According to the opinion of the legal decisors, if one does not understand what they are saying, they have not fulfilled their obligation. Simply put, when one does not understand, their intention is not to annul the chametz automatically. Indeed, it is still worth asking, because one inherently knows the essence of the matter that they need to annul the chametz, and they want to annul it, and they also know that chametz on Passover is forbidden to benefit from, and it is assumed that they remove it from their mind with intent, so what difference does it make if they do not understand the specific wording they are saying? This requires careful consideration.

It is possible that there can be a new interpretation based on the intention of the legal decisors in what they wrote, that one has not fulfilled their obligation of annulment, according to what we have innovated above. Because the essence of annulment is in the thought, and speaking is a corrective measure of the sages to strengthen and complete one's intent in the annulment. According to this, one who says the annulment formula and does not understand, may not have fulfilled their obligation according to the decree of the sages to say the annulment formula verbally, but they have indeed fulfilled the obligation of the annulment itself. This seems correct in my humble opinion.