וְלֹֽא־אָב֤וּ הָֽאֲנָשִׁים֙ לִשְׁמֹ֣עַֽ ל֔וֹ וַיַּחֲזֵ֤ק הָאִישׁ֙ בְּפִ֣ילַגְשׁ֔וֹ וַיֹּצֵ֥א אֲלֵיהֶ֖ם הַח֑וּץ וַיֵּדְע֣וּ א֠וֹתָ֠הּ וַיִּֽתְעַלְּלוּ־בָ֤הּ כׇּל־הַלַּ֙יְלָה֙ עַד־הַבֹּ֔קֶר וַֽיְשַׁלְּח֖וּהָ (בעלות) כַּעֲל֥וֹת הַשָּֽׁחַר׃
But the others would not listen to him. So the man seized his concubine and pushed her out to them. They raped her and abused her all night long until morning; and they let her go when dawn broke.
(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.)
Here the noun אֲנָשִׁים plays its usual situating function on the discourse level: it marks its referent as essential for grasping the evolving situation, which the narrator sketches in schematic terms.
As for rendering into English, the NJPS rendering ‘the men’ nowadays overemphasizes gender, which is already established. A non-gendered term is more idiomatic. To convey the Hebrew noun’s vital role in re-situating the essential participants, the situation-oriented pronoun ‘others’ works better than a simple pronoun such as ‘they’ (NLT).