Citation (Tosefta 4:3): One who vowed from Tirosh is forbidden all kinds of sweet things, and he is permitted wine.

Citation (Yerushalmi): This is like the opinion that Nedarim follow the way people speak. I.e. they normally call sweet things "Tirosh", but they do not call wine ["Tirosh"].

Citation (cont.): However, according to the opinion that Nedarim do not follow the way people speak, the Torah called it "Tirosh". "Tiroshcha" is wine.

Pesak: Therefore, since we speak a foreign language, if one vowed from Tirosh in Lashon ha'Kodesh, he is forbidden wine, and he is permitted all kinds of sweet things. We call only wine "Tirosh", like the Torah does;

Citation (Eruvin 30a - Mishnah): One who vowed from Mazon is permitted water and salt.

Citation (cont.) Question: This connotes that water and salt are not called Mazon, but everything else is called Mazon. This refutes Rav and Shmuel!

Citation (cont. - Rav and Shmuel): We bless Borei Minei Mezonos only on the five species [of grain].

Citation (cont.) Answer (Rav Yosef): The case is, he said "everything that is Zan is Alai." In such a case, he is forbidden everything except for water and salt.

However, one who vowed from Mazon is forbidden only the five species [of grain].

Explanation: The garment was narrow, and he was pained in it.

Assertion: It seems to me that the Beraisa argues with our Mishnah about R. Yehudah's reasoning;

The Tana of our Mishnah holds that R. Yehudah agrees with the first Tana that whenever there is no proof, [his words] connote [that he forbids] wearing, and not carrying;

R. Yehudah in the Beraisa connotes that he holds that also to permit carrying, we need a proof, but whenever there is no proof, even carrying is forbidden.

Pesak: Presumably, we hold like our Mishnah. Therefore, Stam connote [that he forbids] wearing, and not carrying;

However, if he was laden, and amidst this he vowed, carrying is forbidden and wearing is permitted. So it seems to me.

This is unlike the Rambam in Hilchos Nedarim (8:8).