"This food does not have olive oil."
Translation:Αυτό το φαγητό δεν έχει ελαιόλαδο.
This an issue that has been addressed in the forums more than once.
The difference between τροφή and φαγητό is the same between food (for which the plural foods is used), and food, that is a collective noun.
The first one (τροφή) is only used for individual kinds of food (like, all the foods you should eat when you're on a diet). In Greek, it is not that commonly used, unless someone is referring to diet, cat food or dog food :P
The second one (φαγητό) has the element of cooking to it, or at least the mixing of some ingredients. It doesn't refer to a specific ingredient.
So, you see, 99.9% of the times, they are not interchangeable.
Ok, I'll try to get my head around the difference. What about φαΐ? Does that mean food (I assume so)? Is it always interchangeable with φαγητό? Is it a form of φαγητό maybe? They just suddenly put it in there as a potential correct answer with having never seen it before.
There's quite a few functions I would love to see added to duolingo to increase funtionality/learning (such as being able to hover over the parts of the correct answer to see the translations like you can while solving them and being able to listen to the answer when translating from English to Greek instead of only being able to listen when translating from Greek to English (or having to go hunting for them). The first in particular would help with this current quandary).
I've commented about this before, but I'm concerned that still these type of sentences have in English the form "this food has..." I appreciate this course is based on American English, and that under certain circumstances this construct makes sense in US English, but for Greek people learning English, surely this is not the translation that should be taught. The form "this food contains..." is the standard way of expressing it, and I assume this is also the case in America, even if "has" can be used as well, at least in certain dialects. To an English English speaker, anybody who said this would be presumed to have very limited English, and quite likely wouldn't even be understood.
Another sentence I came across was translated as "this sausage doesn't have ketchup". What does this mean? It doesn't contain ketchup? It isn't served ketchup? This is just an incorrect and incomprehensible English sentence.
If an American English speaker would like to say that the "have" versions are entirely normal, I'll happily eat humble pie and withdraw this comment, of course.
American English speaker here, "This sausage doesn't have ketchup" is a completely normal thing to say, and is in fact exactly how you would say it in normal speech. You might say "This sausage doesn't have ketchup on it", as well, but generally the "on it" is omitted for convenience. You don't really ever hear "this food contains" under any circumstances in speech, though you might see it on the package label saying something like "this food contains gluten" or something like that.