וַיִּקְח֥וּ הָאֲנָשִׁ֖ים מִצֵּידָ֑ם וְאֶת־פִּ֥י יְהֹוָ֖ה לֹ֥א שָׁאָֽלוּ׃
Those involved took [their word] because of their provisions, and did not inquire of GOD.
(The above rendering comes from the RJPS translation, an adaptation of the NJPS translation. Before accounting for this rendering, I will analyze the plain sense of the Hebrew term containing אִישׁ — or in this case, its plural אֲנָשִׁים.)
The narrator employs the situating noun אֲנָשִׁים, indicating that the audience should regard this referent in terms of their participation in the existing situation. The definite article marks the referent as identifiable to the audience, relying upon them to employ considerations of salience to infer the intended referent, namely the negotiators on Israel’s side.
As for rendering into English, NJPS had employed the classic English situating noun (‘the men’). Nowadays that phrase comes across as more masculine than it did forty years ago. However, there is no warrant for rendering in gendered terms: it goes without saying that women are probably not in view. The new rendering is more clearly situation oriented.