A source language does not mean a representation meant for human consumption but a language that is intended to be translated. You say that transpiling does no

A source language does not mean a representation meant for human consumption but a language that is intended to be translated. You say that transpiling does not carry any additional information, but that is only supported by your implicit assumption that transpiling only produces idiomatic code that humans will edit. You say that domain experts do not use the word transpiling. From this one infers that you believe you are a domain expert and others are not. In the best light, you are taking your personal experience and applying it globally. You present that as an argumentum ad baculum, which is a fallacy in its own right, but it is really the conjunction of an availability bias couched in a hasty generalization. Plus, your statement is false - domain experts do use the word transpiling, just maybe not people in your circle.