Edit: Errr, by the way, what was the full sentence you were asking about in the original post? That might really help me to solve your specific problem.
...
That's a hard one, because there's not really a clear rule for using "which" and "that".
In general, you use "which" in a clause that can be removed from a sentence, like one separated by commas. Like this:
A pecan tree, which only had one leaf, stood in the front yard.
So, that leaves "that" to be used in nonrestrictive clauses that are integral to the sentence:
The pecan tree that only had one leaf, years later, still stood in the front yard.
Of course, that restriction isn't written in stone, but it's usually a good rule to follow and it almost always holds up. It's a good rule, but the lines have become blurred because not everyone follows it. Just remember that you use "which" to start a non-restrictive clause; you use "that" to start a restrictive one. Sometimes, it's okay to use "which" to start a restrictive clause, but you can never use "that" to start a non-restrictive one.
Examples:
Right, non-restrictive clause:
The lamp, which we broke, is in the trunk.
Right, restrictive clause:
The lamp which we broke is in the trunk.
Right, restrictive clause:
The dog that wouldn't leave us alone is over there.
Wrong, non-restrictive clause:
The dog, that wouldn't leave us alone, is over there.
That last one clearly reads weird. In the first two examples, you can see that the two sentences read differently from one another. In situations like that, the usage comes down to what nuance of meaning you want to convey.
Some other examples that I hope will make things clearer:
Several elements that interested him were magnesium, oxygen, and xenon.
Her madness, which gave her the manic look in her left eye, was absolutely charming.
This is the fire hydrant that raised me as a child.
The car (which had two bicycles and various other metal objects adhered to the roof) was parked near the curb.
The car that had bicycles on the roof pulled away, smoking.
Facebook
Twitter