הִנֵּה־נָ֨א לִ֜י שְׁתֵּ֣י בָנ֗וֹת אֲשֶׁ֤ר לֹֽא־יָדְעוּ֙ אִ֔ישׁ אוֹצִֽיאָה־נָּ֤א אֶתְהֶן֙ אֲלֵיכֶ֔ם וַעֲשׂ֣וּ לָהֶ֔ן כַּטּ֖וֹב בְּעֵינֵיכֶ֑ם רַ֠ק לָֽאֲנָשִׁ֤ים הָאֵל֙ אַל־תַּעֲשׂ֣וּ דָבָ֔ר כִּֽי־עַל־כֵּ֥ן בָּ֖אוּ בְּצֵ֥ל קֹרָתִֽי׃
Look, I have two daughters who have not known a man. Let me bring them out to you, and you may do to them as you please; but do not do anything to the others, since they have come under the shelter of my roof.”
(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—in this case, its plural form אֲנָשִׁים—by employing a situation-oriented construal as outlined in this introduction, pp. 11–16.)
This is a prototypical (and therefore readily understood) usage of the situating noun: its use in the definite noun phrase profiles its referent in terms of the given situation. The situating noun is preferred when speaking schematically a previously depicted situation.
Here the label אֲנָשִׁים treats its referent as a point of reference for describing an undesired situation in terms of the previous one.
Because Lot is using אֲנָשִׁים in a conventional manner—namely, for situating purposes—the plain sense of his utterance is not putting any emphasis on the visitors’ gender.
As for rendering into English, the NJPS ‘these men’ nowadays comes across as more strongly gendered than when that translation was first issued in 1962. It is much less likely to be read as a situational term. Consequently, in the context of Lot’s invoking his daughters, the noun phrase is likely to be (mis)understood as if his point is that he values males more highly than females. To avoid that misconstrual, I have substituted a non-gendered and more situation-oriented noun.