Fillmore (1969) has offered a semantic “role” analysis for some verbs of judging. In the present case study, we subject Fillmore's own similarity judgments for a set of verbs of judging to structural analysis, employing nonmetric multidimensional scaling and hierarchical clustering techniques. We compare the results with those yielded by more ordinary subjects and seek to assess the revealingness of the hierarchical solution relative to the distinctions made by Fillmore in his theoretical analysis. A number of methodological issues are discussed, perhaps most important whether subjects can consistently employ the same similarity criterion throughout their judgments, or whether, at least for some semantic domains, they may rather use a series of different criteria, with particular pairs or subsets of terms selecting now one criterion, now another. The latter procedure, which was employed here by Fillmore, raises some serious problems with regard to the interpretation of the results of structural analyses of similarity data.