Is this relative clause correct?


> 彼女からは警戒心が剥き出しの刺々しい雰囲気はない

In this sentence, 刺々しい雰囲気 appears as the noun here and being modified by
警戒心が剥き出し. But how could a complete sentence like 警戒心が剥き出し take the particle の
to modify another noun? It would make sense if 警戒心が剥き出しの刺々しい雰囲気 is a complete
sentence, but there is はない in the end, which means 雰囲気 must be the main noun
being modified here. Wouldn't it be more correct if it's something like

> 彼女からは剥き出しな警戒心の刺々しい雰囲気はない?




> But how could a complete sentence like 警戒心が剥き出し take the particle の to
> modify another noun?

Remember that Japanese has something called a "double subject" construction
such as 彼は背が高い, フランスはワインが有名だ and この本は表紙が緑色だ. By pulling out the は-marked
argument and leaving the が-marked argument, you can construct a relativized
phrase like so:

  * 背が高い人  
tall people

  * ワインが有名なフランス  
France, which is famous for wine

  * 表紙が緑色の本  
a book with a green cover

Your sentence is basically an example of this. 警戒心が剥き出しの is a perfectly valid
adjectival (noun-modifying) expression, and it modifies the following noun
phrase 刺々しい雰囲気. (Note that むき出し is a no-adjective on its own, and Japanese
adjectives are [similar in syntax to
verbs](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/1016/5010).)

To explain this in more detail, 彼女は警戒心が剥き出しだ is a valid sentence but
(この)雰囲気は警戒心が剥き出しだ is not. I think this 警戒心が剥き出しの is a [**gapless** relative
clause](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/14550/5010) that modifies
(刺々しい)雰囲気. Similar examples include:

  * カエルが池に飛び込む音  
the sound of a frog jumping into a pond

  * 誰かが魚を焼く煙  
smoke from someone grilling a fish

  * 彼が学校に行った帰り  
on his way back from school

