An inclusive pronoun as intersubjective evidential: Shared access vs. primary access to knowledge

This paper argues for the existence of a first person dual inclusive pronoun in intersubjective evidential function in Jaminjung, an Australian language of the Western Mirndi group. On the basis of detailed examina-tion of corpus data, we show that this evidential pronoun is part of a rudimentary evidential paradigm, consisting of only two forms. The first is an egophoric evidential in the sense of La Roque et al. (2012): it signals that the speaker claims epistemic authority for an assertion. In declaratives it is found in statements based on the speaker’s current or past participation in an event or (with first person participants only) in comments on the speaker’s feelings or intentions. In questions, epistemic authority shifts to the addressee.
The second evidential is identical to the first person dual inclusive pronoun, mindi. It is invariably used to comment on (or ask a question about) a state of affairs that has just come to the speaker’s attention. It is restricted to clauses with present tense marking, past tense marking (if, and only if, the result of the event is observable at speech time, or potential/future marking (if the imminent occurrence of an event can be inferred from events observable at spech time).
On the basis of this distribution we propose that =mindi is an intersubjective evidential indicating shared epistemic authority for a state of affairs which, crucially, is not yet part of the common ground of speaker and addressee. Shared direct evidence by both speaker and addressee at speech time is a necessary, but not a sufficient criterion for its use. 
Unlike e.g. in S. Conchucos Quechua (Hintz 2012), established shared knowledge remains unmarked in Jaminjung. This study adds to cross-linguistic evidence for the existence of intersubjective evidentials indicating the source of evidence for the hearer, or evidence shared by speaker and hearer (e.g. Landaburu 2007, Bergqvist 2009, Gipper 2011, Hintz 2012, San Roque & Loughnane 2012). The 1+2 pronoun functions as a remarkably transparent marker of such intersubjectivity.