Linguistic devices
Besides and additionally to the above, many languages have specific means to show politeness, deference, respect, or a recognition of the social status of the speaker and the hearer. There are two main ways in which a given language shows politeness: in its lexicon (for example, employing certain words in formal occasions, and colloquial forms in informal contexts), and in its morphology (for example, using special verb forms for polite discourse).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politeness#Lingu...

euphemism, dysphemism

I have the feeling there may be a better word than these two. I encourage you to check the definitions in an on-line dictionary before accepting them.

http://www.cunning-linguist.co.uk/blog/koon-k...
“Ka” is the female politeness-particle added at the end of each sentence, but of course in Japanese (with which I’m much more familiar) this is a question ...

http://www9.georgetown.edu/faculty/portnerp/n...
Once -yo is attached, these particles mark politeness and become polite speech style particles. Let us refer to -yo as the politeness particle. - I argue that this politeness particle can attach to any sentence ender to end the sentence politely as long as there is no clash in speech style. ...

Could it indeed be as simple as that?       :^)

Click on any of the links below to perform a new search
ERIC #:EJ532575
Title:Politeness Markers in French and Dutch Requests.
Authors:Van Mulken, Margot
Descriptors:Contrastive Linguistics; Cultural Differences; Discourse Analysis; Dutch; French; Native Speakers; Pilot Projects; Pragmatics; Speech Acts
Source:Language Sciences, v18 n3-4 p689-702 Jan-Apr 1996
Peer-Reviewed:N/A
Publisher:N/A
Publication Date:1996-00-00
Pages:N/A
Pub Types:Reports - Research; Journal Articles
Abstract:Compares request strategies in Dutch and English and attributes the differences to a different perception of the need for repair. The article concludes that the Dutch use lexical downgraders where the French use longer constructions, that is, supportive acts. Further research is recommended to verify the findings. (16 references) (Author/CK)
Abstractor:N/A
Reference Count:N/A
Note:Special issue: Contrastive Semantics and Pragmatics, Volume 2: Discourse Strategies.
Identifiers:Politeness; Requests
Record Type:Journal
Level:N/A
Institutions:N/A
Sponsors:N/A
ISBN:N/A
ISSN:ISSN-0388-0001
Audiences:N/A
Languages:English
Education Level:N/A

 

Help viewing record details

p2mg: I suspect you have the better reference. Here just another term.

http://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/Home.portal?...

politeness marker and politeness particle

"These level of refinement, in turn, are closely linked to normal selection patterns involving self-reference pronouns as well as certain particles and other linguistic markers."

http://www.cels.bham.ac.uk/resources/essays/G...


A CONTRASTIVE ANALYSIS OF ARGUMENTATIVE
DISCOURSE IN ENGLISH AND GERMAN
WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR TEACHING?
by
MELANIE GIRDLESTONE

Good luck.

Thus, "particle" would refer to singular words added for politeness, but "marker" would have a broader scope, such as choice of grammar, level of speech, or even body language? Do I get that right?

Linguistic marker according to Wiki.

Sorry to insist, but since my linguistic education is basically drawn from little more than having read the appendices of "Lord of The Rings", I still have to get things clear in my mind. :^)
The Wikipedia article on "Marker (linguistics)" states that "a marker is a free or bound morpheme", while the same source defines a (grammatical) particle by saying "particles are function words".

Thus, a "particle" would necessarily be a "word", whereas a "marker" could be any "morpheme" (not just one of those morphemes that are words themselves). Tobi's query was related to "Partikel", so I still think that "particle" could be appropriate if Tobi is concerned with "politeness words" only. If the word/morpheme issue is not one of Tobi's major concerns, I agree that "marker" seems to be common enough.

OT: As is not uncommon in LEO, I have the impression that by now all readers of this thread will now have enough linguistic background to decide on their own if they need "particle" or "marker" in their specific context.   :^)

p2mg: The terms are all discussed at this Wiki page.

A word to the wise: Define your terms as you introduce them.

(We did pretty good work, huh?)

Indeed. And yes, you caught me having not read much of the page that I linked.
Now that I finally have, my favorite quote of this page is this one:

Depending on its context, the meaning of the term ((Grammatical particle)) may overlap with such notions as "morpheme", "marker", or even "adverb" (another catch-all term). Like many linguistic concepts, the precise content of the notion is very language-specific.

"A word to the wise": A true and necessary one, indeed.       :^)

http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLing...
What is a marker?
Definition
A marker is a lexical item that signals a morphosyntactic operation.
Examples (English)
* The suffix -s added to a noun signals plurality, as in the following example:
three hats
* The suffix -s added to a verb signals third person, singular, present tense, as in the following example:
he sees

Source
Pei and Gaynor 1954 132
http://www.sil.org/linguistics/BibliographyLi...


http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLing...
What is politeness?
Definition
Politeness is social deixis that expresses a low degree of solidarity between the speaker and the addressee.
Examples (German, French)
#
Some uses of the second person pronouns Sie in German and vous in French signal politeness.
Source:
Hartmann and Stork 1972 179
http://www.sil.org/linguistics/BibliographyLi...

What is a particle?
Definition
A particle is a word that
* does not belong to one of the main classes of words
* is invariable in form, and
* typically has grammatical or pragmatic meaning.

Discussion
The usage of the term particle varies. Some authorities include English prepositions and even English articles as particles.
Examples (English)
* to (in marking infinitives)
* up (in set up)
* not
* well
* oh
Sources:
Richards, Platt, and Weber 1985 208
http://www.sil.org/linguistics/BibliographyLi...

Despite earlier efforts I was left with the feeling that something was missing here.

The question is: Is please particle?

What is a particle?
http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLing...

Sorry, folks, I seem to have left out a link. Here is the missing link.

Wiki seems to indicate that pleaase is not a particle.

What do you think?

Correction. That's "please".