Пища -or- Еда

[david-us.livejournal.com]

Пища or Еда.

From what I can tell, both words mean "food" in Russian. But what is the difference? Are they completely synonymous and, therefore, interchangeable?

Thanks!

Comments

[pitsot.livejournal.com]

I'd say they are interchangeable in most cases.

Exception is when еда is used as the process of eating: мойте руки перед едой, не разговаривай во время еды, etc.

[pitsot.livejournal.com]

I mean in such cases еда should be used, not пища.

[malim-praedari.livejournal.com]

"Пища" has a narrower meaning confined strictly to "food", the stuff we eat. It sounds a bit antiseptic and whiffs of scientific or medical use - not that you'd encounter it exclusively in such contexts.

"Еда" can mean (a) victuals or (b) the process of eating (not quite equivalent to the English "meal" but close in many cases). It overlaps with "пища" in meaning (a) only.

[ovd-off.livejournal.com]

As for my understanding, пища - то, что питает (питать - to feed -> feeding, food). Еда - то, что едят, или процесс поедания (есть- to eat -> eating, meal, food).
(Пища для размышления, пища для ума - you cannot use еда in these idioms).

But they can be synonyms in some contexts.
P.S. Кормить и корм - also have the meaning to feed and food, forage, but питать is used mostly in general meaning - Реку питают многочисленные горные ручьи, or poetically - Надежды юношей питают.
Корм is mostly used as food (= forage) for animals.

[archaicos.livejournal.com]

They aren't. The use is different.

Мы обычно покупаем еду (или продукты), но не пищу. We don't say: Я купил тебе пищи/пищу. Likewise usually, мы готовим еду and мы едим еду (although in the latter case it's better to change the verb or noun to something that doesn't have the same stem).

There's пища для ума, but not еда для ума.

It's possible to употреблять (что-то) в пищу (i.e. есть/питаться), but not употреблять в еду. This is a more formal/scientific way of saying to eat some kind of foods in general. Also принимать пищу is a more formal way of saying to eat.

There're both горячая пища и горячая еда.

There's пищевой (e.g. продукт, краситель), but not едовой/едальный. Съедобный means a different thing, edible.

We say:
перед едой
во время еды/за едой
после еды

but we don't say:
перед пищей
во время пищи/за пищей
после пищи

Пища is a more formal word.

There's also питание:
питание включено в стоимость - meals are included in the price
трехразовое питание - three meals a day
искусственное питание - artificial feeding / bottle-feeding
недостаточное питание - undernourishment/malnutrition
усиленное питание - high-caloric diet

[ovd-off.livejournal.com]

>"Пища" has a narrower meaning confined strictly to "food", the stuff we eat.<
I don't agree with this statement.
Please, see below.

[oryx_and_crake]

+1

[pigmeich.livejournal.com]

Or both word mean "meal".

Еда more close to meal, пища to food. But all depend on context, as always.

[malim-praedari.livejournal.com]

True. That's a good catch. I think archaicos has explained it the best below.

[slovami.livejournal.com]

Also, the label we call "Nutrition Facts" in English is пищевая ценность ("nutritional value") on Russian packages. From this, and from these excellent examples, we can see that пища is often used in contexts when you're emphasizing food's role as nourishment/nutrition.

[spiritrc.livejournal.com]

In such a case 'еда' doesn't translate as 'food' as well. It's 'eating' and strictly speaking it's a different word. I guess for most cases when 'food' is implied, both 'еда' and 'пища' may be used. There are exceptions though. In religious contexts, for example, 'еда' is never used, I guess. Also you can't say 'духовная еда' or 'еда для размышлений'.