[Mesorah] Cholov Yisroel or Chaleiv Yisroel?

[David Cohen]

I'm not certain, but I think that we use the term "chalav akum"
because Mishnaic Hebrew often doesn't distinguish between the
possessive and regular forms of a word, and in this case, it uses
"chalav" for both.

If this is correct, then I suppose that the proper Biblical Hebrew
equivalent would, in fact, be "chaleiv akum" -- or actually, come to
think of it -- "chaleiv nokhri."

I have a question about this premise, though.  Since the difference
between a regular and possessive form is usually just in the vowels
(as in this case), doesn't the absence of the possessive forms in the
early vowlized manuscripts of the Mishnah (i.e. the Kaufmann Codex)
tell us more about the way the copyists spoke (or thought that Chazal
spoke) than it does about how Chazal actually spoke?

--D.C.