"Could you wash the dog?"

Is not a question asking whether the person is capable of washing the dog. It's a command phrased politely.

"Try to wash the dog"

"Try and wash the dog"

If you had no prior information on whether the dog likes water or not, I'd say that the try-and version expresses a greater level of confidence that washing the dog will be successful, in other words it's a command.

Whereas try-to could be read either straight (this task may fail) or as a command phrased politely.

▲

cratermoon 5 days ago | parent [-]

The linguistic prescriptivist in in me cringes at "try and", but I recognize usage has moved on.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/grammar/were-going-to-explai...

▲

antonvs 5 days ago | parent [-]

When prescriptivism is balking at usages that have been continuously in effect for four centuries, the problem is not with the usage. The prescriptivism you're using is suspect.

	▲	NuclearPM 4 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Prescriptivism is good. I could care less.
	▲	llbbdd 5 days ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		Prescriptivism is silly anyway, you'd be better off counting sand.
	▲	nyeah 5 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Yeah. Prescriptivism may have a worthwhile role to play. But it needs to be a lot more thought out than "what some authority wrote 75 years ago".