摘要：In their commentaries, Heiko Narrog and Bernhard W.lchli raise interesting questions with the approach I am advocating in my paper. I will start with Bernhard W.lchli.s commentary, since it is more on a critical note, and thus requires a more elaborate response. The main goal of my paper was to question the general assumption commonly underlying semantic maps that recurrent similarities should always reflect semantic affinities; as pointed out, some of the similarities can be attributed to other factors. A secondary goal was to show what consequences this observation has for the semantic map approach. In his comment, Bernhard W.lchli (2010b) does not challenge the actuality of these other factors, but casts doubt on the validity of these findings for the methodology of semantic maps. I will briefly react to the three questions raised by W.lchli here
