Daf Yomi bava Kamma 6b: Chav vs. Chayyav

An interesting gemara, in that it asks a linguistic question, and rather than making a diyyuk with halachic ramifications, they note that it is a dialectal difference. Thus, chav in the Mishna means chayyav, but the Tanna was from Yerushalayim. This calls to mind naghei vs. leilei in the beginning of Pesachim, where the conclusion of the gemara was also that it is a dialectal difference, rather than a halachic difference.

It is also interesting in that they can attempt to identify the author based on linguistic style. This approach borders on certain academic approaches. Of course, I do not think that the gemara does this consistently.

Tosafot on the daf notes other instances of chav, but says that there is a difference between חיוב and חובה. Here is is חיוב, an obligation, whereas in those places it means חובה, as in a loss. Such as zachin vs. chavin, which is causing a loss to someone; and siezing for a creditor where it causes a loss to others (who are other creditors of this debtor).

Besides the semantic difference, perhaps there is also the causative or transitive element? In these cases, it causes a loss to others. We also have בין חב עד שלא הזיק בין הזיק עד שלא חב לא עשו ולא כלום, where the intent is a debt. (And perhaps also these are past-tense, hizik and chav.) Here, also, the point is that as an intransitive present-tense verb, we should expect chayyav, that he is obligated.

Indeed, while we cannot find any exact examples in Bavli aside for this Mishna, we find a nice example or two in Yerushalmi. Thus, in Nedarim 2a:

אמר רבי חנניה אפי' בככר אחד אתייא היא כהדא דתני זה חומר לשעבר מלבא שאם אמר לא אכלתי לא אכלתי חב על כל א' וא'. לא אוכל לא אוכל אינו חב אלא אחת אם אומר את אין אסר מין שבועה חב על זה בפני עצמו ועל זה בפני עצמו.

where we would expect chayyav. As far as I can tell, this is the only parallel, but it proves what Rav Yehuda said in the name of Rav.

Another interesting instance (not the same) in Yerushalmi Sanhedrin 21a:

א"ר יוסי אין כיני אמר אחד מן העדים יש לו ללמד זכות ובא חבירו וסייעו ויש כאן סיוע. אם אומר את כאן לא נמצאת חב לדייני'.

where it means causing the judges to sin. This, I would guess, is also chova rather than chiyuv.