fbpx Skip to content

Word: fraction (number-forming element)



marker for denominator in a fraction; generalization of {vatlhvI’} “percent” to numbers other than 100. Examples: “one third”, “three quarters”, “nine tenths”, “1/81”. 

Merged from another suggestion by admin: Can this be used to express ratios as well?

Comment below with feedback and suggestions.

9 thoughts on “fraction (number-forming element)

  1. Luciano Montanaro says:

    I started thinking that {vatlhvI’} could be generalized, but now I am not sure. Maybe as {SaDvI’}?
    But in a conversation, a fraction or a ratio could be expressed as “one in ten”, “two parts in five” or “two apples for each pear”.
    I don’t suppose that {wa’maHDaq wa’} could be used, it is too literal. We also do not have a word for “part”.
    Well, there is {SubmaH} for fraction or ratio…
    I don’t think we can use something like {cha’ SubmaH wa’} for “one part/fraction of two”, as the noun-noun construct seems to imply a possessive “of”, not a partitive one.

    • De'vID says:

      It might be possible to generalise vatlhvI’ to the other powers-of-ten number-forming elements, but it can’t generalise to completely arbitrary numbers because of ambiguity. For example, cha’maH wej vatlhwI’ is 23% or 23/100. But if we allowed -vI’ to be appended to any number, you could have wej vatlhvI’ (“one 300th”) and then cha’maH wej vatlhvI’ might mean 20/300 instead of 23/100. So you can’t have that.

      • Luciano Montanaro says:

        Yes, that is why I developed some reservation as well.

        Maybe there could be a counter suffix for “parts of” or viceversa “from a total of”, if we want to keep the numerator/denominator reversal of the division.



        cha'<parts-of-suffix> wa’maH


        wa’maH<partitioning-of-suffix> cha’


        In this way, the suffix would disambiguate.

      • janSIy says:

        How is this any different than the ambiguity in English of “twenty three hundreths”?

  2. Andrew Miller says:

    I don’t like vI’ for this since it already means decimal point. A unique morpheme should express fractions.

    • De'vID says:

      True. Having vatlhvI’ is already slightly confusing.

  3. Daniel Dadap says:

    If this word makes its way to Maltz will it be clear that we’re not necessarily asking for it to come in the form of a number-forming element? I’d personally be happy with any kind of construction that allows for expressing functions (for example a verb, or a verbless word formula with maybe one noun-noun for the nomination and another for the denominator, or whatever Maltz can end up remembering)

  4. Edward Bailey says:

    It is not necessary for the written form to be unambiguous. If I write “one hundred twenty-fifths,” I could mean 100/25, 1/125, or n/125. If I were careless and left off the hyphen, it could also mean 120/5. In speech, we avoid ambiguity with stress and phrasing, and in writing, we resort to fraction notation.

    I dislike the idea that -vI’ cannot combine with numbers other than the element vatlh. Why should Klingons attach the particular importance to the number 100 that we do?

Comments are closed.

The chabal tetlh software was created by Daniel Dadap, and is managed by Daniel Dadap and qurgh.

The Klingon Language Institute is a nonprofit corporation and exists to facilitate the scholarly exploration of the Klingon language and culture. Klingon, Star Trek, and all related marks are Copyrights and Trademarks of Paramount Pictures. All Rights Reserved. Klingon Language Institute Authorized User.