I agree with Artxell Knaphni that the words “immanence” and “transcendence” belong to a conceptual metaphorics. Deleuze’s own use of “immanence” is in danger of being self-contradictory, as the intended anti-foundational meaning of the word can be negated by its use as part of some foundational litany.
The reiterated use of a “non-theological” vocabulary is often itself a theological gesture. Repeating it three times (or horror! more) does not make it so. A “Deleuzian” veneer can hide positivist fabric.
On the analogy of the famous “Latour litany” we could call such lexical tropes “Deleuze dithyrambs”.