The OED (online) entry on "so-called" now includes the statement:
"More recently, and now quite commonly (esp. in technical contexts), used merely to call attention to the description, without implication of incorrectness"
I'm wondering: How do other native speakers of English see this? Have you experience the use of "so-called" as becoming more neutral, and no longer negative by default (so to speak)?
Or does the following still apply, do you think? (Taken from a comment found online at https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/1..., and lightly edited)
'In general usage, "so-called" is used to indicate that the following words are not the writer's own, but come from another source.
'When the subsequent words are not in common parlance, it could be considered neutral. It is especially useful when the introduced phrase has a literal meaning that may be confusing. I have seen it used in popular publications when introducing concepts from maths and physics: "friendly numbers", "strange particles".
'When the following words are not being used in a strange way; when the literal meaning is the intended meaning, then using "so-called" distances the writer from the truth of what they have written. They indicate that the writer is simply reporting another's turn of phrase. This acts to undermine the phrase and should, therefore, be considered negative.
'Since interpretation is a factor here, it's a good idea to avoid "so-called" unless your intention is negative.
'In general, I think if a casual reader would understand the words following "so-called", then its presence is unnecessary for the sake of clarification, so the negative use would then be assumed.'
