English Interjections in Fifteenth Century 7 
ow, owe. Probably modern Scotch ow, used in a concessive sense. 
In ME. it expressed astonishment, as well as other emotions. 
Compare ow showing consternation (II); lamentation (III) ; 
and exultation (XI). 
Coventry Plays, xii, Joseph: Ow! dame, what thinge menyth 
this? . 
out, outte, owte. This seems to have lost its force as an elliptical 
expression and to have become, in ME., purely interjectional. 
It is most commonly used in connection with other ejaculations. 
See, also, out expressing terror (II); lamentation (III); and 
anger (IV). 
York Mystery Plays, xxxiii, 161, Cayphas: We! outte!... 
so I stare. York, xxxili, 166, Cayphas: Out! slike a sight suld 
be sene! York, xxviii, 259, Judaeus: We, oute! I ame mased 
almost. 
we, whe. Here, equivalent to modern why! Corresponds to OE. 
interjection wa! It may come directly from OE. wéa, we, 
either of which would become ME. we. Bjorkman (Scandina- 
vian Loan-Words in Middle English, p. 39) sees no sign of a 
Scandinavian origin here. Thé OE. @ of we was not diphthon- 
gal, and probably depends on Latin ve. Compare we indicat- 
ing consternation (II); sorrow (III); and anger (IV). 
York Plays, xv, 49, Pastor: We! telle me men, emang vs thre. 
York, xxxviii, 298, Miles: Whe! harrowe! deuill, whare is he 
away? York, xxxiii, 236, Preco: We! nay sir, why shuld I be 
soo? York, xv, 38, Pastor: We! man, hou maddes all out of 
myght. York, xxx, 378, Miles: Whe! harke how pis harlott 
he heldis. York, xv, 46: Whe! hudde! be-halde into the heste! 
wemmow, wemay, wemo, wema. For other forms and examples 
see interjections expressing irritation (IV); contempt (VI); 
and a call to stop XVI, (2). Etymology uncertain. It may 
have been originally a curse, connecting with OE. wemman, to 
defile. Cf. Wright, English Dialect Dictionary. 
Towneley Plays, xxvii, 291, Lucas: Wemmow! where is this 
man become? 
what. OE. hwet! the neuter form of hwa, who. An introduc- 
367 
