+0
Distributive justice, absolute, rigid, and unvarying, must be observed by anyone who has children to deal with.

If 'which is' was added as:

Distributive justice, which is absolute, rigid, and unvarying, must be observed by anyone who has children to deal with.

would it still have the same meaning as the original? Or would it sound a bit different?
+0
I don't know what "distributive justice" means. Perhaps the part in bold is defining it for me, in which case, the "which is" serves to tell me that it's a definition.

However, adding it makes the original sound less austere, and I think the writer likes the austere tone.
+0
I think I would take it as defining too, and thus omit the commas in the extended version:

1. Distributive justice which is absolute, rigid, and unvarying must be observed by anyone who...

MrP
Teachers: We supply a list of EFL job vacancies
Comments  
It's B. Russell, GG.

For your information:

http://russell.cool.ne.jp/beginner/HA16-010.HTM

Here it seems to mean something like 'treating each children equally'.

If the non-restrictive 'which is' was added, wouldn't it sound like 'distributive justice' is basically absolute, rigid, and unvarying? Is it really always so?
 MrPedantic's reply was promoted to an answer.
Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.
P, do you think this adjective 'hot' grammatically different from those adjectives in question, or not?

There is no proof that Pekin Man knew how to light it, and it is unlikely that he had learned how to cook. If he had, he would not have had to crack the bones of his food animals to get at the marrow, which, hot, could have been scooped out with relative ease.
Hi Taka

I'd say the word "hot" is used similarly to the adjectives in your first sentence.
Distributive justice, absolute, rigid, and unvarying, must be observed by anyone who has children to deal with.

The words "absolute, rigid, and unvarying" modify "distributive justice".
TakaThere is no proof that Pekin Man knew how to light it, and it is unlikely that he had learned how to cook. If he had, he would not have had to crack the bones of his food animals to get at the marrow, which, hot, could have been scooped out with relative ease.
In that sentence, the word "which" refers back to the word "marrow", thus the word "hot" modifies "marrow".