Scrum is a popular Agile process, so why not use its terminology?

First, there are plain English words that already mean the same things. “Iteration” is a perfectly fine word and is actually closer to the intended meaning than “sprint.”

Second, Scrum terminology directly contradicts the stated principles of Agile development. For example:
Agile processes promote sustainable development…[The team] should…maintain a constant pace indefinitely.
Contrast this with the term “sprint,” which suggests a short burst, an unsustainable pace.

Third, the Scrum terminology creates a negative frame of reference. For example, you can be on the first day of a project and have a “backlog.” “Sprints” and “spikes” suggest a state of permanent and meaningless urgency.

Fourteen years ago the authors of the Agile Manifesto said unto us: all technical problems are people problems that manifest technically. In doing so they repeated what Peopleware’s DeMarco and Lister had said fourteen years before that. We cannot break the endless cycle of broken frameworks and buggy software by pretending that broken, homogenous communities can produce frameworks that meet the varied needs of a broad developer base. We have known this for three decades.