וַיָּקֻ֙מוּ֙ מִמִּדְיָ֔ן וַיָּבֹ֖אוּ פָּארָ֑ן וַיִּקְחוּ֩ אֲנָשִׁ֨ים עִמָּ֜ם מִפָּארָ֗ן וַיָּבֹ֤אוּ מִצְרַ֙יִם֙ אֶל־פַּרְעֹ֣ה מֶלֶךְ־מִצְרַ֔יִם וַיִּתֶּן־ל֣וֹ בַ֗יִת וְלֶ֙חֶם֙ אָ֣מַר ל֔וֹ וְאֶ֖רֶץ נָ֥תַן לֽוֹ׃
Setting out from Midian, they came to Paran and took others* from Paran along with them. Thus they came to Egypt, to Pharaoh king of Egypt, who gave him a house, assigned a food allowance to him, and granted him an estate.
*others I.e., subordinates, perhaps as guides for traversing the wilderness.
(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.)
The clause in question is וַיִּקְחוּ אֲנָשִׁים עִמָּם מִפָּארָן. As is prototypical for our noun, it appears as a matter of situation-defining participation. It is used here—as in more than a dozen other cases—to introduce into the scene a new, unquantified subset of an already known group (often rendered with terms like “some” or “certain”). On this function, see further my article “The Noun ’îš in Ancient Hebrew: A Marker of Essential Participation,” Journal for Semitics 30.2 (2021), Test #3 and Table 9B; and my comments at Gen 12:20 and at Josh 7:2. Similarly, singular אִישׁ is repeatedly used to introduce an additional party as constitutive of the depicted situation (often rendered with terms like “another” or “someone else”); see my comment at Deut 19:15 and the list there.
Although the reference is specific, the noun is not specifying the gender of its referents (apart from the fact that at least one is presumed to be male). There is no contrast drawn with women; they are not definitely excluded from view.
Meanwhile, the preposition עִם often indicates subordination, as in Gen 32:7; 33:1; 1 Sam 22:2. That meaning would fit the situation here, given an implied hierarchy under the prince Hadad, who occupies the narrative spotlight (vv. 14–17).
As to why this new (sub)group from Paran is mentioned at all, some interpreters posit that this clause accounts for how the fugitives managed to make it across the desert, which was known not to be a trivial matter—and thus their survival was not assured. Cogan (Anchor Bible), echoing Keil & Delitzsch, calls this clause “a realistic detail” and explains that “guides familiar with the territory were hired to help them cross the desert.”
As for rendering into English, the NJPS “men” nowadays is likely to be construed solely in gender terms. The revised rendering focuses attention more clearly on the discourse function.