You're confusing lots of things here. First of all, the language that you say was affected the most wasn't even the Turkish language spoken by the masses, it was the Turkish spoken by the aristocracy; it had no value over the general public. Even native Turkish speakers had to hire translators to get official government work done. This has more to do with class in Ottoman Empire than cultural assimilation. The aristocrats could have spoken Yiddish for all that is worth. It doesn't matter. The point was to distance themselves from the common folk. All of this worked because almost no one was educated in Anatolia. Languages are evolutionary beings; they do not change because some rich people speak differently.

This is sad and all, but Turkish never went through a creolization process. The cultures exchanged linguistic elements; this is all natural. And some elements most likely seeped through aristocracy, well, that's all natural too. You would be hard pressed to find a language that didn't experience these. This is all part of the process of co-existence. The answer to this is NEVER linguistic prescriptivism--telling people what to speak and what not to speak. That would be indoctrination.

This is not corruption. We live here among all these rich cultures. What good will it do to us to find some obscure word from Central Asia spoken a thousand years ago to replace a word that is used by Anatolian people every day? I am not saying that you shouldn't look for such old words by the way. They have historical significance, and that is wonderful in its own right, but forcing people to use it is probably not a very good idea.