וְסָמַ֨ךְ אַהֲרֹ֜ן אֶת־שְׁתֵּ֣י יָדָ֗ו עַ֣ל רֹ֣אשׁ הַשָּׂעִיר֮ הַחַי֒ וְהִתְוַדָּ֣ה עָלָ֗יו אֶת־כׇּל־עֲוֺנֹת֙ בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל וְאֶת־כׇּל־פִּשְׁעֵיהֶ֖ם לְכׇל־חַטֹּאתָ֑ם וְנָתַ֤ן אֹתָם֙ עַל־רֹ֣אשׁ הַשָּׂעִ֔יר וְשִׁלַּ֛ח בְּיַד־אִ֥ישׁ עִתִּ֖י הַמִּדְבָּֽרָה׃
Aaron shall lay both his hands upon the head of the live goat and confess over it all the iniquities and transgressions of the Israelites, whatever their sins, putting them on the head of the goat; and it shall be sent off to the wilderness through a designated agent.
(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 אִישׁ, by employing a situation-oriented construal as outlined in this introduction, pp. 11–16.)
Prototypically, the situating noun אִישׁ labels an essential party whose involvement defines the situation of interest. At the same time, by regarding its referent in terms of the overall situation, אִישׁ directs our attention to that situation.
Here, the presence of אִישׁ carries out its prototypical function. It clarifies that this participant is new to the discourse—someone else aside from the high priest (who on this critical occasion cannot leave the premises of the sanctuary).
This same party is referred to in v. 26 as הַמְשַׁלֵּחַ אֶת־הַשָּׂעִיר לַעֲזָאזֵל “the one who set the Azazel-goat free.” They are designated in terms of their function: to carry out a mission.
Other biblical usages of singular אִישׁ to introduce an additional party as constitutive of the depicted situation (often rendered with terms like “another…” or “someone else”) include: Gen 31:50; 41:38; 45:1; Exod 2:12; 12:44; 34:3; Lev 7:8; 19:20; 20:10 (2nd instance); Num 5:13; 19:9, 18; Deut 19:16; Josh 10:14; Judg 16:19; 1 Sam 2:25 (2nd instance); 10:22; 12:4; 2 Sam 17:18; 18:26 (2nd instance); 21:4; 2 Kgs 12:5 (2nd instance); Isa 3:5 (2nd instance); Ezek 18:8 (2nd instance); Ps 49:17; Prov 20:5; Est 1:8. Nearly all of these cases employ the bare noun—which is not the case here, where אִישׁ is modified by the obscure adjective עִתִּי.
Regarding gender implications, here אִישׁ is used to refer to a category of persons, rather than a specific individual. Such references, by their nature, do not exclude women from their scope (Stein 2008; Stein 2013). In terms of societal norms, there is no reason to conclude that women are excluded from view. Thus we have no warrant to translate in gendered terms.
As for rendering into English, the NJPS “a dedicated man” nowadays puts undue emphasis on gender. The revised rendering conveys the function of אִישׁ in a gender-inclusive manner, using a basic-level role term in accord with English idiom. (Relational nouns are akin to situating nouns—and thus frequently used to render the latter, such as husband for אִישׁ in marital contexts.)