36263
In Samuel E. Martin's "A Reference Grammar of Japanese", in a section (Chapter
23, p. 1041) on putative etymologies for some Japanese interjections like さあ
or まあ, he asserts:

> Although others [other interjections] seem like little more than grunts or
> shouts — aa, yaa, yoo — they may have originated as shortenings of more
> legitimate etyma; oo 'yea' is, after all, a Chinese loanword.

Really? If so, a loan from which Chinese word?
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-05-16T23:28:28.843
24371
2016-07-03T09:15:14.683
2015-05-17T12:15:26.560
9185
816
question
etymology
Is the interjection おう really a Chinese loanword?
I think Martin has 応 (old form 應) in mind. This was not uncommonly used to
write _ō_ , especially in Edo times. A famous haiku by Kyorai:

> 応々といへどたたくや雪の門  
>  ō ō to / iedo tataku ya / yuki no kado  
>  "All right, all right!" / I say, but the knocking doesn't stop / at the
> gate in the snow

However, I agree with the commenters that _ō_ is unlikely to have been
borrowed from Chinese at all -- not least because it appears in the Nihon
Shoki as 越々, i.e. /wowo/ (which incidentally isn't easy to reconcile with any
Chinese pronunciation of 応/應), and only got attached to 応/應 later.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-06-28T15:52:21.667
36263
2016-06-28T15:52:21.667
531
24371
answer
I'm astounded to see a series of the answers and comments to this question.
Most of them are misguiding and confusing the O.P. They lack even a beginner's
knowledge of Chinese language about how to read it and what it means.

None of “応、鳴、唯, 越々, and 応々” corresponds to the pronunciation equivalent to
“おう” – "oh" or "ou." They are pronounced respectively as "ying," "ming,"
"wei," "yue-yue" and "ying-ying" in Chinese. And all suggested words are
pointless and utterly wrong. If you have just an elementary knowledge of
Chinese language, you wouldn't make such a primitive and laughable mistake.

They are absolutely different beasts from “さあ,” “まあ” and “おう" either
phonetically or semantically. If you have any objections, please contend with
me to make your case. I'm waiting for your rebuttal.

Both “応" and "鳴" are verbs each meaning "respond" and "sing, chirp, twitter."
"唯” is an adjective meaning "only, sole" in both Japanese and Chinese, ”越々” is
an adverbial phrase meaning "the more ... the more," all irrelevant to “さあ,”
“まあ,” and “おう" which are interjections.

The connection of "応々" in 去来's haiku with Chinese word is comically
farfetched. There's no Chinese word spelt or vocalized like 応々, and if it
should happen to be by chance, it must be read "ying-ying," not "ō, ō" as an
answerer suggested.

I think @sqrtbottle is right. And only he was right.

If Japanese, “さあ” and “まあ” is a loan word from Chinese word or character that
sounds “oo” as Samuel Martin says, it may be “哦” which is pronounced as "o" or
"oh."

A Chinese language dictionary at hand, “多功用常用字典” - published by 新華出版社 in
Beijing - defines “哦” as a "感嘆詞.表示懐疑或吃惊. 哦! 是这么回事. – [Exclamation] indicates a
suspicion or surprise. Example. Oh, my God! What is this all about! "

However, I’m not sure whether “さあ” and “まあ” are really a loanword from Chinese
language.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-07-01T03:25:35.867
36331
2016-07-03T09:15:14.683
2016-07-03T09:15:14.683
12056
12056
24371
answer