Wow!! I see the problem and I'm almost stumped. Maybe this is where we need
the two-words-in-one analysis that you and I have discussed in the past,
where "how" = "WH + thus" (or whatever). It's like (3).
(3)     What he bought cost a pound.
where "what" is simultaneously subject of Cost and object of Bought.
Semantically the two relations are different - its referent defines the
subject and its sense the object. It means "that which", where the two
roles are separated.
Dick


At 14:22 09/07/2002 +0100, you wrote:
>A WG analysis of (1) would at first blush be (partly) as
>shown in (2).
>
>1.  I am how you are.
>
>2.  I  am  how  you  are
>    <-s----- -s->
>
>There is something wrong with (2), though, because a word
>can't have two noncoordinate subjects.
>
>Does anybody see a possible quick fix, or does it evidence
>a deeper problem with WG?
>
>--And.
>
>

Richard (= Dick) Hudson

Phonetics and Linguistics, University College London,
Gower Street, London WC1E  6BT.
+44(0)20 7679 3152; fax +44(0)20 7383 4108;
http://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/dick/home.htm