‘Quid pro quo’ does not mean ‘This for that.’ It literally means ‘What for what,’ but that doesn’t quite make sense, which is why your use of the back scratching image is much better. ‘This for that’ would read ‘Hoc pro illo.’

Also, someone said ‘Ad hominem’ means ‘Towards the man’ as opposed to your suggested ‘Attacking the man,’ when such a claim is just based on a limited knowledge of the word ‘ad’. Most prepositions in Latin have several translations depending on the case and context they are used with (exempli gratia – ha! – the preposition ‘in’ can mean either the English ‘in’ or ‘on’). In some cases, ‘ad’ can mean ‘against.’ The most common example of such usage was in legal proceedings, and so in this case, ‘Ad hominem’ translates literally to ‘Against the man,’ which fits well with your interpretive ‘Attacking the man.’ An example of this would be found in one of Cicero’s speeches attacking the conspirator Cataline, “Ad Catalinum.’

But its use is much more diverse.

‘Quid’ and ‘Quo’ have originally the same root, they are just different declinations of the same idea of concept. Therefore using ‘Quid’ instead of ‘Quo’ is a given sentence might cause a great confusion to the listener or reader.

So one of the major meaning – if not the major one – of this sentence is exactly this idea of confusion and mess. Actually it is not rare to use this expression where the word ‘confusion’ or ‘mess’ could be.

:)

This was just a huge FYI.

75% of people who use heroin started on marijuana, therefore marijuana is a gateway drug.

Sounds logical till you recall that 100% of them started on milk.

Just because it follows does not mean it was caused by.

If only I had a sound mind in a sound body. Everyone forgets the Ut, like it is actually possible. Maybe for 2 year olds.