I wrote a long comment, and immediately deleted it because I'm trying to avoid being a confrontational jerk.
I disagree with your assessment of "normal CS jargon". I'm wondering if you mean "normal jargon in the C/C++ community".
In my experience with compiler textbooks and computer science professors who specialize in compilers, compilers are any formal-language-to-formal-language translator. Yes, sometimes sub-types of compilers have specific names, but they are all compilers.
Is there one word for the subject material of the dragon book? I think there is, and I think that word is "compiler". Including source-to-source translators, including assemblers, including preprocessors, including linkers.
I disagree with your assessment of "normal CS jargon". I'm wondering if you mean "normal jargon in the C/C++ community".
In my experience with compiler textbooks and computer science professors who specialize in compilers, compilers are any formal-language-to-formal-language translator. Yes, sometimes sub-types of compilers have specific names, but they are all compilers.
Is there one word for the subject material of the dragon book? I think there is, and I think that word is "compiler". Including source-to-source translators, including assemblers, including preprocessors, including linkers.