"eighth" and the OED

[Joel S. Berson]

The OED's entry on "eighth, adj. and n." can be read, from the
absence of quotations, as implying that "eighth" alone as a fraction
of something (as contrasted with the ordinal use, "eighth" in a
series) might not have come into use until around 1840.  An 1842
quotation is in B.n.1.a, "eighth part n. one of eight equal parts
into which a quantity may be divided."

"Eighth part" (sense A.2) does appear earlier than 1840s (quotations
from 1523 to 1660), but in the quotations always with the word "part"
present, and always without the final "h".  And in B.n.1.a, the
earlier quotations there (1557, 1747) use "eight", not "eighth".

Is that correct -- "eighth" alone as a fraction of something is as
late as the 1840s?  Or should I take the "eight" in the early B.n.1.a
(part of something) quotes as simply a spelling variant of "eighth"?

Should "eighth" as a fraction be given a place equal in prominence to
A.1.a. "That comes next in order to the seventh" (that is, the ordinal)?

Joel

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org