From the word-a-day that I do subscribe to:

I think it’s funny that a disease can have a sequel, but that you call it a sequela.

But according to the 1913 edition of Webster’s dictionary, the medical definition is not the primary one:

Sequela \Se*que”la\, n.; pl. {Sequelae}. [L., a follower, a result, from sequit to follow.]
One who, or that which, follows. Specifically:

  1. An adherent, or a band or sect of adherents. “Coleridge and his sequela.” – G.P. Marsh.
  2. That which follows as the logical result of reasoning; inference; conclusion; suggestion. Sequelae, or thoughts suggested by the preceding aphorisms. – Coleridge.
  3. (Med.) A morbid phenomenon left as the result of a disease; a disease resulting from another.

I think it’s interesting that, according to definition #2, sequela is the opposite of non sequitur; I would have expected sequitur to be the opposite of non sequitur.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: