What would you change in your native language?

[FlatAssembler]

So, what would you change in your native language if you could? In Croatian, I would get rid of the pitch accent, and make the stress predictable, to always be on the penultimate syllable. I would also make the phonotactics a bit more restrictive, not to allow those complex consonant clusters which are hard to pronounce even by the native speakers (like in "hrčcima" ("to the hamsters"), pronounced /xrtʃtsima/, six consonants in a row).

[panini]

I'd like the morphology to be improved. English is kind of pathetic as far as morphology goes: we don't have much at all by way of person, number, tense, aspect, mood, polarity etc. as verbal inflection, not to mention derivation e.g. causative, reciprocal, pluractional (compare Sanskrit, most Bantu, Arabic, Klamath). I'd like a morphology where there would be a couple million inflected forms from each root. Then I'd like it to do something awesome with those riches. Like in Arabic, with glides coming and going, vowels changing; Klamath with that syncope rule; Bantu with all sorts of tone changes. Also, some better consonants, like ʕ, qʷ', and  (as you can tell, that's not a currently sanctioned IPA sound). If not that, at least a decent pitch-accent system.

[FlatAssembler]

Why would you like English to have a pitch accent system? I can tell you why I'd like Croatian not to have one: many Croatian dialects don't have one, and the speakers of those dialects often find the standard Croatian hard to pronounce. Everyone speaks in a "different accent" and we often sound wrong to one another.
As for morphology, I'd at least get rid of the declension of numerals. It seems to serve no other purpose except making it harder to speak the standard language grammatically.

[panini]

I was hoping that it was obvious that I wanted much better, and pitch accent is simply "settling". A good pitch-accent system would be interesting. From what I can tell, Serbian, Croatian and Slovenian all have interesting prosodic systems, the problem is that the facts are obscure (and made more obscure by the spelling system). If I had it in my language, it would be easy to get all sorts of informative data. My interest is not making English be the easiest language for others to learn. I likewise would not want to eliminate tone or all of those palatal-like consonants from Chinese just because other people find them hard to cope with. My basic motivation is that I'm a linguist, and am interested in the nature of grammars.

[FlatAssembler]

The Croatian language cries for a new standard. The current standard is based primarily on the dialect of Vuk Karadzic, of the south-western Serbia. It was made that way because it was supposed to be a common language for the whole Yugoslavia. It doesn't work well for Croatia at all. With a possible exception of the Shtokavian dialect of Croatian, it's not mutually intelligible with Croatian dialects at all. The Kaykavian and the Chakavian dialect are more similar to Old Church Slavonic than to the standard Croatian. That's why I think Old Church Slavonic with some simplifications in grammar should be the new standard.

[Sylar]

Native Language: English

Isn't it obvious? A sane orthography!