Honestly if I'm reading a translation, I'd rather read "sunyata" than "emptiness," rather read "skandhas" than "aggregates," rather read "prajna" than "wisdom", etc...

"Emptiness" has a range of meanings in English that distract from what's indicated by "sunyata." A cup is empty after I drink it. Lacking any permanent/inherent/essential nature is sunyata.

"Aggregate" is what you put in concrete to give the cement something to bind to. "Skandhas" are the aspects of identity that we tend to conflate as an essential self-image; i.e. body, sensation, perception, cognition, and awareness (now be grateful I didn't say rupa, vedana, samjna, samskara, and vijnana).

"Prajna" is a direct insight into the nature of reality that defies verbal explanation. "Wisdom" is a loaded term with many possibile meanings, including the unsolicited advice that your older family members get upset when you promptly ignore, the inane tautologies that a preacher spoon-feeds his unquestioning flock every Sunday, or even the snakepit of discursive reasoning that's come to be known as "philosophy" in the west. Prajna is none of those things, and the closest any of them come is probably when Plato says true philosophers are derided as cloud-gazers.

So you see, when translators choose to preserve a Sanskrit or a Pali word, it's not them being lazy. It's them deciding that English (or the language they're translating to) doesn't have an equivalent concept, and that it's better for the reader to learn a new word with its full range of associations, rather than try to squeeze so many layers of meaning into an existing English word that is already loaded with pre-conceived notions.