While appreciating Mrs. A. Dragomirescu’s description of what is called the Romanian „supine”, governed by different parts of speech, as it is registered in dialectological atlases, the author reproaches it distinguishing properly between different phenomena traditionally treated as „supines”. So (to say nothing of ordinary nouns, cf. e.g. în sfinţitu soarelui or lăsatu de brândză) she identifies transitivity (a necessary, but not sufficient sign of verbality), with verbality as such, thus presenting as „purely verbal” to an equal degree both the transitive turns in which de, la, pentru etc. preserve their prepositional status (which turns could really be properly called „supines”) and those with de, as no more a preposition, but the left semiconfix of the new more and more used de făcut – type infinitive (a phenomenon disregarded by atlases, grammars, textbooks etc., despite having been supposed to appear as such in its early manifestations already more than a hundred years ago).