Not all part of kanji contributes to its meaning. Most (like 70%) kanji consists of parts that are in essence a pronunciation hint.
in this case you can see that its onyomi "shu" is the same as the onyomi of the word protect 守 as in 守護者shugosha.
another great example is 小 少 省 all have onyomi as shou.
Unrelated, a more general advice from me is that: until getting more understanding of the language itself (like after 2, 3 years), any language at all, we shouldnt bother too much with the logic of how it works, not to say there isn't a logic to it, but because it probably formed in a context that we're not familiar with anyway. So yea, let's just laugh at it xd
Yeah, I get that "pronunciation hint" logic. Actually, I am more of interested in the what context that word is formed like this. Just curiosity. Thanks :D
You said that made me curious too. Maybe they could have chose a different part that still sound SHU and not contradict the meaning directly.
Maybe it's also aesthetically related :D. strokes count among other things.
Maybe, I guess.
Howell gives the following kanji etymology
狩 (9) シュ；か（り・る）
As per 守# (enclose/surround) + 犬 dog/beast → hunt by surrounding animals (or, by driving
them into an enclosure and surrounding to prevent their escape) → gather; pick → view
nature (← enjoy the outdoors).
for the meaning of 守 he gives the following chain of reasoning
→ enclose/surround to defend or
protect → guard; watch → govern; observe (a tradition); maintain (a position);
keep (one's word); stick to. Also, protector, keeper [...]
Okay, now it makes a sense. Mamoru part originally means to surround, then whether to protect or hunt. Thanks. Nonetheless, It's still funny.
Contradiction?
Why is it animal part and kanji for "Protection" together becomes word for "hunting"? Is there any explanation to this? or is it okay for me to just laugh at this weird combination?