(The ways in which mathematicians name things could comprise an entire field of study. I claim that such a study should be an adjunct to formal linguistics. Sometimes, the choice of terms boils down to laziness and ambiguity -- similar to what we do with speech and notation when there is a lot to say or write.)
Mathematicians call many things "standard"; some of these things are anything but.
Mathematicians call things "normal", where I don't see normalcy, either.
Dividing by 3/2 is not, as far as I can tell, a complex operation, but clearly we name it so, regardless.
Defining a number to have an imaginary component is not really complex, either.
But, here, I am interpreting "complex" to mean "difficult". Shame on me for my narrowmindedness!
I learned a name for the set of non-negative integers: the set of Whole Numbers. Yet, I've met several mathematicians who claim that there is no such thing as a set of whole numbers.
Add general ambiguity inherent within contemporary American english, and the tracks are set for derailment.
Are complex numbers and complex fractions related?
No. But their names are.
One dictionary states the following partial definitions.
COMPLEX: ... having more than one part, compound, ...
COMPOUND: ... having more than one part, ... complex ...
At the end of the day, we can say and write whatever we like. If we want to achieve successful communication from our head to others', then we need to wait for the reaction so as to correct misinterpretations or differences of perception. This process is slow when the communication is not interpersonal, and there is a lot of mathematical communication which is not interpersonal.
(I want everybody to know that I'm currently restraining myself from bringing up the term "numeral" ...)