In this paper, I argued that relative clauses in Japanese are IPs, contrary to the proposal that they are CPs headed by a null complementizer. I assumed that the lack of CP is responsible for the inapplicability of embedded topicalization in relative clauses and clausal adnominal modifiers in Japanese, and concluded that whenever they have a complementizer, it must be overt. I also showed that null complementizers must be licensed by an adjacent verb or noun, and demonstrated that relative clauses in Japanese do not have a null complementizer, based on the observation that they need not be adjacent to the head noun. Hence, I proposed that NGC is a result of Agree between a nominal element D and the embedded subject. Also, in order to answer the question why NGC is possible under Agree Closest and why it is blocked when a complementizer appears overtly, I referred to an analysis where the optional T-to-D head movement plays an important role. Under this analysis, the head movement feeds the Agree relation, but it is blocked when C is intervening between T and D.ArticleNanzan Linguistics Special Issue. 3(2):185-198 (2008)journal articl
