Your understanding is correct. Symbols have no meaning until they are interpreted.
Yes, $A$ is the domain of the $L$-structure $\alpha$. You specify the language $L$ and then interpret the symbols of the language in $\alpha$. That is why it is called an $L$-structure. You may encounter the notation
$$\alpha:=\left(A,\{R^{\alpha}:R\in L\},\{f^{\alpha}:f\in L\},\{c^{\alpha}:c\in L\}\right)$$
Which is just notation to tell us what the $L$-structure $\alpha$ consists of, as the definition you provided.
Yes, if $f\in L$ is an $n$-ary function symbol, then its interpretation $f^{\alpha}$ is a function with domain $A^{n}$ and range always a subset of the domain of interpretation $A$. Meaning is always with respect to one domain. If the domain changes, the meaning may change. But you cannot have two different meanings within the same domain.
The superscript is notation to tell us we are talking about an element of the domain $A$. If $c\in L$ is a constant symbol, then $c^{\alpha}\in A$ is the element of a corresponding to the interpretation of $c$ in $A$. If $f$ is a function symbol, $f^{\alpha}$ is the function corresponding to the interpretation of $f$, and so on.
No, an algebraic structure consists of a nonempty set $X$ (also called the domain or underlying set), a collection of operations on $X$ (e.g addition and multiplication if applicable), and a finite set of axioms that the operations must satisfy. For example, groups, rings and vector spaces are examples of algebraic structures.
However, an algebraic structure is indeed a particular type of logical structure. For example, consider the language of rings: $L=\left<\dot{0},\dot{+},\dot{-},\dot{\times}\right>$ (where I use dots to emphasize these are symbols of the language). We have not given these symbols meaning yet, and $\dot{0}$ is a constant symbol, $\dot{-}$ is a $1$-ary function symbol, and $\dot{+}$ and $\dot{\times}$ are $2$-ary function symbols. Then, a group with underlying set $G$ is an algebraic structure, and it is also an $L$-structure $\alpha:=(G,0,+,-\times)$ subject to the group axioms (here I am denoting the interpretation of the symbols of the language $L$ simply by removing the dot over them, e.g $\dot{+}^{\alpha}:=+$).
Example: Take as domain $H$ the set of all humans. The language $L$ consists of the following symbols (with their intuitive meaning in parenthesis): 1-ary function symbols $m$ (mother of) and $f$ (father of), $1$-ary relation symbols $M$ (man) and $W$ (woman), binary relation symbols $P$ (parent of), $C$ (child of), $\ell$ (loves), and constant symbols $\{\text{Adam}, \text{Mary}, \ldots\}$ (names). The $L$-structure
$$\alpha=(H,m^{\alpha},f^{\alpha},M^{\alpha}, W^{\alpha}, C^{\alpha}, \ell^{\alpha}, \{\text{Mary}^{\alpha}, \text{Adam}^{\alpha},\ldots\})$$
is not algebraic. Symbols are interpreted according to their intuitive meaning. For example, $P^{\alpha}$ is the $2$-ary relation "parent of" in the domain $H$ of all humans, and $\text{Mary}^{\alpha}$ is a human named Mary.
Example: Consider the language of sets $L=\{\in\}$ (i.e. $\in$ is a binary relation symbol). The set of real numbers $\mathbb{R}$ with $\in$ interpreted in the usual way is an $L$-structure. But it does not have a defined algebraic structure. If we add to $L$ the symbols $+$, $-$, $\cdot$, $0$, $1$ defined and interpreted in the usual way (i.e. $+$, and $\cdot$ are interpreted as the usual binary operations) and we add the field axioms, then in the augmented language the $L$-structure now has an algebraic structure defined- that of a field.
A final point: For any $L$-structure $\alpha$, an assignment is a function $a:\{\text{set of variables of $L$}\}\to A$. Relative to the assignment $a$ of $\alpha$ you will see notation like $c^{\alpha}[a]$, or $f^{\alpha}[a]$ denoting the interpretation of the symbols in $A$ relative to the assignment $a$ of the variables.