Is it common in the literature to define regular languages and serialization languages as programming languages? Often when I create programs I use operating-programming language such as Bash for automating OS operations, structure ("markup") language such as HTML to define structures, styling language such as CSS to style structures, and programming (behavior defining) language such as JavaScript, to define the "nature of interaction" with programming by user interface.

But there are two other types of languages I sometimes use when creating programs:
Regular languages such as POSIX basic regular extensions or PERL compatible regular extensions, and Serialization languages such as JSON or YAML; from my experience, it is reasonable to assume that the former type can be combined with generally all operating-programming languages and behavior defining languages, while the latter type I usually combined with JavaScript.

Is it common in the (Computer Science) literature to define regular languages and serialization languages as programming languages (as sharpening the behavior of a program)?
No. In formal language theory, a language is just a set of strings, and it has nothing to do with programming. Note also that the things that programming languages such as Perl call "regular expressions" are more powerful than the regular expressions used in computer science and can define some non-regular languages.