It seems like you might be after so-called "vulgar fractions". One such package that provides this is xfrac
by means of \sfrac{<num>}{<denom>}
. A similar functionality is provided by nicefrac
that supplies an analogous \nicefrac{<num>}{<denom>}
. With package options one is also able to choose between "ugly" and "nice" (default) fractions. And finally there's faktor
that produces similar-style fractions using \faktor{<num>}{<denom>}
(it requires the amssymb
package though). Here are some comparisons:

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{xfrac}% http://ctan.org/pkg/xfrac
\usepackage{nicefrac}% http://ctan.org/pkg/nicefrac
\usepackage{faktor}% http://ctan.org/pkg/faktor
\usepackage{amssymb}% http://ctan.org/pkg/amssymb
\usepackage{lmodern}% http://ctan.org/pkg/lmodern
\begin{document}
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.5}
\begin{tabular}{lll}
\verb!\xfrac! & $\sfrac{\mathbf{v}}{x}$ & $\sfrac{\mathbf{v}_1,\mathbf{v}_2}{x_1,x_2}$ \\
\verb!\nicefrac! & $\nicefrac{\mathbf{v}}{x}$ & $\nicefrac{\mathbf{v}_1,\mathbf{v}_2}{x_1,x_2}$ \\
\verb!\faktor! & $\faktor{\mathbf{v}}{x}$ & $\faktor{\mathbf{v}_1,\mathbf{v}_2}{x_1,x_2}$
\end{tabular}
\end{document}
The choice of lmodern
was because of minor font substitutions when it comes to typesetting the denominator & numerator. It is also possible to write a macro that would typeset these respective entries differently, if needed. My choice of \mathbf{...}
for the numerator was just a style choice.
v/x
doesn't work, but the expression has to occupy a single line what would that look like?$v/x$
?