This paper provides a valuable compilation of recent advances and emerging opportunities in Antarctic geophysics, focusing on the interactions between the solid Earth and the ice sheets.  It is well written and benefits from contributions by a broad range of researchers working on this and related topics.  The overview of the development of GNSS and seismic observations in Antarctica, as well as the summary of key scientific achievements, is thorough and well supported by extensive references.   This background will be especially useful for students and new investigators entering the field.  The recommendations section defines a well-thought-out strategy for future progress, particularly in advancing our understanding glacial isostatic adjustment in Antarctica.  Hopefully the recommendations in this document and the call for international cooperation will be fruitful in generating important international projects in the upcoming International Polar Year.  I strongly support publication of this paper with minor revisions.

1. I agree with several earlier comments that the title may convey an overly broad impression of what is covered in this paper. Perhaps add “solid Earth” before geophysics in the title?    Then in the introduction, perhaps at the end of the first paragraph, state something like “In this paper, we review the results of geophysical observations made by ground-based  networks in Antarctica, with a particular emphasis on applications to solid Earth -ice sheet interactions, and do not attempt to cover the entire range of Antarctic geophysical investigations”. 
2. Figures 3 and 4 are an important part of this paper, and will be highly useful to readers and future researchers. However, they should be improved.   The northern Antarctic Peninsula and Ross Island regions have many stations that are difficult to see, as they plot on top of each other.   Magnified insets for these regions would allow these areas to be shown properly.  Also, some seismic stations are shown on Figure 4 and but not on Figure 3 (such as the stations near Dome C), which is confusing. 
3. For the history of portable seismology in Antarctica, it would be worth referencing the SEPA project (1997-1999), which deployed temporary broadband seismic stations on the Antarctic Peninsula and nearby islands for several years (https://www.fdsn.org/networks/detail/XB_1997/).
4. Distributed acoustic sensing (DAS) and dense nodal seismograph deployments have a lot of potential for new, detailed studies of cryospheric processes. This should be discussed in more detail in section 3.1.5
5. Sections 3.1.6 (seismic wavefields) and 3.1.7 (general circulation models) are not well connected to other discussions and lend this section of the paper a “laundry list” feeling. They should be improved (focused?) or discarded.

Please find attached the review in the file "review_generalcomments.docx" and the textual corrections in the pdf "corrections.pdf".

Kind regards,

Wouter van der Wal & Caroline van Calcar