Embedded topicalization in English and Japanese

There have been two approaches to embedded topicalization in English: 1. (1) the IP adjunction analysis by Baltin (1982) and Lasnik and Saito (1992); 2. (2) the CP recursion analysis by Authier (1992) and Watanabe (1993). The purpose of this paper is to defend the IP adjunction analysis and to derive restrictions on embedded topicalization from an independently motivated condition. We will argue that embedded topicalization requires two kinds of licensing: 1. (1) a topic is licensed in the projection of INFL; and 2. (2) INFL is licensed by adjoining to COMP in LF. We also show that English and Japanese have the same restrictions on embedded topicalization, and based on the Japanese data we argue for LF movement of INFL to COMP in the construction. It is further argued that given the proposed analysis, there is no strong motivation to assume an independent functional category for embedded topicalization, contrary to Ueyama's (1989) and Sato-Zhu and Larson's (1992) claim.