annulled only part thereof the entire vow remains valid. Consequently the reading of some editions is preferable: But the Sages maintain, just as in the case of annulment, even that part which he annulled is not void, so is confirmation too — even that which he confirmed is not confirmed (Ran). ');"><sup>6</sup></span>