What is the ruling on breaking an oath before fulfilling it, and does it require expiation, by analogy with someone who made a vow without specifying it?

A person is not held accountable for thoughts unless they are uttered or acted upon. Mental existence has no effect; rather, what matters is verbal or practical existence. Oaths are not established merely by intention; they must be uttered. Therefore, if someone does not complete the utterance of the oath's formula due to retracting it, their oath is not binding because the formula was not completed. There is a difference between not completing the formula of an oath and a general vow in which the vow's formula is fully mentioned without specifying what must be done. In the first case, the oath is not binding, while in the second, an expiation for breaking an oath becomes obligatory.