To the first part, that is exactly the way it is read in Hebrew.<quoted text>
.... I see a pattern in the OT of it saying the Spirit of God came UPON them and not things like "dwelled in them:
I am wondering of the best way to describe the Spirit of God might be to say "touched by God". Whether when getting the breath of life or being instructed or being moved to act in a certain way; these are all things that would be the result of an interaction with God through His Spirit....
But why then even make a distinction at all? Why not just say God came upon someone or God breathed life into someone or God instructed someone?.....
To the second part, there are two problems with the English Bible. First is that it is a translation of a translation of a translation and not even in Modern English. Second it looses almost every Hebrew idiom and coloquilism of the original.
Lastly is a problem in Christinaity (and some denomonations of Judaism), The Hebrew Scriptures are written in poetic form. It is written to be engaging and interesting. If it was written using the exact same boring words "came upon" and "dwelled in" and no other ways of saying that then it would be as dull and boring and forgotten as the list of "begats".
God "inspires" everything and that "inspiration" is not "breath or spirit in the literal physical sense but a figurative metaphisical one.