This paper analyzes the response strategies the presidential candidates in Korea and in the U. S. use when they deal with the interviewer's accusation of inconsistency and shows the presence of a strategic maneuver for trying to win debates. When an interviewer criticizes politicians who have allegedly changed their views or acted in ways that are contradictory with their earlier statements in political interviews, politicians are often observed to strategically employ category shifts (i.e. agent shift, perspective shift, time shift, identity shift, or dissociation of agenda) to bring about a change in the starting points of discussion, and thus direct the audience attention to the change at hand, rather than the central aspects of the issue. The analysis provides a basis for further considering the action implications of such practices in terms of how the politician's strategic maneuvering response contributes to the resolution of difference in opinion, as viewed by the interviewer and the audience.

Abstract
 1. 서론
 2. 선행연구
 3. 방법론 및 데이터
 4. 범주 전환(Category Shift)
  4.1. 동작주 전환(Agent Shift)
  4.2. 정체성 전환(Splitting oneself)
  4.3 안건의 전환/분리(agenda shift/dissociation)
 5. 맺음말
 참고문헌

• 서경희(한국외국어대학교)